No law per se against 'straw purchases' for private sales?

**tl_3237** · February 11th, 2009, 08:52 PM

Some discussion has already taken place on this subject at:
http://forum.pafoa.org/question-answ...ent-legal.html

After some thought I came to a conclusion that was interesting and would like to put it out there for discussion. IANAL and playing a little of a devil's advocate but I think the question is thought provoking and well served to be analyzed by the firearm law mavens of PAFOA

Presumptions:

All actors in the transaction are residents of Pa and the transaction itself occurs entirely within Pa. Firearm sold is neither handgun nor NFA.

Issue:

'There is no law per se against 'straw purchases' for private sales.'

Rationale:

18 USC Chapt 44 and subordinate regulations require an FFL to secure from the buyer a fully executed and sworn 4473. Q 12a specifically defines 'buyer' and ask whether the affiant is the actual buyer. Additionally the sworn statement signed by the buyer reinforces that a false statement to Q 12a is a felony.

http://www.atf.gov/forms/4473/index.htm

When a straw purchase takes place before an FFL question 12a must, by definition, have a FALSE answer. That falsification of the record (false swearing) is the crime, not the firearm purchase. Similarly the actual purchaser hidden behind the straw man is liable to prosecution for complicity to the false swearing. Again all this deals with the 4473 itself not the firearm purchase.

Now when there is no 4473 involved, as in a private sale, thus there can be no false swearing. Assuming that the strawman is not a prohibited person under 18 USC Chapt 44, where's the proscription for a private strawman sale?