Gold Supporter
- Messages
- 673
- Reactions
- 744
Once again, you try to hide your confusion by blasting unrelated information. The law states you must abide by the 4473. The 4473 says you cannot act as an agent. End of story. The court has given NO indication that their previous stance has changed on this topic. That is why this case is not arguing whether it is actually illegal as the law stands (that has been decided before), but as to whether the feds have the right to pass such a law. They are not arguing the fact that a law has been broken, they are arguing the principle of the law itself.
PS: The ATF website itself answers the question by saying...
"A straw purchase is an illegal firearm purchase where the actual buyer of the gun, being unable to pass the required federal background check or desiring to not have his or her name associated with the transaction, uses a proxy buyer who can pass the required background check to purchase the firearm for him/her. It is highly illegal and punishable by a $250,000 fine and 10 years in prison."
Blasting unrelated information? I'm citing case law directly related to 922. Can you please cite where Uncle did not want his name associated with the transfer? Uncle was eligible and did in fact pass a background check on the subsequent transfer. Your citation to the ATF information is totally unrelated to the facts of this case, as nothing about it applies. Is the ATF now above the 5th circuit. Also is "highly illegal" like "highly pregnant?"
Anyway - Congratulations - You get the final say. I'm done. Respond away.