I was watching a little 'Fox and Friends' this morning and caught a clip about this former State Trooper from Virginia who is in trouble because he bought a rifle for a gift to his uncle (who was not a felon) and it is going to court because the feds claim it was a 'Straw Purchase'
I don't know where to start with this, first off the guy is an idiot for telling what he did and asking for permission. What is wrong with supposedly free people asking the government what they can do ? Free men don't ask permission, they just do it, second of all if you do get in a bind there are loop holes which legally allow him to do this. He could have said (if asked by authorities) that he intended to keep the gun but sold or traded it to his uncle because he didn't need it anymore
I do agree this whole thing is absurd because from the ATF's own web site they state that the reason for making straw purchases illegal is to prevent people buying guns for those who aren't legally able to on their own and this is obviously not the case here. At the gun store when you sign the form stating the firearm is for you to enjoy who is to say you don't enjoy giving it away as a gift to a family member.
I feel so sorry for people who live their whole life worrying what the government thinks and wanting the governments blessing on their lives, as I have said before when I want to do something I ponder many things but what the government thinks is last on the list.
Spot on. Free men don't ask permission. And, furthermore, the ATF can kiss my butt. It was nice, our visit. The coffee is always hot.
ReplyDeleteOne reason we are friends is we think alike (and you give me free coffee)
ReplyDeleteThe piece says the Uncle filled out the federal background check form, what ever that is, presumably a 4473, in Pennsylvania. If that is so, the Feds have no case at all.
ReplyDeleteExactly the reason he should have just given him the gun and left it at that. When you start getting the government involved things always get messed up and misconstrued. What the government doesn't know they don't worry about.
DeleteWell said, Duke. We don't need permission to exercise rights.
ReplyDeleteRev Paul, amen. Thanks.
DeleteA very good point about the asking permission thing. As usual if the government can't make something illegal they will just take you to court until you can't pay and win by superior cash flow.
ReplyDeletePP, It's madding to me why people get themselves into these stupid positions, when will they learn. Thanks.
DeleteThe ATF has ruined a lot of good people with their convoluted interpretation of idiotic laws. One case that comes to mind is the firearms instructor who lent an AR-15 to a student for a shooting match. The student loaded the magazine with some cheap jack ammo and got a slam fire. He then called ATF and told them that he had been given a gun that fired "on full auto." ATF could not make the gun slamfire again but still arrested the shooting instructor and he was found guilty in a federal court of possessing an unregistered automatic weapon. Sick people.
ReplyDeleteI had not heard of that case, sounds like the student was either a total idiot or a closet liberal or maybe both. Thanks.
DeleteI remember that case, and I remember thinking I'd never, ever, again loan a firearm. Sad, and a travesty of justice.
Deletewell, buddy i am glad to see you back to posting. and since not one of the very respected people above me decided to answer your question - i will:
ReplyDeletewhat is wrong with people? stupid, buddy. just plain ol' stupid.
and to quote another good buddy of mine, Mr. Forrest:
"stupid is as stupid does"
bahahahahahahahah! now git back to regular posting! bin' missin' ya! your friend,
kymber
Kymber, Thanks for checking in my friend, some people are their own worst enemies.
DeleteI had to fill out a form when I bought my grandson a little 22 crickett last year for Christmas. They knew good and well the gun was not for me. Isn't this the same thing? The man who used to hook us up with firearms without paperwork died a couple of years ago. We miss him and all of his resources.
ReplyDeleteMamma Bear, but you did the smart thing and just kept your mouth shut, some idiots would call the ATF and ask how to give it legally. I have given away guns to people, sold them to people, traded them to people and it is none of the governments business and their own laws allow me to do this. It drives me crazy how some folks like to screw themselves over for no reason.
DeleteWell said my friend.
ReplyDeleteThanks Senior.
Deletewhat i can't figure out is this--the country is overrun with criminals. can't the atf find something useful to do for their paychecks?
ReplyDeletei guess it's a warning that even state troopers are vulnerable and the police had better toe the gov't. line. just a subtle reminder that big bro is on everyone's back, maybe.
djh
Anon, They have to justify their paycheck so they create issues. Thanks.
DeleteFirst all I agree with everything that's been stated.
ReplyDeleteSecond off I think you are all very, very wrong.
This is not about asking or permission or even seeing if giving a gift is with in the law if you buy it with the reason of giving the gift explicitly at least in the eyes of the .gov gurus.
1. The most casual thing is it's been a time honored tradition in America to give a gift to a family member, buy purchasing it if not by gifting a well used firearm to a younger generation. This legal battle will determine if this is legal from here on out. That's a goal here make no mistake. This also will make it very easy for .gov to say we now have the authority to regulate private purchases of firearms from person to person. After all if you can buy for someone else that's not a felon all purchases private to private must now be regulated and inspected/run though the system.
2. Yes it's been a document filled out stating if you are knowingly giving this to a felon by 99% of people's understanding. But that again is not the goal with this or even the intimidate result of this case. This is to say that it gives legal precedent that if you buy anything though a dealer that you can never again sell it if it could be possibly used in a commission of a crime, or that it would not be run though any system, or even that a tax or fee is not put on the transaction.
Think of it like this, many firearms are bought and then resold either new, used or as parts. What sets up the timeline from you by something to its being sold again as a "Straw purchase?" What is any entity to stop from saying well, you just bought all these items and you sell them two years later so it then must be a straw purchase? This ruling will if it goes in favor of the .gov set the precedent that you have to prove with every purchase you never ever may want to sell this firearm or gift it at any point.
3. While we will ignore or for the moment put aside arguments about commerce clauses clashing with other clauses at times this also becomes about the state/.gov proving or trying to prove intent, or actually illustrating intent vs it becoming the onus on the citizen to prove what was or what was not his intent.
By nearly all readings of Constitution it is on the state to be able to prove intent, vs the Citizen having to prove anything because they are as illustrated above, -free-. This strikes me as much of the state proving you may do something illegal vs you are doing something (And make no mistake in my eyes) deliberately illegal.
Jester, I don't disagree with what you say, When the buyer admitting his intent he brought it out in the open thus giving the feds more cause to address the issue. The bottom line to me is the more we cave to their unconstitutional laws the more power we give them. Thanks my friend.
DeleteGift giving is a crime ? In what Universe ?
ReplyDeleteYeah, speaking your mind is becoming not so smart. That wedding cake - gay wedding fiasco in Colorado is another example of the above. The couple asked him to bake a cake for the ceremony, the shop told them they didn't approve of gay marriage and refused. And the shop gets taken to court and was found guilty of discrimination. The court ordered them to bake the cake - woopdy doo!
No such thing. Their shop - their rules. NO SHOES - NO SHIRT - NO SERVICE policy. I'm pretty sure there are other cake shops in Colorado. Many of them would have been glad for the business. What the owners of that shop should have done was pretend to accept it, then apologize for being unable to complete the order. Out of town, prior commitments - simple.
Anon, True enough. Thanks.
DeletePeople are no longer capable of independent thought sir... THAT is the problem... They want 're-enforcement' for any decision made...
ReplyDeleteOld NFO, I have come to the same conclusion my friend. Thanks.
DeleteFurthermore, it the .gov's win this case it will drive the market in firearms deeper into the underground/black market economy.
ReplyDeleteTrue, Let 'em try banning guns, it works so well banning drugs.
Delete