Ah, but the decision doesn't address that; it addresses purchasing the weapon for the express purpose of buying it for someone else -- i.e., lying about who the weapon is for. In other words, it requires proof that the intent at the time of purchase was deceptive.
For example, if you have the gun for a month, and then give it as a gift to a family member - how does this law address that? Or if you have it for years, and decide to give it as a "family hand-me-down"; how is that covered?
I do not see how they got it right.
Buying firearms for gifts has long been accepted practice in this nation. Their ultimate goal is to eliminate civilian to civilian transfers of guns.
They want a paper trail of all the firearms.
They are moving there one small step at a time.
"Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc., etc."
If I buy a gun legally, then give it to someone while fully knowing that the person cannot legally own a firearm, should I not be culpable?
And not thru mind-reading by police, but by solid evidence of what I knew or clear evidence of what I should have known.
The issue of gifts within family hits close to home, as all my current firearms were either given me by my dad or inherited from him.
However, should my child commit a felony such that he/she is no longer legally able to own a gun, I ought to have enough sense not to give one.
I'm guessing only a tiny portion of legal-to-illegal straw purchases involve within-family exchanges.