CBS doing a story on story on straw purchases right now

[baldeagle]

An undercover investigation of straw purchases in the DFW area found that 5 out of 11 gun stores and pawn shops were perfectly fine with straw purchases. Each person involved should be arrested.

[OldGrumpy]

Just proves we do not need more laws - but enforcement of the laws we already have. How many know of a straw purchase prosecution?

[Dave2]

An undercover investigation of straw purchases in the DFW area found that 5 out of 11 gun stores and pawn shops were perfectly fine with straw purchases. Each person involved should be arrested.

I saw the ad, but not the show. Wow, 5/11? They sure do have some 'splainin to do! What stores were involved?

[baldeagle]

An undercover investigation of straw purchases in the DFW area found that 5 out of 11 gun stores and pawn shops were perfectly fine with straw purchases. Each person involved should be arrested.

I saw the ad, but not the show. Wow, 5/11? They sure do have some 'splainin to do! What stores were involved?

They finally have the story up - http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2013/05/14/i-te ... -gun-laws/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Cash America Pawn Shop in North Dallas, A Action Pawn Shop in Irving, Cheaper Than Dirt Outdoor Adventures in Fort Worth, Uncle Dan’s Pawn Shop in Dallas, and Doc Holiday’s Pawn Shop in Fort Worth.

The problem is going to be that since no transaction occurred, there was no crime committed. But those stores should have to go through a serious audit, and the employees involved should at least be disciplined if not fired.

[Dave2]

An undercover investigation of straw purchases in the DFW area found that 5 out of 11 gun stores and pawn shops were perfectly fine with straw purchases. Each person involved should be arrested.

I saw the ad, but not the show. Wow, 5/11? They sure do have some 'splainin to do! What stores were involved?

They finally have the story up - http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2013/05/14/i-te ... -gun-laws/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Cash America Pawn Shop in North Dallas, A Action Pawn Shop in Irving, Cheaper Than Dirt Outdoor Adventures in Fort Worth, Uncle Dan’s Pawn Shop in Dallas, and Doc Holiday’s Pawn Shop in Fort Worth.

The problem is going to be that since no transaction occurred, there was no crime committed. But those stores should have to go through a serious audit, and the employees involved should at least be disciplined if not fired.

Good... No one I know (as far as I know).

[The Annoyed Man]

CTD surprises me....not that they're all that and a bag of chips, but that they're not a mom & pop store either. You'd think they already get enough scrutiny.

And what does "willing to do a straw purchase mean" mean, exactly? An individual employee might be willing, but that doesn't mean that it is company policy. In fact, CTD's response—HERE—specifically states that they have reported suspicious attempted transactions, on their own initiative, to the BATF, involving attempted purchases by the drug cartels.,

It's not that I'm a huge fan of CTD; it's that I'm NOT a huge fan of CBS "entrapping" an employee into violating company policies, and then reporting it as a huge problem in the gun industry. My own experience in mom & pop shops locally is that they are REALLY paranoid about straw purchase attempts.....as they should be.

[gthaustex]

Just proves we do not need more laws - but enforcement of the laws we already have. How many know of a straw purchase prosecution?

I rarely, if ever, hear about straw purchasers / sales being prosecuted.

[K.Mooneyham]

CTD surprises me....not that they're all that and a bag of chips, but that they're not a mom & pop store either. You'd think they already get enough scrutiny.

And what does "willing to do a straw purchase mean" mean, exactly? An individual employee might be willing, but that doesn't mean that it is company policy. In fact, CTD's response—HERE—specifically states that they have reported suspicious attempted transactions, on their own initiative, to the BATF, involving attempted purchases by the drug cartels.,

It's not that I'm a huge fan of CTD; it's that I'm NOT a huge fan of CBS "entrapping" an employee into violating company policies, and then reporting it as a huge problem in the gun industry. My own experience in mom & pop shops locally is that they are REALLY paranoid about straw purchase attempts.....as they should be.

[The Annoyed Man]

Just proves we do not need more laws - but enforcement of the laws we already have. How many know of a straw purchase prosecution?

I rarely, if ever, hear about straw purchasers / sales being prosecuted.

No, we don't; but to be perfectly objective about it, probably an awful lot of straw purchases occur without the seller being aware that it is a straw purchase because the buyer is smart enough to keep their trap shut.

