Tuesday, June 17, 2014

Analysis of the Abramski decision. (Tell me again how the Heller case was such a big deal.)

Supreme Court Affirms Conviction In Gun “Straw Purchase” Case


Anonymous said...

smuggle --- verb --- (1) to import or export without paying duties or charges. (2) to convey by stealth.

The above is just FYI, as I know such thought has never entered your mind.

Anonymous said...

It was a chance for the leftist judge to slap down a legal and lawful gun purchase and make a criminal out of a law abiding citizen.

Anonymous said...

Do a search for "Sarah Brady straw purchase."

flaxk9 said...

Boycott the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS by face to face exchanges to acquire firearms. This type of exchange is still legal in most areas. Just don't have someone buy a firearm for you with a NICS check.

Backwoods Engineer said...

My analysis.

In part:

With this ruling, Obama and the Left now have most of the pieces of an Erector set, from which to construct an unconstitutional machine for registration and confiscation of all legally-owned firearms in the United States. Here's the bill of materials: Part A: all new guns sold only through dealers, and recorded on Form 4473 (Gun Control Act of 1968). Part B: notify FBI before transfer of any gun at a dealer (1993 Brady 'instant background check'). Part C: no more gun transfers without a dealer (Abramski ruling, today). Part D: a future prohibition of all transfers of guns to non-LEOs, like the Hughes Amendment did with machine guns in 1986.

Just assemble and activate. Confiscate and exterminate. Insert Abramski, and turn key to start.

You doubt me? Let's break it down.

It is exceedingly difficult for courts and/or LEO's to determine when a possessor "decided" or "intended" to privately transfer a gun to another person. It's in the person's mind, and the action is identical, whether or not the intent existed. As of the Abramski ruling today, is a lot easier for courts and LEO's to just assume everyone who transfers a gun to another person outside an FFL intended to do so before signing the Form 4473. This makes anyone who transfers a gun to another person outside an FFL into an "straw buyer" and an instant felon. The charge? The ATF's oft-used "Conspiracy to violate Section 922 of the US Code".

As you can see, post-Abramski, it becomes illegal to give a gun to someone without them taking possession by a transfer through a licensed dealer. The transfer of the gun to another person is half of a private sales transaction. The rest is just money. It is but a tiny, tiny step, measured in millimeters, for some lower court to cite Abramski and rule that all firearms that move in lawful commerce must be transferred via a gun store on a Form 4473.

Private sales of firearms in America: GONE. Because Abramski. Because if we don't, someone might give a gun to their uncle.

Even if a court doesn't rule that way, all it would take is for the ATF to write a "determination letter" to that effect, start enforcing it, and it's done. "Stroke of the pen, law of the land, kinda cool," as "The Forehead" Paul Begalla said. Obama's ATF has tried similar extralegal maneuvers before, like forcing a CLEO signoff even for a machine gun transfer to a trust.

Elliott said...

When was question 11a added to the 4473? It is my understanding that it was not always on the form, but I have thus far been unable to locate a revision history for the 4473 that predates the internet age.

Paul X said...

Gives new meaning to the term "mala prohibita".