This topic contains 7 replies, has 4 voices, and was last updated by 1 month ago.
January 23, 2014 at 6:45 am #12005
Supreme Court weighs gun rights challenge
The Supreme Court took up a new gun rights case on Wednesday, weighing whether it should be a crime for someone to buy a gun for somebody else, if both people are legally allowed to own one.
Justices on Wednesday heard from Bruce James Abramski, Jr., a former police officer who got in trouble with the law after he bought a Glock 19 handgun in Virginia — and transferred it to his uncle in Pennsylvania.
Abramski bought the gun because he could get a discount, and checked a box on the relevant form saying the gun was for him. But he sold it to his uncle.
Abramski was later indicted under federal law for making a false statement material to the lawfulness of a firearm sale — and for making a false statement with respect to information required to be kept in the records of a license firearm dealer.
But Abramski’s lawyers told the high court that since both he and his uncle were legally allowed to own guns, the law shouldn’t have applied to him.
His team argued that Congress never intended for a lawful buyer who transfers a gun to another lawful owner to be prosecuted under this law — and that the intent was all about making sure straw buyers don’t purchase guns for people not allowed to have them, like certain convicted criminals.
But the government argued that he violated the plain language of the law, when he said on the form that the gun was for him. They argued he never gave the seller any idea that he planned to essentially resell the gun to someone else the dealer would have no opportunity to vet.
Much of Wednesday’s arguments centered on the question on the form — prepared by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives — and whether the agency’s decision to include the question gives it the force of law, enough to make it a crime to answer untruthfully.
A decision in the case is expected by JuneJanuary 23, 2014 at 7:42 am #12006
so, if they rule against him, does this not set a precident saying it is illegal for a father to buy a gun for his child?is this one of obamas “common sense ” gun laws?
Attachments:January 24, 2014 at 10:24 am #12063
IF they rule against him it will mean that the selling of a firearm to anyone who can legally own one could possibly bring charges. I have bought many firearms over the years and have sold a couple to people that I KNEW were not criminals nor not allowed to possess a firearm for any reason. Since when I bought the firearm and filled out the form 4473 honestly yet later decided to sell it for whatever reason does that make me a liar or less than honest ? Not at all as I have always required the buyer to give up their info on a Bill Of Sale that I had written up and then printed off with enough copies to have extras as well as making sure that both myself and the buyer had one should any questions arise in the future. So how many here have sold a firearm to either a relative or friend that you know does not have a criminal record ?January 24, 2014 at 10:32 am #12066
we have entered an era where there is no such thing as a law-abiding citizen, only subjects and slavesJanuary 26, 2014 at 6:38 am #12098
The judicial system is now the sword of the tyrants! You will be destroyed!January 26, 2014 at 10:22 am #12107January 27, 2014 at 9:07 am #12133
yup, says it all. the republic will not fall by bombs and warfare but by thounderous appluase
sgingras , I sent you a pm
February 2, 2014 at 9:44 am #12325
- This reply was modified 1 month, 1 week ago by yote.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.