And probably, most of the attempted straw purchases that gunstores do know about are simply the case of something relatively innocent. Example:

Wife: "I want to buy a gun for my husband."

Clerk: "Is he paying for it?"

Wife: "Well, we have a joint checking account, but it's a gift I'm buying him for his birthday present. He's been wanting that Colt Single Action Army for a long time. This is going to be a surprise for him."

In all probability, that's an innocent purchase. But, they have a joint checking account, so he is indirectly paying for it, even though she's making the purchase. Is it an illegal sale if the clerk knows that it is a birthday present for her husband? I don't honestly know. I know that you can legally purchase a gun, and you can legally gift it to someone else who is not prevented by law from having it. That is exactly what this woman is doing. The only catches are that A) her husband has (unknowingly) helped to pay for it, and B) the clerk knows it is being bought for him, even though the transaction is in her name, and the clerk is unable to verify if he may legally own the gun.

SHOULD someone be prosecuted for that? I don't think so. OTH, how to you enforce prosecutions for REAL straw purchases without also prosecuting the many purchasers who are basically innocent? Just as common are the girlfriends of gangbangers who buy their boyfriends a gun, knowing that he is both ineligible and may possibly use it in the commission of a crime.

The problem is that the seller will never be aware that it was a straw purchase, and neither with the police until AFTER the gun has been used in the commission of a crime and recovered at the scene, and whatever mayhem it was going to be used for has already been perpetrated. You can prosecute the lawbreakers who made the straw purchase........but they are lawbreakers, and they'll do it again because they don't care about the law.

[JALLEN]

Be careful what you consider a straw purchase.

It is illegal to buy booze for someone under the age of 21. If you do that, intending to deliver the booze to such a person, you are committing a crime. What about if the person you intend to give it to IS over 21, and completely legal to buy any booze (s)he desires?

The same thing with gun purchases, right? If you buy a gun for me that you know I really, really want, say at a gun show, some rare unusual, etc. gun, and you know that I could buy it myself if present, is that a straw purchase? The only justification for rules about straw purchases is to prevent you from buying a gun for someone who is not otherwise legally allowed to have one.

It would be a straw purchase if husband was legally ineligible to purchase a gun. What if he is not disqualified? Why should that be a problem? Run hubby through the computer if you must, big deal!

[RX8er]

Be careful what you consider a straw purchase.

It is illegal to buy booze for someone under the age of 21. If you do that, intending to deliver the booze to such a person, you are committing a crime. What about if the person you intend to give it to IS over 21, and completely legal to buy any booze (s)he desires?

The same thing with gun purchases, right? If you buy a gun for me that you know I really, really want, say at a gun show, some rare unusual, etc. gun, and you know that I could buy it myself if present, is that a straw purchase? The only justification for rules about straw purchases is to prevent you from buying a gun for someone who is not otherwise legally allowed to have one.

It would be a straw purchase if husband was legally ineligible to purchase a gun. What if he is not disqualified? Why should that be a problem? Run hubby through the computer if you must, big deal!

This reminds me of what happened to a user of this board: viewtopic.php?f=83&t=61967" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[TrueFlog]

It's my understanding that it's only illegal if you know (or reasonably should have known) that intended recipient is a prohibited person. So a wife who buys for her husband would be committing a crime only if she knows that he's prohibited. Likewise, if her husband is not prohibited, she can buy as many guns as she wants for him. Suppose she has a CHL, and he doesn't. They go to the store together to buy a gun for him. He looks at the gun, handles it, asks all the questions, etc. while the wife shows no interest. He decides to buy it but asks his wife to do the paperwork and pay for it so that she can use her CHL and skip the NICS. In this scenario, everything is perfectly legal. Most retailers would probably not go along with it, as it seems somewhat suspicious, but it still wouldn't be an illegal straw purchase.

[The_Busy_Mom]

It's my understanding that it's only illegal if you know (or reasonably should have known) that intended recipient is a prohibited person. So a wife who buys for her husband would be committing a crime only if she knows that he's prohibited. Likewise, if her husband is not prohibited, she can buy as many guns as she wants for him. Suppose she has a CHL, and he doesn't. They go to the store together to buy a gun for him. He looks at the gun, handles it, asks all the questions, etc. while the wife shows no interest. He decides to buy it but asks his wife to do the paperwork and pay for it so that she can use her CHL and skip the NICS. In this scenario, everything is perfectly legal. Most retailers would probably not go along with it, as it seems somewhat suspicious, but it still wouldn't be an illegal straw purchase.

