Carter’s Country-New Policy

[Mike D]

I’m so tired of “companies” looking out for my well being. I agree with the OP…I’m just from a different time.

They aren’t looking out for your well being. They are looking out for theirs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Bucknaked]

They aren’t looking out for your well being. They are looking out for theirs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Don’t try using common sense on them - It Won’t Work!

[tvc184]

Sigh...

Here is one more sigh for you. This is not only the law but also a SCOTUS case from 2014 where both the purchaser and the intended owner could lawfully purchase a handgun.

In Abramski v. US a former police officer bought a Glock because he could get it at a very good deal. As a former officer some of the local FFLs gave him a good deal on a Glock 19.

So Abramski’s uncle wanted the good deal on the Glock. The uncle could legally purchase a Glock locally as he had no federal issues with his background. He simply wanted the better deal. Abramski being a (former) police officer was aware of the law about a felon purchasing a firearm but he knew that his uncle was not a felon, under indictment, etc.

Three days after Abramski purchased the Glock, a check for $400 was put in his bank account from his uncle. The next day, Abramski transferred the Glock to his uncle through an FFL.

ATF found out, filed charges and Abramski was convicted of a felony. He fought it all the way to SCOTUS and his conviction was upheld.

So here are the facts of the former officer/convicted felon’s case:

1. Abramski could lawfully purchase a firearm.

2. Abramski’s uncle could lawfully purchase a firearm.

3. The uncle wanted a better deal than he could purchase a Glock for. Abramski offered to buy the Glock for his uncle.

4. Not only did Abramski purchase a gun for his uncle, he even lawfully transferred it through an FFL, obviously not trying to hide anything.

5. The uncle truthfully answered Form 4473 because he was the lawful purchaser from Abramski. Therefore only Abramski falsified the 4473 when he said that he was purchasing it for himself, which was false.

So we have a guy who could awfully purchase a firearm, did so for his uncle who could also lawfully purchase a firearm and then transferred it to that uncle lawfully through an FFL.

Convicted and upheld by SCOTUS.

If you feel like reading the syllabus from the SCOTUS ruling;

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/573/169/

Sigh……

[lovemylegacy]

Common sense, no one uses my cc but me. Its a good policy, one they should have already been following in my opinion. Don't hold it against them.

[TxBowHntr]

Are you saying in this example you give me $$$ so I can go do the 4473 for you because you are to lazy??

Too lazy, not physically there, etc... There are numerous reasons why someone would want another to purchase the firearm for them.

I am not saying I agree with it, but that is the way the law is written.

As to the store's looking out for you, they aren't. They are 100% looking out for themselves. They have to be strict on adhering to the laws, otherwise they open themselves up to lawsuits, criminal charges, etc...

[4wheels]

That policy sits okay with me. Especially when it comes to buying a firearm.

x2

You're not sending him to get a beer.

[gingib]

that policy sits okay with me. Especially when it comes to buying a firearm.

amen!!!!

[Artos]

Store's can have whatever policy they want...just like ups store not shipping a gun when it's legal.

Guy is in a store & see's a colt python that he knows a buddy collects to let him know.

Buddy is boarding a plane & asks to get it for him & they will square up later.

Now you have two felons when both can legally own??

The intent of 21.a is to keep guns out of the hand of people who are not legally allowed to own. ATF has traceability of the python. Straw = a gun being acquired for some who cannot legally own. It's described on your check off list at the end of audit ffl's have to sign off.

Unless you got a Peter Strozk like ATF agent, there won't be a problem with the example trace...I understand the 'technicality' per 21.a being argued, but it does not meet the definition of illegal transfer as described from 15 years of audits & discussions I've had. It will make for a good discussion on the next.

One thing for certain is AI's can have varying opinions...you can/can't abbreviate on the 4473, etc. Every one of my discussions & the verbiage on the check off has consistently been that Straw has to end with an illegal transfer to meet said 'straw' purchase definition.

I think we've beaten this one into the ground & TVC as always makes a good case to defend his side. It's just not a situation that will end in a bad ending 99% of the time as of today with LE discretion...the way the three letter agencies are heading?? Probably best to tell your buddy to go get his own gun.

[Fishndude]

I would put money on it that every person here that is saying it’s a great policy and what not have handed their spouse or kids their card to go buy something before.

You’re probably right but do a survey on how many times was a kid buying a gun.

[Statton48]

The world we live in!! I agree with the OP for the majority of it. I’ve had my wife pick up shells and guns for me. Especially when I was out of town working. And used my card

[Tejas Wildlife]

100% Correct

Sounds like they just want to keep their name in the clear. This is in the grey area of a straw purchase. It's the world we live in.

Sorry OP but CC is correct. FFL dealers are being checked WAY closer than in the past.

[MetalMan2004]

Sorry OP but CC is correct. FFL dealers are being checked WAY closer than in the past.

I bought a gun last weekend and the store made me fill out the paperwork a second time because I used check marks instead of Xes. I asked why and they said ATF.

[Tejas Wildlife]

Everyone arguing this is NOT who the ATF will be gunning for. Think about it.

FJB is actively trying to reduce the nationwide number of FFL holders.

FJB just got his MULTI BILLION $$ bill adding 87,000 IRS agents for increased audits

FJB just sent the FBI to raid Pres Trump’s Florida home

Quit using the phrases “I don’t see them coming for me, In the past I ………, or No government employee would follow illegal orders”!

We are living in a different world.

[Bucknaked]

I bought a gun last weekend and the store made me fill out the paperwork a second time because I used check marks instead of Xes. I asked why and they said ATF.

That is definitely not new!

[MetalMan2004]

That is definitely not new!

Shows how much I pay attention. I’ve only filled that form out a few times and don’t recall. Oh well.