Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism > Okay, so straw purchases are illegal

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-10-2013, 05:27 PM   #11
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
TimL2952's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lockport,New York
Posts: 1,324
Liked 188 Times on 131 Posts
Likes Given: 303

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by danf_fl View Post
I can understand "give and take" in negotiations.
The Democrats got some support on "Straw purchases"
http://news.yahoo.com/senate-panel-backs-crackdown-clandestine-gun-sales-010612683.html

But for some reason, I think this was kind of like giving a bottle to a baby.
"Shut the kid up" and we get some peace.

"Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001 makes it a crime to: 1) knowingly and willfully; 2) make any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation; 3) in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative or judicial branch of the United States. Your lie does not even have to be made directly to an employee of the national government as long as it is "within the jurisdiction" of the ever expanding federal bureaucracy. Though the falsehood must be "material" this requirement is met if the statement has the "natural tendency to influence or [is] capable of influencing, the decision of the decisionmaking body to which it is addressed." United States v. Gaudin , 515 U.S. 506, 510 (1995). "
(source: http://corporate.findlaw.com/litigation-disputes/how-to-avoid-going-to-jail-under-18-u-s-c-section-1001-for-lying.html )

So when completing the 4473 and you lie that you are the actual buyer, you commited a felony.

So what are the Democrats giving the legal gun owners for this "victory" they received?
What I got from the article in the first paragraph was that it is now a Federal Crime....I'm not sure if it was a state matter before or not..I would assume it was always federal.

But yea...like you said, it's giving the dog a bone.
__________________
TimL2952 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 05:32 PM   #12
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
chloeshooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: The Great North Woods
Posts: 2,234
Liked 1739 Times on 900 Posts
Likes Given: 345

Default

As long as we don't register guns, I don't care about throwing the book at people who traffic. Make all penalties for committing crimes with guns stiff as you can - anyone who is selling irresponsibly can kiss my backside because that is a problem to be sure.

Tough laws on criminals yes. Impose upon law abiding citizens NO

__________________
leave the cannoli - take the gun
chloeshooter is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 05:33 PM   #13
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Idaho --,Happy
Posts: 1,905
Liked 341 Times on 237 Posts
Likes Given: 38

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tackleberry1 View Post
I have a big problem with the notion of UBC's when neither the Feds nor big city Chiefs put any effort into prosecuting people are turned down by the current system. According to the Milwaukee WI Chief of Police... "we don't waste resources on paper trails"... As though the 76,000 denied criminals just gave up on getting a gun?

Straw purchasers get a slap on the wrist, if anything, denied criminals are not prosecuted, violent gangs causing the majority of murders are never cracked down on because everyone, "including Cops and Politicians" are getting their piece of the Drug Pie...

... And your OK with giving this corrupt system MORE power to INFRINGE upon 2A?

With all due respect, I find your position to be the "simplistic" capitulation of someone NOT seeing the bigger picture. As someone else already said, the DEVIL is in the DETAILS and UBC's can only lead to registration.

Tack
Straw purchases are hard to prove so they only give the minimum sentence. And the criminal who can't have a firearm is only guilty of possession of a firearm, he can apply all he wants and thats not a crime until he is in possession. I just don't see UBC's as a path to registration. I think the intent is to just make it harder for criminals to buy guns without the UBC like gun shows or person to person. I am not a criminal so the thought of a UBC has no effect on me but if it helped keep guns out of the hands of criminals then that is good.
It will still be hard to prosecute either way. Your comment reads like you just want the current laws to be enforced ! Good luck with that !
__________________
Flat Tire is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 06:44 PM   #14
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Pendleton, 29670,South Carolina
Posts: 2,477
Liked 1137 Times on 667 Posts
Likes Given: 1676

Default

Lying on a 4473 is pure and simple perjury, uttering a false document. Usually a 1-year suspended sentence or probation, and the sale is denied.
But even a UBC can turn up no hits on somebody who is an habitual felon, but he has never been caught. At the same time, some guy who took a joyride in a car 50 years ago on his 18th birthday, and has never committed any crime since will be denied the purchase.
The point I'm making is that someone with no record could be the most dangerous scumbag around, and somebody with a trivial record may be no threat at all.
It is not the ownership of a weapon that is the problem, but how the weapon is used. The UBC is a "feel good" concept to fool the public into believing the politicians are doing something to stop the violence.

__________________
AIKIJUTSU is offline  
LUBrowningBoy Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 07:10 PM   #15
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
TimL2952's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lockport,New York
Posts: 1,324
Liked 188 Times on 131 Posts
Likes Given: 303

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AIKIJUTSU View Post
Lying on a 4473 is pure and simple perjury, uttering a false document. Usually a 1-year suspended sentence or probation, and the sale is denied.
But even a UBC can turn up no hits on somebody who is an habitual felon, but he has never been caught. At the same time, some guy who took a joyride in a car 50 years ago on his 18th birthday, and has never committed any crime since will be denied the purchase.
The point I'm making is that someone with no record could be the most dangerous scumbag around, and somebody with a trivial record may be no threat at all.
It is not the ownership of a weapon that is the problem, but how the weapon is used. The UBC is a "feel good" concept to fool the public into believing the politicians are doing something to stop the violence.

You got that right....My dad tried buying a shotgun while we were in Illinois. We had to do a NICS check because it was coming back to NY with us.

Well, back in the 70s he unknowingly bought a stolen car. Police stopped him one day, he gave em the story, they arrested the guy who sold it to him. Well, my dad was facing a misdemeanor for buying stolen goods...judge set it to a few hours of community service.

