FFL Question

Went to a local gun store yesterday to buy a handgun for a young man graduating from the police academy. Filled out all the paperwork as I have done countless times before. The clerk then asked me if the purchase was for myself. I replied I was buying it then gifting it to a person who can legally possess it and conducting the proper transfer.The clerk denied the purchase stating it was a straw purchase. I argued that I was not buying it on "behalf" of someone who could not legally purchase it. They still denied the transaction. I left in frustration as I have never encountered a problem when purchasing a firearm. I searched the ATF website and found a reference to NSSF. The NSSF stated you can gift a firearm as long as the recipient can legally possess it. Now my fear is if I will be flagged by the ATF for attempting a "straw purchase". To my knowledge they did not call in the background check. I think the dealer is wrong. I would appreciate any thoughts.

I think that if you would have bought it for yourself and then gifted it, it would have been legal.. but as you described the situation, it's a "straw purchase".

Don't quote me on this, I let my FFL expire years ago.

Your situation is perfectly reasonable, but if the FFL is audited and the boxes aren't checked the right way, they will be in big trouble. There's no way for the auditor to know the background story.

The couple of times this has come up I've bought the gun, then decided I didn't really need it. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Yep, buy it for yourself.
Then gift it.
Clearly it shouldn’t be a problem, your not purchasing for someone who can’t legally purchase one.

Contacted another dealer who said the same. Bottom line is I probably said too much. Sadly it encourages the purchaser to be less than honest. At the same time I can appreciate the dealer being diligent in preventing those who cannot legally possess firearms from getting them.

estuck wrote:Contacted another dealer who said the same. Bottom line is I probably said too much. Sadly it encourages the purchaser to be less than honest. At the same time I can appreciate the dealer being diligent in preventing those who cannot legally possess firearms from getting them.

Yes I think that sums it up.  Unless they changed the 4473 form YOU had to check the box that said you are the actual purchaser of the firearm.  The clerk then verifies that all of the boxes are checked with the correct answers.  It is a no win situation by the way the form is written.  Even though the actual laws say you can give a gun as gift, you can't answer no to that question and take delivery of a gun.  Good on the clerk for catching it.  It stinks for you on that purchase but at least the store will be legal and they are diligent enough to try and keep sales above board.

Good luck at the next store.

John

The 4473 form recently changed to be more explicit in its wording that the individual purchasing is purchasing for themself and no one else. The rules are the rules and FFLs need to follow them to stay in business.

Here in lovely New York State, my daughter (non-permit holder) didn't buy, but paid for a pistol from a dealer, and I (permit holder) was allowed to qualify and pick it up. Birthday gift.
If you approached the store that way, the store would gladly let you pay for the gun, but not be actually buying it.

An individual who purchases a firearm as a gift for another qualified individual, is the actual purchaser of it. In this instance, the store representative was being overly cautious. When asked these kinds of questions, a simple yes would have satisfied the law and the store representative. The store representative doesn't want to take any chances , nor the store (better safe than sorry). It is their livelihoods they must protect. I highly doubt that you have been reported to the ATF. Just go to another gun store and make the purchase, since you are now educated.

As other's have stated the FFL person was correct. In Virginia now individual transfers have become illegal. I think estates/inheritance are exceptions under specific conditions. 

We as citizens allowed the NFA and GCA 68 and others to encroach on the "...Shall not be infringed..." part of the 2nd Amendment. The encroachment will continue until the 2A will be all but a memory. Law abiding gun owners accepting reasonable limitations yesterday, will result in owning or possessing any firearm will be deemed unreasonable. Oh well.

Here's my 2 cents. My name is on the dealer portion of THOUSANDS of 4473's, either as the seller or as a second checker. A buyer has to be careful what he/she says out loud in front of an FFL holder/FFL Rep. If you said the wrong thing in front of me, no gun for you period. If you gave me ANY doubt of the legitimacy of the purchase, you were denied. Here's the reason, and a very simple one. The worst thing that could happen to me if someone was just talking too much and I denied them to be on the safe side side is: A. I'd have to listen them bitch and moan about this and that. B. Listen to them threaten getting a lawyer for some reason or another. If A or B happened, I could give a s*#t less. My paycheck was the same and I could go on with my life. Now if I WAS to sell them a gun and it was an undercover ATF agent doing an audit, I could go to PRISON! Lose everything I have and flush my life right down the toilet.