Editor
NES Member
Who or what is “AFT”?
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Overheard at the airport
- Thread starter Darksideblues42
- Start date
Mesatchornug
NES Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 13,217
- Likes
- 27,550
Biden misspoke and renamed BATFE. It stuck.
FalArAk
NES Member
This is the most surprising thing to me, I never really paid attention because I don't do group buys on firearms or anything like asking someone to buy me a weapon... I always thought a straw purchase was buying a gun for someone who couldn't pass a 4473.
TBH that is exceedingly rare but imho.the process is the punishment. In my opinion if two people are talking about a gun buy in public they don't have the mental equipment to do this without like walking themselves directly into a bear trap.
Also in some cases you're not entirely right but like for example in the Michael Lara case the jury actually sided with Michael *he got acquitted) but the whole thing basically ruined his life and his career.
Gun deals with 3rd parties:
-Keep your mouths shut. No really, shut the f*** up. (See also, omerta)
-No partial gifts. Ever.
-Cash only
-No paper that shows bad money flow. (Im not talking 4473 either, thats easy).
-No paper where the gun is. Ever. Store it offsite, encrypt it, anything. If a dealer ever gives you a copy of a 4473 you should just destroy it and forget that you ever had it. Most dealers don't do this anyways but you having a copy of it is useless and gives them free information. Why aid the enemy?
And I say this even if it's arguable that the entire orchestration is legal the less paper that you leave hanging around for somebody to manufacture garbage out of the better off you are even if you are completely innocent.
whatever. we are talking about the law as it is, not what it should or shouldn't be.
I'm all in favor of people changing the laws if they feel there are unfair., there is more than enough that needs changing, that doesn't change what we have now.
I would say you are right. That is what a "straw purchase" is. But Straw Purchase is not a legal term, it does not appear in the law you would be charged with for lying on the 4473. That charge, for lying about not purchasing for yourself, is the same charge, at least one of them, that Hunter faced when he lied about not being a drug addict.
KBCraig
NES Member
They must be "...traveling armed in accordance with the policies or directives of the employing agency."
I guarantee that their policies or directives don't include flying while drunk.
They must be "...traveling armed in accordance with the policies or directives of the employing agency."
I guarantee that their policies or directives don't include flying while drunk.
To your original point, yes any Federal LE can carry on a plane. They all get the required TSA “training” to authorize them to do it.
But yeah, LE never do anything against policy. Of course it would be against policy to carry while drinking. Cops still do it. Hell, some of them drive drunk too.
And I’d wager a cop who pulls his badge out and slams it on the table after 6 drinks, as some sort of threat, is more likely to carry while drinking too.
Once they’re past security, nobody’s checking them to make sure they’re carrying in accordance with their agency’s policies.
* I don’t think any of the federal LE I know would drink when carrying on a plane. BUT, this ATF agent clearly doesn’t have the best ethical principles.
KBCraig
NES Member
He works for ATF. QED.
Tartakovsky
NES Member
Tell ATF guy to go f*** himself and mind his business. That’s not the intent of a straw purchase if you send it to a FFL for legal transfer to an eligible person. Buying a gun for someone ineligible to purchase a gun themselves aka a prohibited person is a straw purchase.
Tartakovsky
NES Member
Technically it’s lying on a 4473 which is a felony. 4473 sec 21 part A, B and N is asking if you are acquiring the firearm with the intent to sell to someone else, if you answer no to all those questions.
The fun thing is though it's worse than that. ATF gets pissy even when the party not receiving the gun NEVER TOUCHES a 4473. This is the situation encountered with group buy operators,
etc. These people never lie on a 4473 but the ATF still considers it straw purch territory if you collect money to buy a gun and you're not a dealer.
All of the people can be elegible and you can still commit a straw.
![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
ATF does not apply "reasonable person" to it, If the supremes had done the right thing this would have been corrected with Abramski, but instead they allowed them to double down on it. That's how f***ed up the ATF interp of the existing law is. And unfortunately US code is too vague on it. If GOP fags had any spine, this could have easily been fixed with a small amendment back some years ago.
Tartakovsky
NES Member
That agency needs to be gutted so badly.
chris_1001
NES Member
chris_1001
NES Member
CrackPot
NES Member
IF the guy found the gun, purchased it, completed a 4473, then sent it off to his buddies FFL and got paid, then yes, that would be a straw purchase. Change ANYTHING in what I just said and it is not a straw purchase.
So the simple path is find it. Pay for it. Have the FFL ship to the buddies FFL. Buddy does the 4473 and takes possession, pays transfer fee and pays his friend who found it. Because the first guy never did an initial 4473, there is no straw purchase.
The ATF agent is an ignorant douche. Should he choose to get involved, he could offer helpful advice saying "just make sure you pay for it and have the FFL send it without you ever taking possession" and be done. The ATF is supposed to be a regulatory agency who makes sure people follow the law/regulations. This behavior is inconsistent. But no shock.
Ban the ATF
Yeah, this was the part I forgot about earlier. ON PAPER if nobody takes the gun first time around, no straw problem. I forgot that in Abramski, the gun involved got 4473ed once, and then later was transferred and 4473d a 2nd time.
I still wouldn't want the paper with part A on it though floating around. I would use cash and only take a generic receipt with nobodys name on it (or the name of the person who's actually doing the paper at the far end).
chris_1001
NES Member
chris_1001
NES Member
Clip on!
I would have pulled a Mike Ermantraut, put my hands on the bar and look him dead in the eye, "What's the matter, forget your handcuffs?"
Dadstoys
NES Member
dcmdon
NES Member
I have not read all 5 pages, just the OP.
But that does not meet the definition of a straw purchase.
I used to be a home based FFL and part of the process is that you are differentiating between who is paying for it and who is actually completing the 4473 attesting that they are the buyer and completing the NICS check.
If I find a gun online that I want to give to my kid in FL, I can legally pay for it and have it shipped to a gun store in FL. he will complete the paperwork do the NICS check, and walk out the door with HIS gun.
The fact that I paid for it and had it sent to an FFL for the transfer to the actual owner means nothing.
That ATF agent is full of 5h1t. If anything, this is an example of HOW to do something like this legally.
The key here, and the part that both the ATF and the FBI care about is that the person signing the 4473 and subject to NICS is the person who will own and use the gun.
But that does not meet the definition of a straw purchase.
I used to be a home based FFL and part of the process is that you are differentiating between who is paying for it and who is actually completing the 4473 attesting that they are the buyer and completing the NICS check.
If I find a gun online that I want to give to my kid in FL, I can legally pay for it and have it shipped to a gun store in FL. he will complete the paperwork do the NICS check, and walk out the door with HIS gun.
The fact that I paid for it and had it sent to an FFL for the transfer to the actual owner means nothing.
That ATF agent is full of 5h1t. If anything, this is an example of HOW to do something like this legally.
The key here, and the part that both the ATF and the FBI care about is that the person signing the 4473 and subject to NICS is the person who will own and use the gun.
