Supreme Court Rules Against Gun Owners

Messages
2,499
Reactions
2,738
1.jpg
Oregon Firearms Federation
06.16.14
Supreme Court Rules You Cannot Buy A Gun For Another Approved Person.

Today the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that if you purchase a firearm and transfer it to another "approved" buyer, you are a "straw purchaser" and may go to prison.

The ruling is in the case US vs Abramski, a case to which Oregon Firearms contributed to an Amicus brief.
The buyer of the gun purchased a gun legally and transferred it to his uncle who was also an approved buyer. The uncle took possession of the gun after passing a background check. Abramski (a former police officer) was charged with a "straw purchase."
"The Obama administration had argued that accepting Abramski's defense would impair the ability of law enforcement officials to trace firearms involved in crimes and keep weapons away from people who are not eligible to buy them."
Clearly this transfer had nothing to do with crimes or people who are ineligible to receive firearms. This ruling will vastly complicate any future transfers of legitimately owned guns.


Forward this email
 
Messages
5,050
Reactions
1,315
< Why they don't have school shootings in Israel.
Notice the long gun slung over the teachers shoulder?

Clearly this transfer had nothing to do with crimes or people who are ineligible to receive firearms. This ruling will vastly complicate any future transfers of legitimately owned guns.
So true, seems like it could be interpreted to mean you can't buy a gun for you child and give it to them without risking jail.

Deen
NRA Life Member, Benefactor Level
"Defender of Freedom" award
NRA Golden Eagle member
NRA Recruiter
Second Amendment Foundation Member
Washington Arms Collectors Member
Arms Collectors of SW Washington Member


"Having a gun is like a parachute, if you need one and don't have it you may never need it again"
 

RicInOR

Messages
12,983
Reactions
27,411
How long ? I buy a gun, then I gift it. How long between purchase and gifting?
Non firearms example: If you make an investment and cash it in in less than 1 year, it is treated differently from one you hold for longer than 1 year for tax purposes.
Or is gifting even impacted? This case is about intent. Such as, I am buying this coffee for my wife. It is a gift, but I bought it specifically for her, and because she requested me to.

My other other thought is "shut up already." Do not talk about what you are doing.
"The justices ruled 5-4 that the law applied to a Virginia man who bought a gun with the intention of transferring it to his uncle in Pennsylvania — even though the uncle is not prohibited from owning firearms."
How would anyone know what your intent was, unless you were running your mouth?



Additional older discussion
http://www.northwestfirearms.com/threads/justices-ponder-straw-purchasers-gun-law.160478
 

bolus

Messages
5,168
Reactions
16,049
What about private sales ?
The case is because he lied on the background check form that the gun was for him. His friend gave him money to buy him a handgun with his police discount. He signed the background check form that says the gun was for him, and then sent the other guy the gun. Police caught this when investigating something else.

Private sales are fine. Just dont lie on the background check form when buying a gun from a FFL.

Something that does not seem wrong (buying a gun for someone who can legally own one) now turns into a precedent by the SCOTUS and is used against us all.
 
Messages
2,677
Reactions
3,480
.....Private sales are fine. Just dont lie on the background check form when buying a gun from a FFL.

Something that does not seem wrong (buying a gun for someone who can legally own one) now turns into a precedent by the SCOTUS and is used against us all.
Not sure about the impact of this. The case they are talking about involves a purchase for another person in order to obtain a discount for which that person was not entitled. Not the same circumstances but sounds like it now makes it unlawful for us to purchase a gun as a gift, even if the receiving person undergoes and passes a background check. To follow it further, in order to enforce the law, seems to me that every gun would need to be registered.

Here's something odd, think I just either heard a pig squealing at the farm near here, or there is a certain politician in the Hillsboro area squealing in delight!
 
