Law Enforcement Officer to Private Citizen Transfers?

[Praegenstein]

Forgive me if this has already been covered somewhere, but I couldn't find anything specific to my question.

If someone can clue me in on the legality of the following scenario, it would be greatly appreciated.

A police officer friend of mine offered that if I wanted a pistol that is not "MA Compliant (i.e. not on the AG list or other MA approved list)", that he could purchase it for himself (as an LEO), then decide he didn't like it and sell it to me (without any LE-Only mags, of course). Is that legal? I told him that I thought it wasn't, but would check into it. My gut tells me no, but I would like to hear what some of you may know about this type of thing.

Thanks in advance

[sourcehill]

From what I understand, this would be legal via FA-10. Someone please school my ass if I am understanding the law incorrectly.

[EC1]

Good question. I'd like to know the answer to that also. It seems like it would be okay, as it is if some one moves in from out of state.

[DickWanner]

I remember hearing something about an LEO purchasing a handgun not on the list and being told he could only sell it to other LEOs. I'm sure one of the senior guys will chime in soon with the positive answer.

[drgrant]

I remember hearing something about an LEO purchasing a handgun not on the list and being told he could only sell it to other LEOs. I'm sure one of the senior guys will chime in soon with the positive answer.

The rules (for this type of thing) are no different for LEOs than they are for anyone else. The thing he was talking about is a contractural agreement that some companies put on LE guns.... eg, Glock, for example, if a gun is purchased on an individual officer LE program, says that the officer can't sell the gun until like a certain period of time has passed. Glock does this because they offer special pricing to LEOs, and they don't want LEOs undercutting their distributors too much. Sig probably does the same thing- so the markings may just be an affectation.

The simple answer is the LEO can sell any gun he has to a non-LEO provided he obeys the same rules the rest of us have to- appropriate LTC on buyer and seller, Filing the
FA-10 form, etc... and no hicap mags for non LEOs. Same FTF limit of 4/yr, etc. The list or no list thing, to answer that- is irrelevant in an FTF, whether it
involves LEOs, or not.

-Mike

[MichaelJ]

Seems like it "could" be legal but would be real close to something like a straw purchase. I would only feel comfortable if he owned it for many years before deciding that he didn't want it anymore.

[drgrant]

Seems like it "could" be legal but would be real close to something like a straw purchase. I would only feel comfortable if he owned it for many years before deciding that he didn't want it anymore.

There's a fine line in the sand with regard to "straws" Basically if a person buys it, possesses it for some period of time, and then sells it to someone else, (for whatever reason) there is no "straw" purchase involved.

Whether something is a "straw" or not depends on the context of the transaction.

Examples:

Person A propositioning person B, with cash, to buy a gun on their
behalf from an FFL = straw purchase.

Person A buys a gun, keeps it for awhile, shoots it, decides he
doesn't like it, then decides to sell it to person B for (amount) = not a straw purchase.

The legally delineating factor (at least in cases that don't involve other laws being broken at the same time) that I've seen, is how money changes hands. If it "looks and smells" like one person paid another person to buy a gun from an FFL on their behalf, then it has all the makings of a straw purchase. The more degrees of separation there is, the harder it is for anyone to say there was some kind of intent to commit a straw purchase.

IMO the best protection against this kind of thing is to keep accurate records. (Seller should provide buyer with bill of sale detailing amount, etc. )

For those interested/paranoid, an interesting case WRT straw
purchases: (eg, one NOT involving criminals)

http://judiciary.house.gov/Oversight...ny.aspx?ID=582

Lara was eventually exonerated (because his actions/intent was never
to violate the law) but his life and career was ruined. Lesson being-
If someone is going to do this sort of a transfer, don't make the same kind
of mistakes that he did. To the reader the mistakes should be patently
obvious, so I'm not going to outline them all. The basic premise is that
BATFE used the way the money changed hands to drive their entire case.

-Mike

[Scrivener]

A police officer friend of mine offered that if I wanted a pistol that is not "MA Compliant (i.e. not on the AG list or other MA approved list)", that he could purchase it for himself (as an LEO)

If it is not on the EOPS list (the AFR), even a LEO cannot buy it, delusions to the contrary notwithstanding.

This HAS been covered, and fairly recently.

[clinotus]

drgrant I see what you are saying, but this is a straw purchase no matter how you phrase it.

[vellnueve]

I knew Scrivener would be along to school some ass sooner or later.

BTW, I believe that the act of straw purchasing actually requires one to be making such a purchase in order to conceal the identity of the real purchaser. This transaction doesn't seem like it would be something you'd want to do. If the LEO bought it and shot it and kept it for a while and then genuinely wanted to get rid of it, then it wouldn't be a problem, but there's the intent there.