TexasCHLforum.com

E.Marquez wrote:

MeMelYup wrote: I have not read anything where he was asked by his relative to purchase the gun for that relative. There has been nothing indicating that the relative gave him money to purchase the item prior to the purchase. The relative was legally able to purchase a gun because it was transferred to the relative through a FFL. Where is the crime as far as the ATF is concerned?

Might check again...
http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/ca ... ed-states/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


In the links provided in this thread it was stated ..
Allegedly the uncle and Mr Abramski discussed the purchase and transfer before the purchase took place.
Allegedly His uncle wrote him a check before the purchase, and indicated on the check it was for the Glock 19 purchased later.
Both the Uncle and Mr Abramski admitted the weapon was purchased for the uncle.

All that aside, from what i have read.. I believe the intent of the law was not violated, and I believe both the Uncle and Mr Abramski believed what they were doing was legal and I believe they were advised at the point of purchase that the deal was legal (ethics of the choice to buy a discounted firearm and reselling to another aside, as its not germane to the event or issue at hand)

E.Marquez wrote:

MeMelYup wrote:Question 11.a. Actual Transferee/Buyer: For purposes of this form, you are the actual transferee/buyer if you are purchasing the firearm for yourself or otherwise acquiring the firearm for yourself (e.g., redeeming the firearm from pawn/retrieving it from consignment, firearm raffle winner). You are also the actual transferee/buyer if you are legitimately purchasing the firearm as a gift for a third party. ACTUAL TRANSFEREE/BUYER EXAMPLES: Mr. Smith asks Mr. Jones to purchase a firearm for Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith gives Mr. Jones the money for the firearm. Mr. Jones is NOT THE ACTUAL TRANS- FEREE/BUYER of the firearm and must answer “NO” to question 11.a. The licensee may not transfer the firearm to Mr. Jones. However, if Mr. Brown goes to buy a firearm with his own money to give to Mr. Black as a present, Mr. Brown is the actual transferee/buyer of the firearm and should answer “YES” to question 11.a. However, you may not transfer a firearm to any person you know or have reasonable cause to believe is prohibited under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g), (n), or (x). Please note: EXCEPTION: If you are picking up a repaired firearm(s) for another person, you are not required to answer 11.a. and may proceed to question 11.b.

According to this statement on the back of the 4473, even if he purchased the item for resale and checked yes, he has not lied.

Is that how you read it

I'm seeing this
"ACTUAL TRANSFEREE/BUYER EXAMPLES: Mr. Smith (uncle) asks Mr. Jones (Abramski) to purchase a firearm for Mr. Smith(uncle) . Mr. Smith (uncle) gives Mr. Jones(Abramski) the money for the firearm. Mr. Jones (Abramski) is NOT THE ACTUAL TRANS- FEREE/BUYER of the firearm and must answer “NO” to question 11.a. The licensee may not transfer the firearm to Mr. Jones.(Abramski) "

Which seem to exactly describe the event in question and clearly states the guy with cash in hand MUST CHECK NO, and further that the licensee may not transfer the weapon.

RoyGBiv wrote:U.S. Supreme Court Will Decide Firearms ‘Straw Purchaser’ Case
http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/201 ... aser-case/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to adjudicate a case involving a firearms purchase and subsequent resale to a family member. In the case of Abramski v. United States, Bruce James Abramski, Jr., a former Virginia police officer, is appealing his conviction for making a “straw purchase” of a Glock handgun. Abramski had lawfully purchased a Glock pistol in Virginia, then later resold the Glock to his uncle, a resident of Pennsylvania. Both purchases were conducted through FFLs, with full background checks, and both parties were legally entitled to own a handgun. Abramski arranged the sale in this fashion to take advantage of a discount available to him as a law enforcement officer.

Abramski was indicted and prosecuted for violating Federal laws against “straw purchases”, specifically making a false declaration on BATFE Form 4473....

(More, including reference links, at above link)