Messages
3,872
Reactions
4,262
but sounds like it now makes it unlawful for us to purchase a gun as a gift, even if the receiving person undergoes and passes a background check. To follow it further, in order to enforce the law, seems to me that every gun would need to be registered.
QUOTE]
That's how I read it. That's the direction we are going anyway.
How many SCOTUS Justices will the next POTUS be picking I wonder?
 
Messages
394
Reactions
223
The fact that distinguishes this case from the gift situation is the uncle paid his nephew $400 in advance to get the pistol for him. This is what makes Abramski's answer about being the "actual buyer" problematic. Had he just bought the pistol and gave it to his uncle or had his uncle pay him afterwards, he'd be in the clear.

That said, it's a bad ruling given the facts. The concern surrounding straw purchases primarily revolves around the scenario where Party A buys a firearm for Party B because Party B cannot pass a background check or does not want a record of the transfer. Here, Abramski and the uncle each had the pistol transferred via a FFL dealer. Each filled out a Form 4473 and submitted themselves to a background check. Neither party avoided the background check or Form 4473.
 
Messages
1,012
Reactions
1,582
That's how I read it. That's the direction we are going anyway.
How many SCOTUS Justices will the next POTUS be picking I wonder?
We are one dead or retired Supreme Court Justice away from a liberal majority in the supreme court.

If you had a crystal ball, you might not like what you could see.

"No Democratic president since John Kennedy has failed to fill a Supreme Court vacancy with a reliable liberal."

"The Second Amendment right to own firearms would almost certainly be overturned, reducing today’s battle over background checks to mere rearrangement of the Titanic’s deck chairs."

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013...ourt-justice-usher-in-new-progressive-agenda/
 
Messages
3,872
Reactions
4,262
In case anybody missed it.................


No Democratic president since John Kennedy has failed to fill a Supreme Court vacancy with a reliable liberal.


"Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia turned 77 this week. For conservatives, his birthday is an opportunity to celebrate his 27 years on the Court. But it’s also a reminder of the all too likely prospect that President Obama will pick a successor for Scalia or his colleague Anthony Kennedy, who turns 77 in July."

Election outcomes matter. It will have an effect our gun rights.
 
Messages
3,872
Reactions
4,262
How would the Supreme court over turn the second amendment? It takes 38 states to change the Bill of Rights. The court can only rule on cases brought before them.
And what side do you think a Kaganesk majority court would rule in a Citizen vs State anti-gun case?
Right of citizen to carry a gun outside the home?
Right of citizen to gift a firearm?
Right of citizen to keep a gun that fires more than 10, I mean 6 ugh 5 rounds???
Right of citizen to not be jailed if someone breaks into his home, steals his gun and commits a crime!


These people want to neuter the 2nd Amendment because they can't eliminate it.
 
Messages
394
Reactions
223
How would the Supreme court over turn the second amendment?
Even though the wording is there, the court can interpret its meaning in a way that is harmful to our rights. They can also refuse to act in ways to protect our rights.

Interpretation. One can interpret parts of the Constitution narrowly or expansively. Look at the Commerce Clause. Initially, it was interpreted very narrowly. This limited congressional power. Over time, it became interpreted to cover all kinds of things and greatly expanded Congressional power. Really from FDR's New Deal to 1995, the Commerce Clause expanded Congress' power to regulate all kinds of activities that are not normally associated with interstate commerce.

It was not until the Lopez case, that the Supreme Court stopped the expansion of Congress' power via the Commerce Clause. Interestingly, Lopez was a gun case. There was a federal law prohibiting firearms on or near schools. Congress based its ability to regulate this activity on the Commerce Clause. A guy (Lopez) got caught bringing a gun onto a school campus. He was convicted of violating the federal law. He appealed and his conviction was overturned. When the Supreme Court heard the case, the government made arguments along the lines of violent crime affecting interstate commerce. It was tenuous. The Supreme Court struck the law down saying that under the government's interpretation of the Commerce Clause, there was nothing that could not be regulated and that went against what was intended.

