Supreme Court Rules Against ‘Straw’ Purchases of Guns

[Crabtownboy]

This one they got right.

By a 5-to-4 vote, the court allowed a prosecution under a federal law that requires gun buyers to disclose that they are making their purchase for someone else, even if both the straw buyer and the real one are eligible to own guns.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/17/u...-politics-guns-abortion.html?hpw&rref=us&_r=0

 

[poncho]

This one they got right.

They've been doing this in every gun store I've been to for at least 20 years now.

 

[Rolfe]

They've been doing this in every gun store I've been to for at least 20 years now.

I have the impression that he does not like guns.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Or the folks that own them.

 

[poncho]

Freedom is a frightening thing . . . to an authoritarian.

 

[carpro]

The way I feel...

They can take their decision and stick it. I'll buy a gun anytime I feel like it and do with it whatever I want.

Keep it. Give it away. Or sell it.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

The way I feel...

They can take their decision and stick it. I'll buy a gun anytime I feel like it and do with it whatever I want.

Keep it. Give it away. Or sell it.

:thumbsup:

 

[Don]

The way I feel...

They can take their decision and stick it. I'll buy a gun anytime I feel like it and do with it whatever I want.

Keep it. Give it away. Or sell it.

Ah, but the decision doesn't address that; it addresses purchasing the weapon for the express purpose of buying it for someone else -- i.e., lying about who the weapon is for. In other words, it requires proof that the intent at the time of purchase was deceptive.

For example, if you have the gun for a month, and then give it as a gift to a family member - how does this law address that? Or if you have it for years, and decide to give it as a "family hand-me-down"; how is that covered?

 

[just-want-peace]

---For example, if you have the gun for a month, and then give it as a gift to a family member - how does this law address that? Or if you have it for years, and decide to give it as a "family hand-me-down"; how is that covered?

Depends on whether ------, well you pick the qualifying factors.

IOW, it's up to the political winds!!!!!!!!:BangHead:

 

[Reynolds]

This one they got right.

I do not see how they got it right. Buying firearms for gifts has long been accepted practice in this nation. Their ultimate goal is to eliminate civilian to civilian transfers of guns. They want a paper trail of all the firearms. They are moving there one small step at a time.

 

[Rolfe]

For example, if you have the gun for a month, and then give it as a gift to a family member - how does this law address that? Or if you have it for years, and decide to give it as a "family hand-me-down"; how is that covered?

Often wondered about the same thing.

 

[Aaron]

Why do you folks insist on feeding the commie?

 

[Crabtownboy]

Why do you folks insist on feeding the commie?

I challenge you again. Show me where I have supported one tenet of Communism.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

"Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc., etc."

 

[Crabtownboy]

"Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc., etc."

You are like a broken record. Repeating worthless noise over and over and over.

 

[just-want-peace]

You are like a broken record. Repeating worthless noise over and over and over.

WOW!!!
Talk about the pot calling ---- oh well, I KNOW it's talking to a bric--- er -uh -- well used kettle!!!!:smilewinkgrin::smilewinkgrin:

 

[Bro. Curtis]

You are like a broken record. Repeating worthless noise over and over and over.

Not only do you support this tenet, you tried to re-write history to show Jefferson supported it, too.

Aaron is correct.

 

[carpro]

Ah, but the decision doesn't address that; it addresses purchasing the weapon for the express purpose of buying it for someone else -- i.e., lying about who the weapon is for. In other words, it requires proof that the intent at the time of purchase was deceptive.

For example, if you have the gun for a month, and then give it as a gift to a family member - how does this law address that? Or if you have it for years, and decide to give it as a "family hand-me-down"; how is that covered?

IOW Another "law" that requires law enforcement agencies to read your mind.

 

[OnlyaSinner]

If I buy a gun legally, then give it to someone while fully knowing that the person cannot legally own a firearm, should I not be culpable? And not thru mind-reading by police, but by solid evidence of what I knew or clear evidence of what I should have known.

The issue of gifts within family hits close to home, as all my current firearms were either given me by my dad or inherited from him. However, should my child commit a felony such that he/she is no longer legally able to own a gun, I ought to have enough sense not to give one. I'm guessing only a tiny portion of legal-to-illegal straw purchases involve within-family exchanges.

 

[Zaac]

I do not see how they got it right. Buying firearms for gifts has long been accepted practice in this nation. Their ultimate goal is to eliminate civilian to civilian transfers of guns. They want a paper trail of all the firearms. They are moving there one small step at a time.

So what do they do when the law abiding citizens decide to start getting their guns the same way that the criminals do to avoid all this?