Never said I was. But current law needs some way to stop straw purchases, I guess. What if Drifter was a felon?

I mean, I know he's NOT--but what if?

Jim

Yes Ang. It is obviously not being enforced especially by our Kansas City Democrat governor. Governors get voted on here in KS between presidential elections. The big D vote comes from Lawrence Salina Olathe, Overland Park Leawood. Kansas City.

Farmers and other rural people are almost 100% big R. Its not the first time we got a liberal governor because big R failed to get out the vote.

What if he was? Why should I not have the right to defend myself due to his choices? It's my understanding that under the current gun laws I should not be able to own a gun if he was a felon, and that's BS. Now, if he took my gun and committed a crime... OK, maybe THEN I could be liable, but otherwise, it's a violation of my 2nd Amendment rights to deny me a purchase or possession of a gun for a crime I didn't commit.

Personally, I think once a person serves his time in prison for a felony committed, his gun rights should be restored to him. But, that's a whole horse of another color.

What if? What if we depended on our penal system to give us some measure of protection from dangerous thugs? Leaving dangerous people in prison rather than releasing them? I really figured you agreed with me that the straw purchase law does not protect anyone form anybody.

No it dose not. Thats why you buy from privet sellers. But they can't have that thats why they want all transfers to require a backgroung check. Got to have records of every transfer don't you know. But no those records are not kept. If you believe that.

Its all bs. All gun control and laws are illegal.

Put me on the jury and the one in trouble in this case is the female Federal Agent who lied when she filled out the forms. In doing so, she committed a felony and gets to go to jail for it. They can't have it both ways.

BTW, I checked, and Ike Skelton did have a son Ike......Capt. Ike Skelton, US Navy. If this guy at the Lake is one and the same, he is not chopped liver. Not a sacrificial pawn you just knock over. He would have connections and know his way around government and be able to put up a good fight.

Ike Skelton was a Democrat. That may make a difference.

Again, did I miss something? How did she lie?

Issue is she filled out the forms. Then HE pulled out the cash and made the purchase. If gun shop got into trouble for selling to him, then she lied when she said the guns were for her. The trigger that set the whole set of events in motion was her filling out the forms.....if she was not going to be the buyer.

And that is complete BS because MOST married couples have joint accounts! If I go into a store, whether for groceries, guns or clothes my husband always uses his card to pay if he's there. So if I go to buy a gun for myself to go shoot a deer tomorrow and my husband is the one who pays, that doesn't make it any less my gun because it's BOTH of ours money he's paying with! Same deal with cash... we both pool some cash in the gun safe. It's OUR money.... not his, not mine. If the female agent filled out the paperwork saying they were HER guns, and her male partner paid.... she did NOT lie!!!!!

In theory, this is no different than local cops sending an underage kid into a bar with a fake ID. Bar lets them in, serves them and gets in trouble. But what about the kid? Did they not break the law by presenting a fake ID? If one gets in trouble, they both do.

Completely and entirely different!

Why would you assume the woman is buying the gun for the man just because the money came from his pocket?!?!?

I'm in complete agreement. In your case you did nothing wrong. But if the Feds are going to setup a sting operation as they did.......and claim the gun shop broke the law........then this blows up in their face. The one that broke the law........the thing that set the whole thing up in the first place.......was the actions of their agents. If they are going to enforce a strict interpretation of the law, then it was them what broke it. She fries.

I've never understood this....how is that any different than if I buy a gun for my 10 year old son, and he pays for it with his own money that he earned? Would that make me or him a criminal?

Because the Feds said so. This isn't about common sense as you are arguing. This is about this one single event. The entire premise of their sting operation was based on an entrapment lie. They sent the two of them in there to entrap the gun shop. The only way they could do that was for her to lie. It is their strict interpretation that allowed them to then send in a squad of goons to raid the place. So if you want to go with their version of the story.......then the one in trouble her is NOT the gun shop. It is their agents what lied to get to the entrapment. They cannot have it both ways.

Goal of the Feds was a smack down of a gun shop. The blowback needs to come back onto them. The best way to do that is to make the agents what participated in this scam to pay the price. Lock up the agents and maybe they will think twice before they agree to do the next one.

No! That woman federal agent did NOT lie and did NOT break the law. Neither did the gun shop. The LAW is broken and this case exemplifies it! Don't try to pin this on an agent just doing her job.... pin it on the root cause.... an unconstitutional law!

The law may be broken, but they are enforcing it. Gun shop guy is out about $200,000 in inventory as it stands today. Unless something changes, it will stand and continue to be enforced. Fastest way to get rid of it is for this to blow up in the Feds face. If they are going to enforce a strict interpretation of what took place, then so be it. They (Feds) broke the law. They (Feds) are the one's in trouble. Enforce that and the law either gets changed......or neutered.

With no regard to the precedent it sets? Ok, just buckle down and take it from behind then.

BTW, I have not gone back to review the tape. Not sure if these two represented themselves as husband and wife, or just left it as a guy and a gal who walked through the door together. Seems it would make a difference.