User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 5:53:55 AM EDT
[#1]
Is it the one in which a cop bought a blue label glock for his uncle?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:04:43 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Is it the one in which a cop bought a blue label glock for his uncle? yep. 50/50 tossup depends on if everybody got to eat their favorite breakfast or not. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:11:19 AM EDT
[#3]
How could this go bad for us? From what I've read the guy was pretty clearly buying a gun for the sole purpose of selling it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:14:13 AM EDT
[#4]
FYI for those of you (like me) that was wondering what this case was:
Questions presented to the SCOTUS http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/abramski-v-united-states/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:17:39 AM EDT
[#5]
Qualifications for the Glock Blue Label program:
Those who qualify include:
Military personnel including Reservists and National Guard with I.D. (Includes retired Military with "retired" credentials) What exactly are "retired credentials"? Does my 214 count? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:17:54 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
yep. 50/50 tossup depends on if everybody got to eat their favorite breakfast or not. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Is it the one in which a cop bought a blue label glock for his uncle? yep. 50/50 tossup depends on if everybody got to eat their favorite breakfast or not. That will also play into that FBI guy in TX who did the same. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:18:44 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How could this go bad for us? From what I've read the guy was pretty clearly buying a gun for the sole purpose of selling it. He did not make a profit on it and it went to a person who could legally buy a gun. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:22:56 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Qualifications for the Glock Blue Label program: What exactly are "retired credentials"? Does my 214 count? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Qualifications for the Glock Blue Label program: Those who qualify include:
Military personnel including Reservists and National Guard with I.D. (Includes retired Military with "retired" credentials) What exactly are "retired credentials"? Does my 214 count? You have a blue or brown-ish ID card. It looks like a dependant's ID card, but says Retired on it. You'd get the blue one after you're 65 I believe (which opens you up for AMC space-a flights as well). |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:23:05 AM EDT
[#9]
From my cursory reading of the facts of the case, this case has pretty serious implications depending on how SCOTUS comes down. If they rule against Abramski, it could essentially mean that it will be illegal to ever purchase a firearm for someone else, even if it's a gift for a relative, etc. The debate is whether the language on the 4473 that asks whether you are the actual buyer of the gun means that you are the intended recipient of the purchase, regardless of whether the intended recipient may legally own a firearm.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:24:14 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Qualifications for the Glock Blue Label program: What exactly are "retired credentials"? Does my 214 count? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Qualifications for the Glock Blue Label program: Those who qualify include:
Military personnel including Reservists and National Guard with I.D. (Includes retired Military with "retired" credentials) What exactly are "retired credentials"? Does my 214 count? Requires a DD Form 2 (Retired) United States Uniformed Services ID Card has been my experience. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:25:10 AM EDT
[#11]
OST
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:27:29 AM EDT
[#12]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:28:18 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You have a blue or brown-ish ID card. It looks like a dependant's ID card, but says Retired on it. You'd get the blue one after you're 65 I believe (which opens you up for AMC space-a flights as well). Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Qualifications for the Glock Blue Label program: Those who qualify include:
Military personnel including Reservists and National Guard with I.D. (Includes retired Military with "retired" credentials) What exactly are "retired credentials"? Does my 214 count? You have a blue or brown-ish ID card. It looks like a dependant's ID card, but says Retired on it. You'd get the blue one after you're 65 I believe (which opens you up for AMC space-a flights as well). Huh, never thought about getting a military ID after I separated. Might have to Google how one goes about obtaining one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:28:56 AM EDT
[#14]
expect the worst
hope for the best |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:30:21 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Huh, never thought about getting a military ID after I separated. Might have to Google how one goes about obtaining one. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Qualifications for the Glock Blue Label program: Those who qualify include:
Military personnel including Reservists and National Guard with I.D. (Includes retired Military with "retired" credentials) What exactly are "retired credentials"? Does my 214 count? You have a blue or brown-ish ID card. It looks like a dependant's ID card, but says Retired on it. You'd get the blue one after you're 65 I believe (which opens you up for AMC space-a flights as well). Huh, never thought about getting a military ID after I separated. Might have to Google how one goes about obtaining one. Did you separate, or retire? If you separated, you don't get a card. If you retired, you do. Read up on the obligations between the two, as there are some important distinctions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:31:13 AM EDT
[#16]
The briefs for the case are fascinating. It's pretty clear that the BATFE made up the current concept of a straw purchase out of whole cloth. The current wording on the 4473 was never subject to any sort of review or public comment. They just did it themselves . . . something they are not allowed to do.