Sometime in the decades after, the crime he "committed" became a felony. His record was not discarded or grandfathered...My father became a Felon for something that had already went through a court and was sentenced on.

We were denied the shotgun, the Sheriffs came to our house and took all of his guns and threatened to take both my guns and my brother's guns.

We got out of it by putting them in our mom's house etc. etc. But he got a lawyer and it was worked out. Thankfully the sheriffs didn't damage his/my future guns...there is a lot of sentimental value there.
__________________

Last edited by TimL2952; 03-10-2013 at 07:12 PM.
TimL2952 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 08:58 PM   #16
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
orangello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19,170
Liked 5731 Times on 3358 Posts
Likes Given: 4877

Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat Tire View Post
I just don't see UBC's as a path to registration. I think the intent is to just make it harder for criminals to buy guns without the UBC like gun shows or person to person.
How can the universalbackgroundcheck system work or be enforceable without a registration first? OK, so a background check is required for all transfers now, so prove i didn't get this SKS before that requirement. Unenforceable laws are pointless.

Now, if you register all the guns first, then you could enforce the UBC requirement: "This gun isn't registered to you and you don't have a copy of the 4473 on it; this way to the gray bar motel sir."

I am not a fan, nor would i comply with a required registration.
__________________

Dead Bears, the only good kind.

orangello is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 09:39 PM   #17
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Idaho --,Happy
Posts: 1,905
Liked 341 Times on 237 Posts
Likes Given: 38

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangello View Post
How can the universalbackgroundcheck system work or be enforceable without a registration first? OK, so a background check is required for all transfers now, so prove i didn't get this SKS before that requirement. Unenforceable laws are pointless.

Now, if you register all the guns first, then you could enforce the UBC requirement: "This gun isn't registered to you and you don't have a copy of the 4473 on it; this way to the gray bar motel sir."

I am not a fan, nor would i comply with a required registration.
The idea would be from this day forward it could be harder for someone with a record to get a gun. It is the same as Fienstiens AWB, they aren't after what is already out there just stop more from coming in. It is just a numbers thing. They will never make it so everyone has to register the guns your grandfather gave you.
__________________
Flat Tire is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 10:48 PM   #18
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,485
Liked 896 Times on 511 Posts
Likes Given: 363

Default

I think UBC's MAY have the effect of preventing sales of legal guns to criminals, but it's pretty clear that criminals don't acquire guns legally since they're not permitted to have them, so the theory that a UBC would prevent transfers of firearms to criminals is good but as with many theories the actual evidence never quite proves the basis of the theory.

When our government can account for all of its weapons and stop selling weapons to well known organized criminal syndicates they can start worrying about the possible criminal transfers of weapons to other civilians, but not before then.

When the CIA stops importing drugs into the US to fund its operations, the rest of the government can start concerning itself with trafficking of street drugs by domestic and international cartels, but not before then.

When the government stops using bombs, missiles, and machine guns to kill civilians (whether here at home or abroad) they can start worrying about what weapons civilians have that may be used to kill other civilians, but not before then.

Our government is the biggest enabler of mass murder around, bar none. If our representatives and government employees are serious about preventing the deaths of civilians, they can start with policing their own activities which lead to the deaths of civilians.

__________________
kbd512 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 10:57 PM   #19
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
DFlynt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Festus, Missouri
Posts: 3,036
Liked 1784 Times on 1168 Posts
Likes Given: 1506

Default

Seems to me that a large part of the straw purchases that happened in Arizona in 2009-2011 should have been prosecuted to the max...OH my bad that was the U.S. Government ignoring the law for their "Fast and Furious" scam.

__________________

“Somebody has to speak for these people. Y'all got on this boat for different reasons, but y'all come to the same place. So now I'm asking more of you than I have before. Maybe all. Sure as I know anything, I know this—they will try again. Maybe on another world, maybe on this very ground swept clean. A year from now, ten? They'll swing back to the belief that they can make people...better. And I do not hold to that. So no more runnin'. I aim to misbehave.” Mal Reynolds Serenity/Firefly

DFlynt is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2013, 11:23 PM   #20
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Yunus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: |,Maryland
Posts: 4,697
Liked 1015 Times on 600 Posts
Likes Given: 317

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangello View Post
How can the universalbackgroundcheck system work or be enforceable without a registration first? OK, so a background check is required for all transfers now, so prove i didn't get this SKS before that requirement. Unenforceable laws are pointless.

Now, if you register all the guns first, then you could enforce the UBC requirement: "This gun isn't registered to you and you don't have a copy of the 4473 on it; this way to the gray bar motel sir."

I am not a fan, nor would i comply with a required registration.
You don't need registration to have UBC's. Simply putting it out there that a background check MUST be performed to do a transfer will reduce the number of sales of guns to people who can't legally own them because the random seller of the firearm who is a law abiding citizen is going to know something shady is going on when the buyer won't do the sale by going through the check.
__________________

"Good people drink good beer."
Hunter S. Thompson

Yunus is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Straw Purchase? Inkster Legal and Activism 9 06-19-2012 01:20 PM
Is this a straw purchase? MichaelBarton General Handgun Discussion 20 02-01-2012 04:56 AM
"Straw"/gift purchases. TimL2952 General Handgun Discussion 53 07-26-2011 06:33 PM
Straw Law Issue / Problem NoWayOut Legal and Activism 13 07-16-2011 08:30 PM