I was at my local FFL, and a girl came in buying a Tactical 870 for her boyfriend who was a US Marshall. She worked for the Justice Department and flinched when she read the question about are you the final user.

The FFL explained that since her boyfriend would pass the background check, it wasn't a straw purchase. It is only a straw puchase if you are buying it to sell/give to someone who isn't allowed to buy.

Should I accept his definition, or was he just hunting for a sale?

BTW, she bought it.

It’s my understanding that buying a firearm for a gift is perfectly legal.
Such as a father buying his fourteen year old son a rifle.

I can see the “establishment” using this sort of thing to harass or target otherwise
legitimate buyers.  Like arresting the father for purchasing his son a rifle.

A “straw purchase” is typically done as a means to deliver a firearm to a person
who would otherwise be barred from owning one.

I don’t understand the final user statement, as several states allow private sales to
other qualified buyers.    

Seem like another flaky regulation/question.

Rather than the “final user” crap, which could be construed to mean a lot of
things, the question ought to read something like “for legal purposes”.

Just my opinion, and not legal advice.

RK  

I flinched when I read someone who works for the Justice Dept. couldn't figure out the legalities of the statement.

A straw purchase is when you buy a firearm for anyone in order to mess with the paper trail. I believe technically this would include the following: Moe and Joe enter the gun store. In CA you are limited to one handgun a month. Joe wants to purchase two guns that day so he purchases one and Moe purchases the other. 30 days from now Moe sells the gun to Joe. Even though Joe passes both background checks and has waited the 30 days he broke the law because he used Moe to hold the gun for 30 days, Moe never intended to keep the gun. I don't think you would be prosecuted for this infraction but it would be against the law.

She could pay for it and give him a picture of the 870 and directions to the shop where he would complete the Form 4473.  If she is not the end user, then it would be a straw purchase and she has committed a felony by making a false statement on the Form 4473.

So, anyone that has purchased a firearm but never actually fired it, then commits a felony if they sell it or give it as a gift?

Does the lady have to fire the shotgun one time? Work the action one time?

Is it only a felony if you didn't intend to keep the firearm forever when you bought it?

Is it a felony if you were thinking that you might possibly, at some time in the future, give the firearm to a person legally entitled to own the weapon, but marked the box that you were the final user?  

What if you convinced yourself that you were indeed the final user when you signed the form but later decided to give the firearm as a gift?

If the lady ever has to take lie detector tests, she had better have the dealer legally transfer the shotgun to the boyfriend.

You can purchase a firearm as a gift for a friend as long as he/she is legally eligible to receive a firearm under federal and state law. That is not an illegal strawman purchase.

I have picked out firearms as gifts at the request of their wives and have done as Dave_G suggested enclosing a picture in an envelope with a card. Then the friend just goes to the dealer and has the firearm transferred to him.  I just don't want the 4473 tied to me for the next 20 years.

This is case upheld on appeal for a strawman purchase conviction.

[url]http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/aug2000/99-13906.opn.html[/url]

1. Question 8(a) on Form 4473 requires an individual to certify that he is the "actual buyer" of the firearm or firearms listed on the form, as follows:

Are you the actual buyer of the firearm indicated below? If you answer no to this question the dealer cannot transfer the firearm to you. (See Important Notice 1.).

Important Notice 1 is on the second page of the form and provides:

WARNING - The Federal firearms laws require that the individual filling out this form must be buying the firearm for himself or herself or as a gift. Any individual who is not buying the firearm for himself or herself or as a gift, but who completes this form, violates the law. Example: Mr. Smith asks Mr. Jones to purchase a firearm for Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith gives Mr. Jones the money for the firearm. If Mr. Jones fills out the form, he will violate the law. However, if Mr. Jones buys a firearm with his own money to give to Mr. Smith as a birthday present, Mr. Jones may lawfully complete this form. A licensee who knowingly delivers a firearm to an individual who is not buying the firearm for himself or herself or as a gift violates the law by maintaining a false ATF FORM 4473.

So Dave,

When the form says “. . . . individual filling out this form must be buying the
firearm for himself or herself or as a gift”

What does that statement mean to you?

Thinking like a cop again? “The customer is ALWAYS wrong.”
The “customer” isn’t always wrong, try thinking outside the box.

Bkinzey,

Don’t all firearms transfers in CA have to go through a FFL?
So what’s the point of your example?

Now if Moe illegaly transfers the gun to Joe without an FFL, that would have
been a straw purchase.  If they wait the 30 days and Moe sells the gun to Joe
through an FFL what is the crime?  Moe can legally sell his guns can’t he?

Oslow,

See how the system could and will abuse the statement/form.
Another example of “intent”, a rather neat little way to screw other wise  innocent
people.

rkbar15,

Good info.



As a side note, this question was added to the form about four years ago??
It was absent the 30 previous years.

RK

I'm in California where all transfers must go through a licensed dealer.  That means ALL legal transfers, including gifts given to another person, including relatives.  My error if such transfers in Colorado don't have to go through a dealer.

It is not true that all transfers in California must go through a dealer.  Transfers (including handguns)  between spouses, parents and children, or grandparents and grandchildren do not have to go through a dealer.  Also, firearms that are left as part of an estate do not have to be processed through a dealer.  Rifles and shotguns that are over fifty year old are also exempt.

The only transfers which must go through a dealer in CO are out-of-state purchases shipped to an in-state FFL, and purchases from an FFL's stock.  In-person private longgun and handgun transfers require no paperwork (except at gunshows, now).

EOD, a quick clarification if you would.  Are you saying that there are transfers that can be done in Cali without an FFL?  Your post sort of implies that.  Just curious.  Thanks.

sfoo,  That's exactly what I'm saying.  The three examples I gave do not have to go through a dealer.  The individual receiving the firearms still has to be legaly qualified (age, BFSC, etc) but the transfer doesn't have to involve an FFL dealer.  Also, the recipient has to register any handguns with the DOJ.

Friend and I went to a CA gun show last year. He bought a Garand off another attendee. It was C&R, cash, no paperwork. "The Transfer Dealer" ( I guess the person officially designated by the promoter to transfer firearms) confirmed we didn't have to do any paperwork.

YES, THE DREADED GUN SHOW LOOPHOLE AT WORK HERE IN CALI! Funny we haven't been motivated yet to go out and commit crimes with the Garand even though we used this "loophole."