Correct. If the husband is not legally disqualified, then the wife can purchase it to give as a gift to the husband. The key is GIFT. And you are even more correct when you state that retailers will not go along with it. Gun sellers have the obligation to NOT conduct a sale if they even think there might be a chance of a straw purchase. Suspicious activity = no sale.

TBM

[OldCannon]

Wife: "I want to buy a gun for my husband."

Clerk: "Is he paying for it?"

Wife: "Well, we have a joint checking account, but it's a gift I'm buying him for his birthday present. He's been wanting that Colt Single Action Army for a long time. This is going to be a surprise for him."

That's not a straw purchase.

There's some very specific rules here, but the 4473 clearly states, "You are not the actual buyer if you are acquiring the firearm(s) on behalf of another person." It gets muddy in the case of spouses, who have joint accounts, etc. It is not unusual at all for somebody to buy (and gift) a firearm to their spouse, and this is very much permitted. As an FFL, if you're doing this, I will directly ask you, "Can your spouse legally own a firearm?" I don't do this to offend you, I do this because there are some spouses who might be coerced into buying a firearm for somebody that cannot legally own one, and such a process would mean the person is breaking the law.

There's a more popular "innocent" straw purchase problem when somebody is going a "group buy," particularly on things like lowers. This is definitely a straw purchase and I won't proceed with the sale. I'll simply tell you to bring your "group" here and they can buy their toys.

Based on the dialog in that article, these dealers should have definitely said they won't make the sale. Frankly, I think such attempts are criminal, but the federal govt doesn't (and would likely not enforce it, because, you know, that might REDUCE crime -- can't have that if you want more money to fight crime, can ya?).

There's a LOT of ways to sniff out a straw purchase, and dealers are on the front lines of this. The NSSF has a lot of excellent training videos on how to spot and what to do (here's some videos for consumers: http://www.dontlie.org/videos.cfm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;). Their more-detailed straw-purchase training videos are free to NSSF members. They actually don't suck, either

The real issue is this: Conducting a straw purchase is illegal (10 years) once you have taken possession and provide the firearm to somebody that cannot own one. There is no law on the books, unfortunately, that can punish an attempted straw purchase. Basically, somebody that wants 5 Glocks 22 can give his girlfriend (or hired mule) a list of what they want and some money and send them off to a list of stores to attempt purchasing from (and they love pawn shops, because those employees are generally less-trained than gun store employees. No store has any way of communicating the attempt to other stores nearby, nor will local or federal law enforcement do anything. So dealers are expected to stop straw purchases, but criminals can just run down to the other store a few miles down the road.

[Jumping Frog]

The same thing with gun purchases, right? If you buy a gun for me that you know I really, really want, say at a gun show, some rare unusual, etc. gun, and you know that I could buy it myself if present, is that a straw purchase? The only justification for rules about straw purchases is to prevent you from buying a gun for someone who is not otherwise legally allowed to have one.

It's my understanding that it's only illegal if you know (or reasonably should have known) that intended recipient is a prohibited person.

Both of you are incorrect when you state it is only a straw purchase if the other person is a prohibited person.

The key is to follow the money, which reflects the intent of the sale.

Example 1: We are co-workers, well known to each other and both have CHL's (meaning we are not under firearms disability). I hear you are going to the gun show this weekend, so I pull out my wallet, hand you 10 hundred dollar bills, and and say, "if you find any good bargains in compact 1911's, grab it for me.". That is a straw purchase. You are not purchasing the firearm for yourself. ILLEGAL even though neither party is under firearms disability.

Example 2: We are co-workers and I see a 1911 I know you will love, so I buy it for you. That is a gift and perfectly legal.

Example 3: Man and woman standing at counter eyeing a gun purchase. Woman says she will buy it, turns to the man who hands her cash. An FFL should turn this down as it certainly looks like a straw purchase. Whether the man is a prohibited person or not is immaterial.