Firearms Talk banner
1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Retired
Joined
·
13,709 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
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/litiga...il-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?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,488 Posts
I like the part of the yahoo article where the guy talks about Sandy Hook and how an AWB would have lessened the killing. Conn already has an AWB. WTF are these hoplophobes smoking!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,825 Posts
So when completing the 4473 and you lie that you are the actual buyer, you commited a felony.
True..but what if the end result of this negotiated compromise now makes the gifting or purchase of a gun as a gift a straw purchase and, therefore, a felony. As it now stands you can answer the 4473 question honestly and gift the gun to a family member...the new law may prohibit that by making the transfer itself the crime, not the response to a question. The devil is, as they say, in the details.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,825 Posts
If you can't transfer a weapon... it will have to be destroyed.
What I meant to imply was that a transfer could not take place without a separate 4473 and NICS.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,904 Posts
It is hard to prove a straw purchase, anyone can just change their mind. But if all gun sales had to have a UBC then the straw purchase game would come to an end. Why would anyone put a gun in his/her own name and give it to someone that can't pass a UBC.

What do they do to someone that sells a gun to someone and then that gun is involved in a crime ? In Idaho I can sell a gun to anyone. It lies more in who is in possession of that gun. As a seller I am not required to check if someone is a criminal. If you can't have guns because of your criminal record and you have guns then you are a criminal, why go back to jail for just having a gun in possession ? I don't have a problem with UBC's for all gun sales.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,922 Posts
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/litiga...il-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?
True, now can you show me anyone who has been convicted of this. I made two open and shut cases where know gang members (named suspects) used false ID's and stolen credit cards to buy more than 60 hand guns to take back to CA for gang use and the US Attorney REFUSED to file on them!!!:mad:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,150 Posts
It is hard to prove a straw purchase, anyone can just change their mind. But if all gun sales had to have a UBC then the straw purchase game would come to an end. Why would anyone put a gun in his/her own name and give it to someone that can't pass a UBC.

What do they do to someone that sells a gun to someone and then that gun is involved in a crime ? In Idaho I can sell a gun to anyone. It lies more in who is in possession of that gun. As a seller I am not required to check if someone is a criminal. If you can't have guns because of your criminal record and you have guns then you are a criminal, why go back to jail for just having a gun in possession ? I don't have a problem with UBC's for all gun sales.
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
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
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
As there are millions of firearms that the goverment has no clue who has them how can UBC work? If someone sells me a firearm and the goverment don't know that person ever had it and we don't want to do a UBC whats to stop the sale? A favorite political statement "common sense" tells us the only way UBC can work is total registration. The political left and the media will push registration after UBC without it don't work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,354 Posts
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/litiga...il-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.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,562 Posts
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
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,904 Posts
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 !
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,879 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,354 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,141 Posts
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.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,904 Posts
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.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,232 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,035 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,249 Posts
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.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top