jon_berzerk
Platinum Member
- Mar 5, 2013
- 31,401
- 7,369
- 1,130
case before the Sc concerning straw purchasing
i did not know that there is no real law against it
other then the ATF simply coined the term
and started to enforce it
Posted by Bob Owens on January 23, 2014 at 7:36 am
The United States Supreme Court seems poised to smack down the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) for attempting to create laws on its own in a case known as Bruce J. Abramski v. United States, or simply Abramski.
Bruce Abramski is a former cop who is legally allowed to buy firearms. His uncle Angel Alvarez, can also legally buy firearms. Abramski purchased a Glock 19 pistol from a dealer using his law enforcement discount to get a better price, then sold the gun to his uncle. Both transfersfrom the Virginia FFL to Abramski, then from Abramski through another FFL to Alvarez in Pennsylvaniafollowed the law.
The ATF then charged Abramski for perjuring himself on the ATFs form 4473 for saying he was the actual buyer.
And heres where it gets interesting: the law that Abramski broken regarding what the ATF calls a straw purchase isnt a law at all, but a gross government overreach and an illegal expansion of the Gun Control Act of 1968.
Abramski case before the Supreme Court could end tyrannical drive for ?universal background checks?
i did not know that there is no real law against it
other then the ATF simply coined the term
and started to enforce it
Posted by Bob Owens on January 23, 2014 at 7:36 am
The United States Supreme Court seems poised to smack down the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) for attempting to create laws on its own in a case known as Bruce J. Abramski v. United States, or simply Abramski.
Bruce Abramski is a former cop who is legally allowed to buy firearms. His uncle Angel Alvarez, can also legally buy firearms. Abramski purchased a Glock 19 pistol from a dealer using his law enforcement discount to get a better price, then sold the gun to his uncle. Both transfersfrom the Virginia FFL to Abramski, then from Abramski through another FFL to Alvarez in Pennsylvaniafollowed the law.
The ATF then charged Abramski for perjuring himself on the ATFs form 4473 for saying he was the actual buyer.
And heres where it gets interesting: the law that Abramski broken regarding what the ATF calls a straw purchase isnt a law at all, but a gross government overreach and an illegal expansion of the Gun Control Act of 1968.
Abramski case before the Supreme Court could end tyrannical drive for ?universal background checks?