4 ms·

> As a gun owner, sure there is. If your gun shows up in a crime, you get indicted as well. That would put a big dent in people being willing to buy guns for ot

by xienze 4y ago

> As a gun owner, sure there is. If your gun shows up in a crime, you get indicted as well. That would put a big dent in people being willing to buy guns for others. Buying a gun "for" someone else is a very gray area. For example, if I bought a gun and ten years later sold it to some guy who committed a crime, should I be indicted? Was this a straw purchase with a looooong time window? Or if I truly did buy a gun for someone else (as in, purchased and delivered the same day) and he waits ten years to commit a crime, was this also a true straw purchase? How can you tell?

ChrisLomont 4y ago
>For example, if I bought a gun and ten years later sold it to some guy who committed a crime, should I be indicted? No, because for you to sell it to him, you'd have done the background check, and transferred it to him. That is the point. Same as car titles, or mortgage deeds, or others items in society that transfer ownership.
- xienze 4y ago
  > No, because for you to sell it to him, you'd have done the background check, and transferred it to him. That is the point. In most (all?) states there's no need for a background check or any kind of record keeping when two individuals are selling/transferring to one another [0]. Between states it's another story. > Same as car titles, or mortgage deeds, or others items in society that transfer ownership. There's no constitutional right to any of those things, which is what makes the situation different. 0: https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/resources/federal-ccw-law/federal-private-firearm-transfer-laws/ https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/resources/federal-ccw-law/f...
  - ChrisLomont 4y ago
    >In most (all?) states there's no need for a background check Have you followed this thread at all? I am fully aware of this, having done many gun transfers. This thread is about adding universal background checks. >There's no constitutional right to any of those things, which is what makes the situation different. It is not different at all - it is perfectly constitutional to require background checks and transfers - that is how the current system is legal. And all constitutional rights have bounds. 1st Amendment free speech has limits on what you can say, where you can do it, even requiring permits for many cases. 3rd, 4th, 5th Amendments about housing and property - you have a constitutional right to property, but it can be deprived, and many forms are registered and require paperwork to transfer. So it's not at all different from other property registration and transfers.
technothrasher 4y ago
> if I truly did buy a gun for someone else (as in, purchased and delivered the same day) and he waits ten years to commit a crime, was this also a true straw purchase? Most definitely yes. It makes no difference even if he never commits a crime, it's still a straw purchase. Per 18 USC 922(a)(6), you cannot lie to a federal dealer when purchasing a firearm. Question 21(a) on the mandatory Form 4473 (Firearm Transaction Record) asks if you are the actual buyer and not buying on behalf of someone else. If you answer no, the sale is denied. If you answer yes and it isn't true, you have violated 922(a)(6).

by xienze 4y ago

ChrisLomont 4y ago

>For example, if I bought a gun and ten years later sold it to some guy who committed a crime, should I be indicted? No, because for you to sell it to him, you'd have done the background check, and transferred it to him. That is the point. Same as car titles, or mortgage deeds, or others items in society that transfer ownership.

xienze 4y ago
> No, because for you to sell it to him, you'd have done the background check, and transferred it to him. That is the point. In most (all?) states there's no need for a background check or any kind of record keeping when two individuals are selling/transferring to one another [0]. Between states it's another story. > Same as car titles, or mortgage deeds, or others items in society that transfer ownership. There's no constitutional right to any of those things, which is what makes the situation different. 0: https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/resources/federal-ccw-law/federal-private-firearm-transfer-laws/ https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/resources/federal-ccw-law/f...
- ChrisLomont 4y ago
  >In most (all?) states there's no need for a background check Have you followed this thread at all? I am fully aware of this, having done many gun transfers. This thread is about adding universal background checks. >There's no constitutional right to any of those things, which is what makes the situation different. It is not different at all - it is perfectly constitutional to require background checks and transfers - that is how the current system is legal. And all constitutional rights have bounds. 1st Amendment free speech has limits on what you can say, where you can do it, even requiring permits for many cases. 3rd, 4th, 5th Amendments about housing and property - you have a constitutional right to property, but it can be deprived, and many forms are registered and require paperwork to transfer. So it's not at all different from other property registration and transfers.

technothrasher 4y ago

> if I truly did buy a gun for someone else (as in, purchased and delivered the same day) and he waits ten years to commit a crime, was this also a true straw purchase? Most definitely yes. It makes no difference even if he never commits a crime, it's still a straw purchase. Per 18 USC 922(a)(6), you cannot lie to a federal dealer when purchasing a firearm. Question 21(a) on the mandatory Form 4473 (Firearm Transaction Record) asks if you are the actual buyer and not buying on behalf of someone else. If you answer no, the sale is denied. If you answer yes and it isn't true, you have violated 922(a)(6).