Correct me if I am wrong. I read the article. The reporter wants to buy a handgun in NH. Since he is from MA he could not so he gave money to a second party to buy a handgun. The reporter paid for the gun, but the second party filled out the paperwork and kept the handgun. Is that a straw purchase? If the second party gave the reporter the gun, it would be, but according to the story the reporter did not keep the gun, thus at worst he financed a gun buy (I don’t think that is illegal).
The financing isn't. It's the false statement made by Belair that's illegal.
The reporter, who is not eligible to purchase a gun, initiated the purchase thru Belair.
When Belair put his signature on the 4473, he made a false claim that he was the 'true purchaser' of the firearm. It doesn't matter if he transfers it to the reporter or keeps it, it's a still a straw purchase.
[T]he law against straw purchases is based on the 1968 federal statute making it unlawful "for any person in connection with the acquisition of a firearm from a … licensed dealer" to "knowingly make any false or fictitious oral or written statement … intended or likely to deceive such … dealer … with respect to any fact material to the lawfulness of the sale …" (18 U.S. Code 92(a)(6)).-- United States v. Dollar (25 F.Supp.2d 1320)
See my post #20
Looks more like a “gift” than a straw buy to me, but he deserved to be investigated because he’s a moron. Just sorry he didn’t have to take it home with him to show his boss what he spent the $ for, so he could have been arrested as well as investigated.