I can't imagine the court even taking this case if they didn't think the BATFE needed a good spanking. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:34:05 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: He did not make a profit on it and it went to a person who could legally buy a gun. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: How could this go bad for us? From what I've read the guy was pretty clearly buying a gun for the sole purpose of selling it. He did not make a profit on it and it went to a person who could legally buy a gun. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:36:32 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Did you separate, or retire? If you separated, you don't get a card. If you retired, you do. Read up on the obligations between the two, as there are some important distinctions. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Qualifications for the Glock Blue Label program: Those who qualify include:
Military personnel including Reservists and National Guard with I.D. (Includes retired Military with "retired" credentials) What exactly are "retired credentials"? Does my 214 count? You have a blue or brown-ish ID card. It looks like a dependant's ID card, but says Retired on it. You'd get the blue one after you're 65 I believe (which opens you up for AMC space-a flights as well). Huh, never thought about getting a military ID after I separated. Might have to Google how one goes about obtaining one. Did you separate, or retire? If you separated, you don't get a card. If you retired, you do. Read up on the obligations between the two, as there are some important distinctions. Ah OK, yea I just separated, guess I'm SOL. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:37:48 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Huh, never thought about getting a military ID after I separated. Might have to Google how one goes about obtaining one. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Qualifications for the Glock Blue Label program: Those who qualify include:
Military personnel including Reservists and National Guard with I.D. (Includes retired Military with "retired" credentials) What exactly are "retired credentials"? Does my 214 count? You have a blue or brown-ish ID card. It looks like a dependant's ID card, but says Retired on it. You'd get the blue one after you're 65 I believe (which opens you up for AMC space-a flights as well). Huh, never thought about getting a military ID after I separated. Might have to Google how one goes about obtaining one. nm |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:39:18 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The briefs for the case are fascinating. It's pretty clear that the BATFE made up the current concept of a straw purchase out of whole cloth. The current wording on the 4473 was never subject to any sort of review or public comment. They just did it themselves . . . something they are not allowed to do. I can't imagine the court even taking this case if they didn't think the BATFE needed a good spanking. I pray to God they get one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:40:43 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Qualifications for the Glock Blue Label program: What exactly are "retired credentials"? Does my 214 count? Quote HistoryQuoted: Qualifications for the Glock Blue Label program: Those who qualify include: Military personnel including Reservists and National Guard with I.D. (Includes retired Military with "retired" credentials) What exactly are "retired credentials"? Does my 214 count? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:42:26 AM EDT
[#22]
"Supream?"