Another way the court can change the law is to simply not hear cases. Recently there was a case regarding concealed carry permits that the Supreme Court declined to hear. That means the holding of a lower court stands. So if a lower court ruled in a way that hurts gun rights, that holding is allowed to stand and that is the law for that jurisdiction.

The Amendments do not self-enforce. If the Court does not protect them, their protections disappear. The First Amendment guarantees the rights of assembly and free speech. "Designated Free Speech Zones" were not what the Founders had in mind. To restore the right to what it should be, requires litigation and a Supreme Court that will uphold where the Founders intended the line to be.
 

RVTECH

Messages
9,119
Reactions
14,915
This 'ruling' is still painted with a broad brush in shades of gray. How does the act of buying a gun and then giving it to someone (legally able to own) differ from buying one and later trading/selling it to a complete stranger? I mean if I sell/trade a gun I am INTENDING to do it - so how does my intent to sell/trade a gun differ from my possible intent of giving it to someone I know, as well as KNOW is legal to own it? Lets look at this another way - I legally buy from an FFL I know at the time it is for ME but a week later decide I made a mistake, don't really like it etc. and decide to trade/sell? Where is the line? Does it all simply 'boil down' to my intent at the time of the purchase? If so then the ONLY way this could be proven and acted on legally is IF the buyer stated verbally 'I am buying this with the intent of giving it away' and this was heard/witnessed.
 
Messages
56
Reactions
24
Just more PROOF that just because you go to college and get a few degree's, DOES NOT make one smart or a student of history or one who can comprehend the "written" language!!

Here is just a snippet of the ruling!

"Writing for the majority, Justice Elena Kagan said the federal government's elaborate system of background checks and record-keeping requirements help law enforcement investigate crimes by tracing guns to their buyers. Those provisions would mean little, she said, if a would-be gun buyer could evade them by simply getting another person to buy the gun and fill out the paperwork.

Kagan's opinion was joined by Justice Anthony Kennedy, who is often considered the court's swing vote, as well as liberal Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor.

In dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia said the language of the law does not support making it a crime for one lawful gun owner to buy a gun for another lawful gun owner. He was joined by the court's other conservatives -- Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito."

Obviously there are some judges who DON'T have life's where there are reality checks!!
 

UPCOMING EVENTS

Lead Farm Precision Rifle Match
The Lead Farm
34006 Gwinn Rd, Prosser, WA 99350, USA
Arms Collectors of SW Washington Gun Show
Battleground Community Center
912 E Main St, Battle Ground, WA 98604, USA
Rimfire Challenge Dec 12th @ DRRC
Douglas Ridge Rifle Club
27787 OR-224, Eagle Creek, OR 97022, USA
Albany Rifle & Pistol Club (ARPC) Gun Show
Linn County Expo Center
3700 Knox Butte Rd E, Albany, OR 97322, USA

LATEST RESOURCE REVIEWS

  • Gun Pro Shooting Supplies
    5.00 star(s)
    Great Little Shop!
    I went in the place several weeks ago while visiting my kid at school. I ended up buying a new set of electronic ear muffs as my old ones were...
  • Gun Pro Shooting Supplies
    5.00 star(s)
    My go-to
    Neil has been nothing but professional, helpful and fair since I was a brand new shooter. He and his staff treat everyone with respect and you...
  • Northwest Armory - Tigard
    1.00 star(s)
    Completely unhappy!
    Not happy, customer service is highly lacking, and the male employees are rude. We wont be back!!
  • Wildcat Mountain
    4.00 star(s)
    Wildcat Mountain Nov. 30
    Went there today, it was accessible but bad conditions which I kind of expected. Melting snow, mud, etc. No one there and I didn't see a lot of...
  • Gator's Custom Guns
    5.00 star(s)
    Best true Gun shop ive been in for some time
    Cool stuff in stock rather than the top 10 at corporate box stores They moved to a larger place I have to go back and spend more money. I like to...
Top Bottom