This is one of the areas where I've hyperfocused for years.

A straw purchase is when a gun is purchased on behalf of someone else. The person buying the gun isn't using their own money, or the person they're giving it to has traded them something of value.

A gift doesn't involve an exchange of reciprocal value. In other words, I can legally take you into a gun store, let you shop, buy the gun for you, then hand it to you. In practice, a gift purchase is almost always when the recipient isn't there, because it looks like a straw purchase.

Ironically, if you take someone shopping to buy them a gun as a gift, by law you're the one that's supposed to have the background check run - not the recipient. Almost all FFLs will deny the sale if you tell them that you're buying it as a gift for someone who is present at the time, and there is no easy and legal way to run a background check on the intended recipient.

If memory serves, a cop was convicted a few years ago of a straw purchase after buying a "blue label" (police discount price) Glock for someone else. That person gave the cop the money, the cop bought it, then gave it to the person. The actual buyer in that case was not a prohibited person, and the straw purchase itself was the only crime committed.

(Edit: See reply. Counterintuitively, a purchaser intending to gift a firearm is the transferee as far as Form 4473 is concerned.)

> Ironically, if you take someone shopping to buy them a gun as a gift, by law you're the one that's supposed to have the background check run - not the recipient.

That is contrary to what is on ATF Form 4473 [0]. Form 4473, question 21.a., asks if the purchaser is the actual transferee of the firearm. The form makes it very clear that it is a crime to answer "yes" if the buyer is purchasing the firearm to transfer to another person.

[0] https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/4473-part-1-firearms-trans...

Actually on the bottom on the form it says: For question 21a if you’re buying it as a bonafide gift YOU are the actual transferee. It’s legal. Too lazy to look it up but I’ve done this many times you can google it

Thank you for clarifying. I updated my response to add a note about this.

I purchased a Glock 24 in a private sale from a Sheriff's Deputy and I paid him what he paid for the firearm. That was a legal transaction in Florida.

A gift would still follow the state's laws on firearms transfers and eligibility, which can involve various forms and middlemen. With a straw purchase you're just handing the gun to someone else.

It's more of a gray area when it's an intrafamilial transfer.

It isn't. Unless someone was operating a crazy and expensive free guns charity, you are not "handing the gun to someone else". You are _reselling_ the gun to someone else who could not legally purchase or is avoiding a paper trail in order to commit a crime.

Sometimes that's even a crime without the inability to legally purchase or avoid a paper trail - just lying about the recipient and engaging in a private sale can be criminal even if both parties are eligible for the firearm purchase

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abramski_v._United_States

I didn't mean to imply that there wouldn't be a payment - although it's not always the case.

It's a thoughtcrime and a terrible law because of it. There's a ton of these w.r.t. gun laws in the US. Say the wrong thing and you get ten, say something slightly different and you get zero.

We examine intent for homicide too.

Generally by volume. One or two? Sure, you might be a really generous friend. Fifty? Probably a bit too generous - something fishy is going on. Of course, without a federal firearms registry, its difficult to quickly just flag people who are buying guns at an unusual rate.

As far as actually catching perpetrators? Again, without a database its usually down to undercover work and tips.

https://giffords.org/lawcenter/gun-laws/policy-areas/crime-g...

https://giffords.org/lawcenter/state-laws/trafficking-straw-...

https://www.fox32chicago.com/news/56-arrests-dozens-of-narco...

You mostly gotta rely on confessions. Particularly dumb criminals might leave a money trail though (like in Abramski v. US). Also, I think if you gift a gun to someone who isn't legally able to own it, that technically counts as a straw purchase. Different states have different rules/laws for gifting guns (including different rules for different types of guns), which makes your question hard to answer directly.

Do people give you money up front to buy gifts for them? Or do you buy the gift and then sell it to the recipient? Those are the differentiators.

Right, but if someone "gifts" their buddy a $1000 handgun, and the cops find out a few weeks later, how are the cops supposed prove if cash went in the opposite direction?

I hope this isn't offensive, but that is a relatively "programmer" like way to respond. You rarely have 100%, airtight evidence of crimes. That is why the standard of proof is guilt beyond a reasonable doubt as determined by a jury.

I have my doubts that in the situation that you described that there would be interest and motivation to prosecute, but if that buddy had gone on to commit a felony, or this was a repeated offense, then they would use warrants, subpoenas, and other standard prosecutorial tools to try to find the cache, get electronic records, and compel witnesses to testify. As someone else noted, all that's required is falsifying the the purchase details (Abramski vs US).

Easy in theory, a bona-fide gift means money/goods doesn't change hands. Straw purchases require a transaction. In practice it can be more complicated to prove if people lie.

Ultimately, the DA and a jury need to make that determination. Usually it's pretty obvious what the intent is.