Posted on 01/22/2014 4:33:05 PM PST by Mad Dawgg
The Supreme Court will decide whether or not it should be a crime for someone to purchase a gun for another person if both are legally allowed to possess a firearm.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnewsinsider.com ...
They don’t need to bother. I already know it’s legal.
An American tradition is a father giving his son his first gun. He teaches him hunting and fishing and within those GOD gifted marvels... he will turn him into a man.
for now...
-
http://www.supremecourt.gov/qp/12-01493qp.pdf
-
12-1493 ABRAMSKI V. UNITED STATES
DECISION BELOW: 706 F.3d 307
LOWER COURT CASE NUMBER: 11-4992
QUESTION PRESENTED:
When a person buys a gun intending to later sell it to someone else,
the government often prosecutes the initial buyer under 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6)
for making a false statement about the identity of the buyer that is
“material to the lawfulness of the sale.”
These prosecutions rely on the court-created “straw purchaser” doctrine,
a legal fiction that treats the ultimate recipient of a firearm as the
“actual buyer,” and the immediate purchaser as a mere “straw man.”
The lower courts uniformly agree that a buyer’s intent to resell a gun
to someone who cannot lawfully buy it is a fact
“material to the lawfulness of the sale.”
But the Fourth, Sixth, and Eleventh Circuits
have split with the Fifth and Ninth Circuits
about whether the same is true when the ultimate recipient
can lawfully buy a gun.
The questions presented are:
1. Is a gun buyer’s intent to sell a firearm
to another lawful buyer in the future a fact
“material to the lawfulness of the sale”
of the firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6)?
2. Is a gun buyer’s intent to sell a firearm
to another lawful buyer in the future a piece of information
“required ... to be kept” by a federally licensed firearm dealer
under § 924(a)(I)(A)?
CERT. GRANTED 10/15/2013
You sir have scored the only correct and AMERICAN answer.
We're supposed to forget Heller, now? The wind on FR changes more rapidly than I expected.
The Corrupts can decide whatever they want, I’m going to do whatever I want.
I think you are incorrect here — or are you willing to allow the regulation of sugar, water, and yeast? (A la Wickard)
See homebrewing — note that their legal reasoning here is deeply flawed: if the 18th amendment gave the federal government the authority to regulate alcohol, then its repeal (by the 21st) makes all such laws invalid as they no longer have authority.
“Step Three wait for a Crisis and use it to end sales of guns to the general public.”
Really? Do you think that the cowards in the ATF and FBI are combat-trained organizations that can disarm Americans? Site their training and presidential unit citation awards.
The alphabet federal fascist agencies, including the FBI, ATF, Secret Service and US marshals, are state-sponsored terrorist organizations. Their mission is to murder women and children and spread terror amongst the population.
These 50 IQ apes are not Rambos.
>>When a person buys a gun intending to later sell it to someone else,
the government often prosecutes the initial buyer under 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6)
for making a false statement about the identity of the buyer that is
“material to the lawfulness of the sale.”<<
Right here is the reason you should never buy firearms from dealers. Always buy from private parties!
Ahh but you see you don't have too do such.
When you make it mandatory to register all weapons and then make it illegal to sell guns to citizens and then make it illegal to transfer guns as gifts the gun problem is fixed bit by bit AND in 40 to 50 years is 99.9999% accomplished.
No all-at-once-massive-gun-grab is needed. The anti gun asswipes win by attrition.
Laws are made to be broken. And in the case of this one if not properly ruled, will be broken. I will give, whatever I want, to who ever I want, if they are fit to hold it.
Eff Them. All of Them.
ATF Form 4473 asks in question 11a.: "Are you the actual transferee/buyer of the firearm(s) listed on this form? Warning: You are not the actual buyer if you are acquiring the firearm(s) on behalf of another person. If you are not the actual buyer, the dealer cannot transfer the firearm(s) to you. (And then the form notes an exception for picking up a repaired firearm for someone else.)
I think what we got here is a technicality.
Just remember Ruby Ridge happened because a shotgun was one quarter of an inch too short and turned Randy Weaver from Law Abiding Citizen into Federal Felon and subsequently the ATF and a host of other agencies descended onto his property even going to the extent of building a special bridge so they could get tanks next to his house.
And remember its legal to own a weapon deemed too short you just need to pay a 200 dollar tax.
Randy Weaver's wife and son were killed over 200 bucks due to Uncle Sam.
Then only robots will have guns?
Imagine, if you will: the alphabet-agencies with a coordinated, methodological operation. (Full coordination is not required.)
The alphabet federal fascist agencies, including the FBI, ATF, Secret Service and US marshals, are state-sponsored terrorist organizations. Their mission is to murder women and children and spread terror amongst the population.
The the above doesn't seem all that far-fetched.
These 50 IQ apes are not Rambos.
You don't need people who think to pull something like this off; you need pople who follow orders.
“Ahh but you see you don’t have too do such.”
Your entire statement is French surrender monkey BS.
You don’t register weapons in war. Do you understand that we are at war? I don’t think you do. Your blabbing about 99.9999% accomplished is stupid.
What a stupid thing to make to court!!!!!!
When are we going to ask if it is lawful for one driver to buy another a car if both have valid driver’s licenses?
Not a good analogy at all. In this case, both the buyer and his friend are allowed to own guns.
You don’t know squat about military operations.
Your fevered example of “coordinated, methodological operation” is hilarious and an example of DU surrender monkey trolls that we see here on FR.
Do you really think that patriots hang out in large cities?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.