CORRECTION: We originally stated that buying a firearm as a gift for someone else would violate the law according to this decision. ATF Form 4473 includes a carve-out for gift purchases. We’ve struck out the text below regarding gifts.
A former police officer, Bruce James Abramski, Jr. legally purchased a Glock 19 handgun in Collinsville, Virginia, in 2009, using his credentials as a former cop to get a good deal on the firearm. Abramski then transfered the firearm to a FFL in Pennsyslvania, who ran a background check and transferred the gun to his uncle.
The Obama Administration then prosecuted Abramski as a straw purchaser even though both men were legally allowed to own firearms and all transfers were conducted by FFLs, because the former officer said that he was the “actual buyer” of the pistol.
This is beyond absurd, and just the latest example of a corrupted judicial branch deciding a case based upon what they want it to be, instead of what the law actually states:
A divided U.S. Supreme Court sided with gun control groups and the Obama administration Monday, ruling that the federal ban on “straw” purchases of guns can be enforced even if the ultimate buyer is legally allowed to own a gun.
The justices ruled 5-4 that the law applied to a Virginia man who bought a gun with the intention of transferring it to a relative in Pennsylvania who wasn’t prohibited from owning firearms.
The ruling settles a split among appeals courts over federal gun laws intended to prevent sham buyers from obtaining guns for the sole purpose of giving them to another person. The laws were part of Congress’ effort to make sure firearms didn’t get into the hands of unlawful recipients.
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.
In dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia said the language of the law doesn’t support making it a crime for one lawful gun owner to buy a gun for another lawful gun owner.
Once again, the American people have been abused by a Supreme Court that has decided that they will decide cases on what they want a law to mean at that time and for their own reasons, rather than the intent and letter of the law as written. This is the ever-present peril of an activist court.
Scalia is correct. The Obama Administration’s rogue decision to prosecute this case is only made more absurd by the 5-4 decision to affirm this insanity.
Kagan’s majority decision means that a parent, spouse, or friend who purchases a firearm
as a gift for another person—including people who may legally purchase arms on their own—is now a potential criminal to be prosecuted by a corrupt Justice Department.
This is an absurd miscarriage of justice… though not one without a simple remedy.
Congress can override Kagan’s kangaroo court by simply making it legal to buy firearms
as gifts for other law-abiding citizens. The language is simply to craft, and can be added as an amendment to almost any bill.
I would hope to see the major gun rights groups all pushing this solution, immediately.