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:42:57 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
From my cursory reading of the facts of the case, this case has pretty serious implications depending on how SCOTUS comes down. If they rule against Abramski, it could essentially mean that it will be illegal to ever purchase a firearm for someone else, even if it's a gift for a relative, etc. The debate is whether the language on the 4473 that asks whether you are the actual buyer of the gun means that you are the intended recipient of the purchase, regardless of whether the intended recipient may legally own a firearm. BATFE does a lot of things they aren't supposed to do, I say let the peepee slapping commence |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:45:12 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There is no requirement to make a profit to be "engaged in business". Plus it was a blue box. Might not be the best guy to try this with, but we can always hope. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How could this go bad for us? From what I've read the guy was pretty clearly buying a gun for the sole purpose of selling it. He did not make a profit on it and it went to a person who could legally buy a gun. My problem with "straw purchase" is the intent and who ends with the firearm. He did not purchase the firearm for a prohibited person. To me it would be like my dad calling me, saying he dropped by a pawn shop in Mobile on his way back from Biloxi, found a Nagant M38 all matching in great condition for $150 and do I want him to pick it up for me. He could buy it and gift it to me, no problem but if I pay him back for it, we have now committed a crime? Both of us can legally buy firearms and have NFA items. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:46:55 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The briefs for the case are fascinating. It's pretty clear that the BATFE made up the current concept of a straw purchase out of whole cloth. The current wording on the 4473 was never subject to any sort of review or public comment. They just did it themselves . . . something they are not allowed to do. I can't imagine the court even taking this case if they didn't think the BATFE needed a good spanking. But doesn't the describe about 87% of what the ATF does ? Make up shit on their own and enforce it ? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:47:10 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Qualifications for the Glock Blue Label program: What exactly are "retired credentials"? Does my 214 count? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Qualifications for the Glock Blue Label program: Those who qualify include:
Military personnel including Reservists and National Guard with I.D. (Includes retired Military with "retired" credentials) What exactly are "retired credentials"? Does my 214 count? How long were you in? Nevermind, already answered. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:47:35 AM EDT
[#27]
Why in the fuck is it "illegal" (by ATF decree) in the first place to buy a gun with the intent to resell or gift it?
Oh, that's right... they might have less control over people. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:47:35 AM EDT
[#28]
Clift? Supream?
Sigh.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:48:27 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Clift? Supream? Sigh.
You're asking a lot these days. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:49:01 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My problem with "straw purchase" is the intent and who ends with the firearm. He did not purchase the firearm for a prohibited person. To me it would be like my dad calling me, saying he dropped by a pawn shop in Mobile on his way back from Biloxi, found a Nagant M38 all matching in great condition for $150 and do I want him to pick it up for me. He could buy it and gift it to me, no problem but if I pay him back for it, we have now committed a crime? Both of us can legally buy firearms and have NFA items. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How could this go bad for us? From what I've read the guy was pretty clearly buying a gun for the sole purpose of selling it. He did not make a profit on it and it went to a person who could legally buy a gun. My problem with "straw purchase" is the intent and who ends with the firearm. He did not purchase the firearm for a prohibited person. To me it would be like my dad calling me, saying he dropped by a pawn shop in Mobile on his way back from Biloxi, found a Nagant M38 all matching in great condition for $150 and do I want him to pick it up for me. He could buy it and gift it to me, no problem but if I pay him back for it, we have now committed a crime? Both of us can legally buy firearms and have NFA items. This is pretty much the same argument for prostitution. Two adults can have all the sex they want but if one gives the other $1 it's illegal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:51:00 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My problem with "straw purchase" is the intent and who ends with the firearm. He did not purchase the firearm for a prohibited person. To me it would be like my dad calling me, saying he dropped by a pawn shop in Mobile on his way back from Biloxi, found a Nagant M38 all matching in great condition for $150 and do I want him to pick it up for me. He could buy it and gift it to me, no problem but if I pay him back for it, we have now committed a crime? Both of us can legally buy firearms and have NFA items. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: He did not make a profit on it and it went to a person who could legally buy a gun. My problem with "straw purchase" is the intent and who ends with the firearm. He did not purchase the firearm for a prohibited person. To me it would be like my dad calling me, saying he dropped by a pawn shop in Mobile on his way back from Biloxi, found a Nagant M38 all matching in great condition for $150 and do I want him to pick it up for me. He could buy it and gift it to me, no problem but if I pay him back for it, we have now committed a crime? Both of us can legally buy firearms and have NFA items. ETA:Pretty much. You are supposed to have the FFL send it to your FFL where you pick it up and fill out a 4473. In reality it's almost impossible to prove that your dad bought the gun with the express purpose of selling it to you. Unfortunately for the officer involved in this case he literally had a printed record that he did so, especially given that the gun (a blue box Glock) was something only he could have obtained. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:55:39 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It goes back to the original intent of the 1968 GCA. If it is decided that the GCA was meant to moniter the trafficking of firearms and that the 4473 is a proper tool to do so we are screwed and will have learned yet another lesson in "passing gun control legislation on the federal level is almost impossible to reverse because for all of the talk and bluster people won't actually pass bills to get rid of it". We don't have an AWB only because the old one had a sunset, not because the GOP did anything about it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
He did not make a profit on it and it went to a person who could legally buy a gun. My problem with "straw purchase" is the intent and who ends with the firearm. He did not purchase the firearm for a prohibited person. To me it would be like my dad calling me, saying he dropped by a pawn shop in Mobile on his way back from Biloxi, found a Nagant M38 all matching in great condition for $150 and do I want him to pick it up for me. He could buy it and gift it to me, no problem but if I pay him back for it, we have now committed a crime? Both of us can legally buy firearms and have NFA items. I understand it would be bad if the SC rules the wrong way on this but it kind of seems like getting a ticket for texting while driving in that you're only going to get caught if you're being really stupid about it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:57:04 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is pretty much the same argument for prostitution. Two adults can have all the sex they want but if one gives the other $1 it's illegal. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
My problem with "straw purchase" is the intent and who ends with the firearm. He did not purchase the firearm for a prohibited person. To me it would be like my dad calling me, saying he dropped by a pawn shop in Mobile on his way back from Biloxi, found a Nagant M38 all matching in great condition for $150 and do I want him to pick it up for me. He could buy it and gift it to me, no problem but if I pay him back for it, we have now committed a crime? Both of us can legally buy firearms and have NFA items. This is pretty much the same argument for prostitution. Two adults can have all the sex they want but if one gives the other $1 it's illegal. I don't think it is exactly same. In my made up situation Dad is not making a profit off the transaction. In prostitution the person is making money. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:57:12 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I understand it would be bad if the SC rules the wrong way on this but it kind of seems like getting a ticket for texting while driving in that you're only going to get caught if you're being really stupid about it. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I understand it would be bad if the SC rules the wrong way on this but it kind of seems like getting a ticket for texting while driving in that you're only going to get caught if you're being really stupid about it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 6:59:30 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't think it is exactly same. In my made up situation Dad is not making a profit off the transaction. In prostitution the person is making money. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: This is pretty much the same argument for prostitution. Two adults can have all the sex they want but if one gives the other $1 it's illegal. I don't think it is exactly same. In my made up situation Dad is not making a profit off the transaction. In prostitution the person is making money. ETA: Many people engaged in business go out of their way to not make a profit for tax reasons. Not to mention all the businesses that fail to make a profit in a bad year. They are still very much "engaged in business" even if they don't end the year in the black. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 7:00:01 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He did not make a profit on it and it went to a person who could legally buy a gun. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
How could this go bad for us? From what I've read the guy was pretty clearly buying a gun for the sole purpose of selling it. He did not make a profit on it and it went to a person who could legally buy a gun. Who also, according to the reply of the petitioner, went through his own background check, just like the original purchaser. Sigh.  They just dont stop.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 7:00:08 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You have a blue or brown-ish ID card. It looks like a dependant's ID card, but says Retired on it. You'd get the blue one after you're 65 I believe (which opens you up for AMC space-a flights as well). Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Qualifications for the Glock Blue Label program: Those who qualify include:
Military personnel including Reservists and National Guard with I.D. (Includes retired Military with "retired" credentials) What exactly are "retired credentials"? Does my 214 count? You have a blue or brown-ish ID card. It looks like a dependant's ID card, but says Retired on it. You'd get the blue one after you're 65 I believe (which opens you up for AMC space-a flights as well). Blue I.D immediately after retirement. Space A can be flown right after retirement too. No I.D if you separated. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 7:00:09 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It goes back to the original intent of the 1968 GCA. If it is decided that the GCA was meant to moniter the trafficking of firearms and that the 4473 is a proper tool to do so we are screwed and will have learned yet another lesson in "passing gun control legislation on the federal level is almost impossible to reverse because for all of the talk and bluster people won't actually pass bills to get rid of it". We don't have an AWB only because the old one had a sunset, not because the GOP did anything about it. ETA:Pretty much. You are supposed to have the FFL send it to your FFL where you pick it up and fill out a 4473. In reality it's almost impossible to prove that your dad bought the gun with the express purpose of selling it to you. Unfortunately for the officer involved in this case he literally had a printed record that he did so, especially given that the gun (a blue box Glock) was something only he could have obtained. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
He did not make a profit on it and it went to a person who could legally buy a gun. My problem with "straw purchase" is the intent and who ends with the firearm. He did not purchase the firearm for a prohibited person. To me it would be like my dad calling me, saying he dropped by a pawn shop in Mobile on his way back from Biloxi, found a Nagant M38 all matching in great condition for $150 and do I want him to pick it up for me. He could buy it and gift it to me, no problem but if I pay him back for it, we have now committed a crime? Both of us can legally buy firearms and have NFA items. ETA:Pretty much. You are supposed to have the FFL send it to your FFL where you pick it up and fill out a 4473. In reality it's almost impossible to prove that your dad bought the gun with the express purpose of selling it to you. Unfortunately for the officer involved in this case he literally had a printed record that he did so, especially given that the gun (a blue box Glock) was something only he could have obtained. But it still does not meet the strict term of a "straw purchase". Keeping records is what got the FBI agent in trouble. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 7:01:37 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Who also, according to the reply of the petitioner, went through his own background check, just like the original purchaser. Sigh. They just dont stop.Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How could this go bad for us? From what I've read the guy was pretty clearly buying a gun for the sole purpose of selling it. He did not make a profit on it and it went to a person who could legally buy a gun. Who also, according to the reply of the petitioner, went through his own background check, just like the original purchaser. Sigh. They just dont stop.So they did a dealer transfer? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 7:02:45 AM EDT
[#40]
Is there any way to get a thread on this case tacked?
Possibly this thread, if the OP edits the title because the misspelling is driving us crazy? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 7:03:26 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: But it still does not meet the strict term of a "straw purchase". Keeping records is what got the FBI agent in trouble. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter ETA:Pretty much. You are supposed to have the FFL send it to your FFL where you pick it up and fill out a 4473. In reality it's almost impossible to prove that your dad bought the gun with the express purpose of selling it to you. Unfortunately for the officer involved in this case he literally had a printed record that he did so, especially given that the gun (a blue box Glock) was something only he could have obtained. But it still does not meet the strict term of a "straw purchase". Keeping records is what got the FBI agent in trouble.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 7:05:39 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So they did a dealer transfer? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: How could this go bad for us? From what I've read the guy was pretty clearly buying a gun for the sole purpose of selling it. He did not make a profit on it and it went to a person who could legally buy a gun. Who also, according to the reply of the petitioner, went through his own background check, just like the original purchaser. Sigh. They just dont stop.So they did a dealer transfer? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 7:06:23 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Like I said earlier it all goes back to the perceived intent of the 1968 GCA and if the current interpretation jives with it. Your opinion (and mine) on the matter doesn't matter to anyone. The opinion of the 9 folks in black robes does.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter
ETA:Pretty much. You are supposed to have the FFL send it to your FFL where you pick it up and fill out a 4473. In reality it's almost impossible to prove that your dad bought the gun with the express purpose of selling it to you. Unfortunately for the officer involved in this case he literally had a printed record that he did so, especially given that the gun (a blue box Glock) was something only he could have obtained. But it still does not meet the strict term of a "straw purchase". Keeping records is what got the FBI agent in trouble.
