Law enforcement lies all the time to get you to admit to a crime. SOP.

Not to me it wouldn't. I don't see a marriage license coming into play here. They presented themselves as a couple. Whether married or not, who cares?

Apparently you, who seems to want to bend over backwards for the feds.

The precedent it sets is for the Feds to be able to break their own laws in order to create fake sting operations to beat up gun shops to drive them out of business. That crapola needs to end.

Not only an unconstitutional law but a violation of state law.

States can make marijuana legal in violation of federal law and the whole world applauds. If a state negates federal gun law however then it must be white supremacy or something. Time to send in the stasi to root out the evil doers.

I think Yote and I are arguing for the same thing. Hard to believe it could get this crossthreaded.

But as the story goes........two people walked into the store....one guy....one gal. Relational status unknown.

I believe they picked out 4 guns, she filled out the paperwork in her name. He paid for the guns and they left.

When they walked out the door, who owned the guns?

Feds say he did.......which according to them and their actions, gun shop screwed up.

Paperwork says she did.

Which is right?

BTW, you don't get to pick the common sense answer, which may be both. In the world of Federal law enforcement, common sense does not apply. It has to be one or the other. Cannot be both.

Her, of course. Anyone that says otherwise did wayyyyy too much acid in the 60's

I would agree, she owns the guns......and that is the only common sense way to look at it.....In which case Feds were wrong to send in a squad of 20 ATF goons and hold shop owners at gun point. Heads should roll and a serious smackdown needs to take place for all involved, not to mention shop owners get their inventory and records back, plus legal fees spent to date. Whatever it takes to make them whole and punish the Feds that cooked up the scam.

But if they really want to push the alternative version where he owned the guns.........then she fries.....plus all the above.

Either way, Feds take it in the shorts on this one.

I have a feeling after looking that that isn't the only charge they have against him. It is all supposed to be out in a few days. Don't agree with the way they went about it but as Paul Harvey used to say I believe there is a rest of the story.

According to the BATF&E whoever hands over payment is the defacto buyer. She flled out the paperwork he paid. Busted. What the store should have done and would have corrected the violation, when he pulled out the payment dealer tears up her 4473s and asks the man to fill them out. If he refuses NO SALE. The feds don’t give a flying poke at a rollin donut who’s married to whom. Whoever submits payment does the 4473. Don’t like it but that’s the way it is. In ten years I had at least three baits dangled in front of me I didn’t bite and I didn’t get audited either. One was especially bad. Guy started off wanting a sporter built on his Yugo 48. No problem. Then he switched to wanting me to assemble and rebarrel his FN FAL. Big problem I told him to take his rifle out of my shop no problems.

Why then would they not investigate him or another way is if i bought my son his first deer rifle don't know Mi. laws anymore used to be 17 you can hunt,buy a license on your own is that a "Straw Purchase"

Don' forget Obama and the feds giving away semi-loads of guns to stop crime

That may be true, but if he is the owner, then she lied and committed a felony too. Says so right on the certification on the form she signed.

So can't have it both ways. If gun shop is busted for selling to him, she is also busted for lying on the form she signed.

Who freaking cares? The gun shop made a nice sale. These people have some new guns. If it were up to me, end of story.

[/quote]
Who freaking cares? The gun shop made a nice sale. These people have some new guns. If it were up to me, end of story.[/quote]

Who cares? I'm guessing it's the guys running the gun shop. As it stands now, Feds have nicked $200,000 in inventory, seized all their records and have them up on felony charges.

There may be more.....much more.....to the story than what is known now, but as it stands now, this is pretty scary stuff.

Try this scenario. Man and girlfriend planning to off the man’s wife. Man knows he can’t pass NICS because his wife swore out a. Domestic violence restraining order. So girlfriend does the paperwork he pays. Not a happy ending.
The gun shop I worked in in Houston had close to a dozen attempts at straw purchasers every month. Illegals coming over the border getting a buddy with US citizenship to do the paperwork.. Then the “emigrants “ would pull out a wad of bills HAHA! No sale.

So what happens to the person signing the paperwork? Form says it's a felony to do so.

Does the money buyer and form signer go down too, or only the gun shop?

In this particular instance.



Law enforcement can break the law in investigations.

So using your logic a highway patrol officer would not be allowed to exceed the speed limit chasing down a speeder LOL.

Sounds like a trap was set and the gun owner walked right into it because he had blind faith she filed out all the forms as was required. Some women might not feel safe packing around a wad of cash on their person. Many women's slacks don't even have pockets to pack a wad of bills if they wanted to. I see a lot of unanswered questions about this. Did she hand the weapon to him to pack out or did the shop owner?

So another question........legal buyer......say one of us. Illegal buyer gives us the cash..........does not walk in the store with us......in fact is no where near the store.....but it is their cash. We buy the gun.......sign the form, hand over the cash, check or debit card as payment. As far as gun shop is concerned, money buyer and 4473 signor are one and the same.

Who, if anyone.....is in trouble now?