Firearms Transactions and Straw Purchases

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), representing the firearm industry, supports the proposed rule to clarify what constitutes a "straw purchase." They argue that the new regulations will provide much-needed clarity for federal firearms licensees (FFLs) to distinguish between illegal transactions and permissible activities like gifting or marital property transfers.

The CEO of Silencer Central / BANISH Suppressors, a Federal Firearms Licensee, supports the proposed rule to codify straw purchasing laws into a single regulatory section. The commenter argues that the rule provides much-needed clarity but requests three specific refinements regarding age terminology, family relationship exclusions, and spousal payment conditions to ensure the rule is easily administrable at the point of sale.

An individual commenter supports the proposed rule, arguing that criminalizing lawful gift purchases between family members is a regulatory overreach. They express concern that purchasing a firearm as a gift for a spouse could lead to prosecution under straw purchase prohibitions.

Dr. John E. Latz, Jr. supports the proposed rule to clarify that lawful gift purchases between family members do not constitute straw purchases. He argues that the current regulations represent regulatory overreach that puts innocent gun owners at legal risk.

GRNC supports the proposed rule to redefine "straw purchase" to align with statutory prohibitions and Supreme Court precedent. They argue that the current ATF definition is overbroad and incorrectly includes lawful transactions between family members.

Irwin J. Nowick supports the general thrust of the proposed regulation regarding firearms transactions but suggests specific adjustments. He argues that the rule should avoid micromanaging family property issues and should be revised to reflect the likely judicial invalidation of age restrictions for 18-to-20-year-olds regarding handguns.

An FFL (Federal Firearms Licensee) argues that the current definition of a "straw purchase" is too vague and leads to the denial of legitimate sales, such as gifts or transactions facilitated by friends. The commenter supports clarifying the rules to specifically define straw purchases while ensuring that non-prohibited transactions are clearly allowable.

The commenter supports the proposed action to address straw purchasing but argues that the definition should be strictly limited to purchasing for prohibited persons. They express concern that the definition should not include common activities like gifting, purchasing for family members, or picking up repairs.