Straw purchase vs. Gift

[Fargo]

I understand your contentions Chip but you, in effect, are asking me to prove a negative when forwarding the supposition of Straw Laws not having been proven to have protected a life. Seriously?

The OP was reaching for clarification, this whole discussion has segwayed into should the law even exist which is basically mute. Of all of the battles to fight where infringement is concerned, this one ranks right up there with tilting at windmills.

I actually strongly disagree. All that the 4473 "true purchaser" requirement does is make sure that it functions as back door registration via NICS records and the FFL's bound book.

It functioning as registration was basically cited by the SCOTUS as the reason they upheld the BATFEs reading last year.

 

[24Carat]

I actually strongly disagree. All that the 4473 "true purchaser" requirement does is make sure that it functions as back door registration via NICS records and the FFL's bound book.

It functioning as registration was basically cited by the SCOTUS as the reason they upheld the BATFEs reading last year.

And?

I guess I should have specified that *****ing about something that can't and won't be changed is tilting at windmills.

The "true purchaser" question doesn't enhance the already present registration characteristics of the 4473.

 

[chipbennett]

I understand your contentions Chip but you, in effect, are asking me to prove a negative when forwarding the supposition of Straw Laws not having been proven to have protected a life. Seriously?

Proving a negative? No. I am asking for the evidence to support the claim that straw purchase laws have been important/critical in furthering an important state objective (you pick the objective).

There are crime statistics available. There are criminal behavioral data available. There is ample information available to use to analyze the veracity of that claim.