To me the whole thing is jacked. I don't see the difference between buying a gun you know is going to be a gift, checking the box on a 4473 and buying a gun for a non-prohibited person with the intention on being paid back the purchase price. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 7:07:40 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: To me the whole thing is jacked. I don't see the difference between buying a gun you know is going to be a gift, checking the box on a 4473 and buying a gun for a non-prohibited person with the intention on being paid back the purchase price. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Like I said earlier it all goes back to the perceived intent of the 1968 GCA and if the current interpretation jives with it. Your opinion (and mine) on the matter doesn't matter to anyone. The opinion of the 9 folks in black robes does. To me the whole thing is jacked. I don't see the difference between buying a gun you know is going to be a gift, checking the box on a 4473 and buying a gun for a non-prohibited person with the intention on being paid back the purchase price. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 7:07:52 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Clift? Supream? Sigh. We are doomed as a nation.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 7:09:29 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It goes back to the original intent of the 1968 GCA. If it is decided that the GCA was meant to moniter the trafficking of firearms and that the 4473 is a proper tool to do so we are screwed and will have learned yet another lesson in "passing gun control legislation on the federal level is almost impossible to reverse because for all of the talk and bluster people won't actually pass bills to get rid of it". We don't have an AWB only because the old one had a sunset, not because the GOP did anything about it. ETA:Pretty much. You are supposed to have the FFL send it to your FFL where you pick it up and fill out a 4473. In reality it's almost impossible to prove that your dad bought the gun with the express purpose of selling it to you. Unfortunately for the officer involved in this case he literally had a printed record that he did so, especially given that the gun (a blue box Glock) was something only he could have obtained. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
He did not make a profit on it and it went to a person who could legally buy a gun. My problem with "straw purchase" is the intent and who ends with the firearm. He did not purchase the firearm for a prohibited person. To me it would be like my dad calling me, saying he dropped by a pawn shop in Mobile on his way back from Biloxi, found a Nagant M38 all matching in great condition for $150 and do I want him to pick it up for me. He could buy it and gift it to me, no problem but if I pay him back for it, we have now committed a crime? Both of us can legally buy firearms and have NFA items. ETA:Pretty much. You are supposed to have the FFL send it to your FFL where you pick it up and fill out a 4473. In reality it's almost impossible to prove that your dad bought the gun with the express purpose of selling it to you. Unfortunately for the officer involved in this case he literally had a printed record that he did so, especially given that the gun (a blue box Glock) was something only he could have obtained. [gomer pyle] Suprize,suprize [gomer pyle] edit Misspelled on purpose to sound the way Jim Nabors said it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 7:10:14 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In the eyes of the ATF that makes you "not the actual buyer" and makes you merely a proxy. Of course the whole thing is jacked, just like the rest of the 1968 GCA. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Like I said earlier it all goes back to the perceived intent of the 1968 GCA and if the current interpretation jives with it. Your opinion (and mine) on the matter doesn't matter to anyone. The opinion of the 9 folks in black robes does.
To me the whole thing is jacked. I don't see the difference between buying a gun you know is going to be a gift, checking the box on a 4473 and buying a gun for a non-prohibited person with the intention on being paid back the purchase price. This requirement is not even a part of the 1968 GCA. The ATF made it up and did not follow proper APA procedure in doing so. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 7:12:27 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This requirement is not even a part of the 1968 GCA. The ATF made it up and did not follow proper APA procedure in doing so. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: To me the whole thing is jacked. I don't see the difference between buying a gun you know is going to be a gift, checking the box on a 4473 and buying a gun for a non-prohibited person with the intention on being paid back the purchase price. This requirement is not even a part of the 1968 GCA. The ATF made it up and did not follow proper APA procedure in doing so. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 7:13:25 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Qualifications for the Glock Blue Label program: What exactly are "retired credentials"? Does my 214 count? Quote HistoryQuoted: Qualifications for the Glock Blue Label program: Those who qualify include: Military personnel including Reservists and National Guard with I.D. (Includes retired Military with "retired" credentials) What exactly are "retired credentials"? Does my 214 count? A .mil ID card.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/22/2014 7:25:44 AM EDT
[#50]
If you have good reading comprehension skills and a little bit of patience, it's well worth reading some of the petitioner's briefs. It's pretty interesing:
http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/abramski-v-united-states/?wpmp_switcher=desktop |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
