Overheard at the airport

People have been convicted of a straw purchase even though the true buyer was not a prohibited person.
Thus my last line "Then again, it doesn't always matter what the law says, it often only matters what the drunk ATF agent at the bar thinks it is at the time and how far he's willing to go to protect his ego once he's sober."
 
Thus my last line "Then again, it doesn't always matter what the law says, it often only matters what the drunk ATF agent at the bar thinks it is at the time and how far he's willing to go to protect his ego once he's sober."
I’m sorry, but I think you are still missing my point. People have been convicted and gone to prison for a straw purchase even though neither of the persons involved was a prohibited person.

Your implication that it isn’t a straw purchase if the ultimate buyer is not prohibited is simply incorrect. The courts have sided with the AFT on this.
 
It's less to do about the true concept and intent of straw purchasing and more to do with being "in the business" of firearms. If you facilitate a sale for someone, even if it goes through a background check, you are technically in the business of firearms which requires a FFL. Facilitating a sale is one the many activities non-licensees do, and usually innocently enough, that can become problematic. It's always best to buy your gun with your money. Even in the case of gifts, having the gift giver buy a gift card to the shop for the gift receiver is a better option for all parties.
Seems to not line up with their "final rule"

Final Rule: Definition of “Engaged in the Business” as a Dealer in Firearms | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

Most specifically there seems to be an intent to create profit, it didn't sound like there was going to be a profit here at all. If I buy you a coffee because you asked for one, and you paid me back, I'm not engaged in the busniess of selling coffee, nor am I profiting on the transaction.
 
So, the dude dropped his badge and then what?

Nothing happened?

Instead of showing everyone he was Mr big d*ck, he ended up looking like a f*cking idiot.

How old was this dude?
 
I’m sorry, but I think you are still missing my point. People have been convicted and gone to prison for a straw purchase even though neither of the persons involved was a prohibited person.

Your implication that it isn’t a straw purchase if the ultimate buyer is not prohibited is simply incorrect. The courts have sided with the AFT on this.
No, my implication was that it's wholly dependent upon how hard the agents and courts wish to push it. As a note, you clearly missed the end of the first sentence in the first post of mine that you replied to where I said "you could possibly argue it was."
 
No, my implication was that it's wholly dependent upon how hard the agents and courts wish to push it. As a note, you clearly missed the end of the first sentence in the first post of mine that you replied to where I said "you could possibly argue it was."
The ATF takes the position that it can be a straw purchase even if neither buyer is a prohibited person. Courts have agreed with them. This isn’t an issue of a particular agent or a particular court “pushing it”. This is ATF’s interpretation.

You seem to be implying that it is unusual for an agent to take this interpretation. It isn’t.
 
all of this is easily avoidable if the guy at the bar would just say "if you ever see yada yada gun for sale please just let me know the name of the FFL so that I may lawfully purchase it."

that's what the atf agent should have told him to do instead of flexing his authority.
Yeah, he could have used it as an opportunity for education. Instead, he chose to be a Richard. Of course, it sounds as though the agent was already half in the bag.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, he could have used it as a pn opportunity for education. Instead, he chose to be a Richard. Of course, it sounds as though the agent was already half in the bag.
I always say: "never underestimate how someone will f*ck your life over for their own gain".

This is a good example. Except as a mid 40s dude getting drunk at the airport, trying to get in a d*ck measuring contest, he probably didn't do too well.
 
I always say: "never underestimate how someone will f*ck your life over for their own gain".

This is a good example. Except as a mid 40s dude getting drunk at the airport, trying to get in a d*ck measuring contest, he probably didn't do too well.
It made him feel like a tough guy, which was his goal. 🤷‍♂️
 
He sat down, ordered a Jack and Coke, was gone in about 60 seconds, then ordered another, ordered a salad, finished 2nd, got 3rd, salad came, 3rd drink gone, glass of water, 4th Jack and Coke, asked for another water, water came, 4th gone, 5th ordered, water gone, 5th delivered, water replaced, both water and 5th are gone, 6th ordered with a fresh water, both delivered, then the badge drop happened, he finished his 6th and the water, paid the tab, walked across the hall to a flight to Fargo.

99% chance he was carrying too.
 
The ATF takes the position that it can be a straw purchase even if neither buyer is a prohibited person. Courts have agreed with them. This isn’t an issue of a particular agent or a particular court “pushing it”. This is ATF’s interpretation.

You seem to be implying that it is unusual for an agent to take this interpretation. It isn’t.
Are you certain that an internet forum is the best place to be a pedant?
 
The ATF takes the position that it can be a straw purchase even if neither buyer is a prohibited person. Courts have agreed with them. This isn’t an issue of a particular agent or a particular court “pushing it”. This is ATF’s interpretation.

You seem to be implying that it is unusual for an agent to take this interpretation. It isn’t.
The "straw purchaser" as prosecuted by ATF is making a false statement on the 4473: "Are you the actual purchaser?"

It doesn't have a damn thing to do with anyone being prohibited. Providing/transferring a firearm to a prohibited person is a separate crime that can only happen after the initial FFL transfer.
 
0% chance that he was carrying.

Just having federal LEO credentials doesn't mean you can carry on a plane.

Yes it does. Every 1811 I know has the option of flying armed if they want. Even when it’s personal travel. They usually do.

Edit: FBI, HSI, EPA, and while not an 1811, also State Dept DSS agents. I believe they’re all given the TSA check the box training at FLETC. And I imagine FBI similarly at Quantico.

Okay, so not every 1811 I know, because I don’t actually know if a USSS agent does it or not. I’d be shocked if he didn’t though.
 
Last edited:
Yes it does. Every 1811 I know has the option of flying armed if they want. Even when it’s personal travel. They usually do.

Edit: FBI, HSI, EPA, and while not an 1811, also State Dept DSS agents. I believe they’re all given the TSA check the box training at FLETC. And I imagine FBI similarly at Quantico.

Okay, so not every 1811 I know, because I don’t actually know if a USSS agent does it or not. I’d be shocked if he didn’t though.

I used to shoot USPSA with an Air Marshall.
I asked him of he could carry whenever he wanted, even when flying to a USPSA competition. He said he could, but if he did he had to adhere to certain rules like staying awake all flight, not drinking... Basically WORKING. I think he also told me he couldn't watch movies.

So he didn't carry all the time.

That is what he said.

This ATF guy sounds like an idiot, but I doubt he was drinking so much and carrying.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom