Enforcement of 'Straw Purchase' - UPDATE pg 4, Situation RES

[The_Busy_Mom]

I would much rather have been accused of subterfuge than to be accused of attempting to break a Federal Law. We have all committed one degree or another of subterfuge at any given moment in our lives (no mom, I did not eat that last cookie!), but I have never broken any Federal Laws. And dishonesty, dressed in the clothing of blame on the government, is still dishonesty. In all fairness, the manager who did this to me was pleasant and helped our gun buying group by honoring our arrival order list. Although I now understand, I will never accept, the reason for denying my purchase, and I will think twice before making a major purchase there in the near future. My money will not be missed by their company, but I will make sure to let them know how disappointed I am that they passed the buck.

You should not infer an accusation of attempting to break a Federal law. You were not going to break a Federal law, assuming you would have also completed a background check without issues.

The predicament the manager faced was that one customer was going to be disappointed. Maybe the 15th fellow in line would have raised heck about it since the policy was one per customer. Not everyone was going to live happily ever after.

I hope with the passage of time you calm down about this unfortunate experience. Cabela's is a heck of a store, with all sorts of goodies. They probably make maybe $200 gross margin on these guns and would rather be marinated in sheep poop than disappoint a customer by not being able to sell a gun, if they could only get some guns.

I'd give anything to have a gun store like Cabelas here in California. I think I have been in the one you were in, kind of north eastern Ft. Worth, opened about 3-4 years ago. My sister and b-i-l live in Arlington and he took me over there while my wife was at the Van Cliburn Competition last time. I spent almost a whole day there, agog, and bought some reloading gear there, IIRC.

I am a lot calmer than my husband! I did everything customer #15 did, so why was I singled out for disappointment, as opposed to #15. I know that rehashing this won't change the fact that I walked out empty-handed. Just wanted some insight about using what should, IMO, only be used in Federal terms, to apply to a corporate policy. I will not boycott Cabela's. We reload, and buy some of our supplies there. We camp, and buy a lot of our supplies there. And we boat during the summer, and buy a ton of supplies there. But firearms purchases there will be off the table for a while. Until I have enough confidence that I won't be singled out again.
And to make things worse, my husband received a call from another person who was there, and I now know that it was #15 who pitched a fit. So not only did the manger try to cover their decision with dishonesty, he didn't enforce his company policy. Just goes to show that throwing a big fit CAN get you what you want sometimes. Oh well, lesson learned, and now to begin the fight with the HOA over the FFL!

Jennifer

[brentski]

My son who was 19 at the time found a shotgun on sale at Ba** Pro and I had agreed to pay for half. He had done everything, did his research, made a decision with all the shotguns, passed the background check and when it came time to pay I pulled out 1/2 the purchase price in cash in front of the cashier to honor my commitment to my son. Wow, the cashier then refused to sell him the gun until he had spoken with the manager about our "straw purchase." Once the manager had come over and looked at our drivers license's he listened and understood what I was doing and let the purchase proceed. The cashier then asked the manager to clarify his decision and it was a pleasure to listen to another parent explain to someone about how families take care of each other and if a parent wanted to help an approved child purchase a firearm as a gift then that would not be considered a straw purchase. Ultimately this could have gone either way with the manager since the clerk had refused to make the sale, but thankfully more understanding heads prevailed.

[JP171]

Glad I have never been in a Cabellas, would have ben really angry and dropped an F bomb or 2 before I dropped the hammer on his overbearing lie telling self to corperate, and 15 would have had racoons eyes for a week or 2. I will refuse to patronize Cabellas same as I refuse to patronize places like Mass rip off shops or RBI. had a fellow I know purchased a pistol at RBI, got stopped for a minor traffic, found his brand new pistol was on the stolen list from the R peeps, poor guy almost went to jail, but having his recipt saved him form an ugly night, took him 3 months to get his pistol back, good part is the R peeps gave him a refund, then he got his pistol back, told the store he got it back cause someone made a mistake at the DPS office, they told him to keep it for the trouble

[Dave2]

had a fellow I know purchased a pistol at RBI, got stopped for a minor traffic, found his brand new pistol was on the stolen list from the R peeps, poor guy almost went to jail, but having his recipt saved him form an ugly night, took him 3 months to get his pistol back, good part is the R peeps gave him a refund, then he got his pistol back, told the store he got it back cause someone made a mistake at the DPS office, they told him to keep it for the trouble

It's kinda scary that this could happen...

[RPBrown]

I could go either way on this!

Clearly a husband and wife are a "team" and with all the "hording" going on right now this type of situation only increases the problem.

But IF she did drive to the store in a separate vehicle (and I do find this a little hard to believe & too convenient) and waited 5 1/2 hours then I am not sure why they would not sell her one.

1) Yes, my wife and I are a "team". However, she has her own guns and I have mine. Although I will at times, advise her on what I think would be good for her, she generally buys her own. Lord only know that I wouldnt buy her one with out her trying it out first (have a couple of safe queens because of that) nor would she do the same for me. We do shop together for guns but also seperatly.

2) I dont know why you find it hard to believe they came in seperate vehicles. My wife and I do this quite often. Most of the places we shop, shoot, or eat at is between where I work and home so if we have something to do together, we will meet there after I get off of work. Or a lot of times, she is out on the weekends and decides to stop somewhere and calls me to meet her there. So not at all uncommon.

3) I do not think my wife would have the patience and I know I dont, to wait 5-1/2 hours to get waited on, back ground run, etc.

With all of that said, the store was morally wrong in not selling them the other rifle. Within their rights, yes, but morrally right, not in my book.

[Ark03]

I was indicating his preference for our personal collection of weapons for me. In a community state, where everything is equal between husband/wife, I had no idea that this statement would elicit a 'Straw Purchase' denial.

I would definitely contact Cabela's about this. Their customer service is normally top notch, and anything their patrons can do to maintain that should be done, especially since you said you plan to continue to shop there.

It was definitely not a straw purchase. You weren't going to ask your husband to give you the money for the firearm - if they wanted to define it as anything other than your own purchase, then it was a purchase for a gift, which is NOT a straw purchase. From the back of the 4473:

For purposes of this form, you are the actual buyer if you are purchasing the
firearm for yourself or otherwise acquiring the firearm for yourself (for example,
redeeming the firearm from pawn/retrieving it from consignment). You are also the
actual buyer if you are acquiring the firearm as a legitimate gift for a third party.
ACTUAL BUYER EXAMPLES: Mr. Smith asks Mr. Jones to purchase a firearm for
Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith gives Mr. Jones the money for the firearm. Mr. Jones is NOT
the actual buyer of the firearm and must answer “no “ to question 12a. The
licensee may not transfer the firearm to Mr. Jones. However, if Mr. Brown goes to
buy a firearm with his own money to give to Mr. Black as a present, Mr. Brown is
the actual buyer of the firearm and should answer “yes” to question 12a.

http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-4473-1.pdf

If you do write a letter, I'd like to hear how it turns out.

[TxRVer]

I don't care if they drove to the store separately or together. If the policy is one person, one firearm then if a family of five comes it, it's five firearms. Even if they paid together the policy is not one per purchase.

Yep, and right to the point. They should have said one per household if that's their policy.

[RX8er]

I have stayed out of this for several reasons. First, I only wish I had my wife's communications skills. Second, I am obviously biased about this issue and third, the way that Cabela's handled this was out of line and I am still aggravated. I wanted to sleep on this to allow my BP to settle down so I did not say something stupid but under no circumstance am I going to let this issue rest with them.

First, thank you to all those that have replied and offered a point of view. It's all been very helpful.

It has been told and rehashed several times here that any business can and does stop a sale for any reason and this I understnad. The problem I have is the mere fact that he used us, as husband and wife talking, as a reason to stop her purchase. We had just done the exact same thing in early December when we got each other a couple early Christmas presents with a 9 and 40 cal. We talked about what we each liked and even talked about being able to swap when at the range. I even told her that "yes, I would buy this one" and made other similar comments. To go just a bit further, I just got back from Bachman Pawn and Guns and explained the story to them. They said it made no sense to them why she was disqualified. They also said they sell guns to just a wife after she gets feedback from her husband. It's not like I was not buying or she was on the phone with me.... I was right in front of her in the purchase line with a nice Sig .308....

None of this makes any real sense to me why someone would act this way.

IMHO, I think that Scott, the spineless Cabela's manager caved under pressure from #15 and came up with a bogus reason to disqualify the sale.

[Keith B]

I have stayed out of this for several reasons. First, I only wish I had my wife's communications skills. Second, I am obviously biased about this issue and third, the way that Cabela's handled this was out of line and I am still aggravated. I wanted to sleep on this to allow my BP to settle down so I did not say something stupid but under no circumstance am I going to let this issue rest with them.

First, thank you to all those that have replied and offered a point of view. It's all been very helpful.

It has been told and rehashed several times here that any business can and does stop a sale for any reason and this I understnad. The problem I have is the mere fact that he used us, as husband and wife talking, as a reason to stop her purchase. We had just done the exact same thing in early December when we got each other a couple early Christmas presents with a 9 and 40 cal. We talked about what we each liked and even talked about being able to swap when at the range. I even told her that "yes, I would buy this one" and made other similar comments. To go just a bit further, I just got back from Bachman Pawn and Guns and explained the story to them. They said it made no sense to them why she was disqualified. They also said they sell guns to just a wife after she gets feedback from her husband. It's not like I was not buying or she was on the phone with me.... I was right in front of her in the purchase line with a nice Sig .308....

None of this makes any real sense to me why someone would act this way.

IMHO, I think that Scott, the spineless Cabela's manager caved under pressure from #15 and came up with a bogus reason to disqualify the sale.

I think a well crafted business-like letter to Cabela's would be in order. At least let them know you feel you were singled out because of the next person in line and that the manager's interpretation is not in any way valid. While it may not get you anywhere, it will at least let them know that you had the issue, are dissatisfied with their service and they are losing a customer.

[rwg3]

So for a slightly different take, I was at cabellas just before Christmas and was waiting for a clerk in the gun section to become available. There were easily a hundred people trying to buy a gun, any gun. I was observing the middle aged woman in front of me in line when her turn came. She went through a variety of pistols and chose one. She was paying when she turned to a younger male and "this is the one you want, right?" The clerk about messed his pants. It was obvious that she was buying for it someone else. He told her that she could not say that, and if he had heard her say it he would not be able to sell it to her. Then he went ahead and completed the transaction when she said it was her son.

No identification asked of the young man to verify,if possible, her claim. Doesn't sound that different from the scenario in your story, but a very different outcome. Not sure which is the right way to do it, maybe it should be a bit of both.

I do know from shopping there in the last week or so that they are having trouble with people buying bushmasters, in particular, for resale. According to them, "pawnshop owners and employees" are showing up and getting in line early to try to buy out the stock as it comes available for resale. cabellas has allegedly not raised prices on their stock to the extent of the others in the market place. In my area they have limited purchases of AR's to two per person and are issuing numbers to people in line based on the order in which they got there and how many come in a shipment. They are under tremendous pressure from the buying public and seem to be trying, albeit not always successfully, to what they think is the right thing in these trying times.

[RX8er]

So for a slightly different take, I was at cabellas just before Christmas and was waiting for a clerk in the gun section to become available. There were easily a hundred people trying to buy a gun, any gun. I was observing the middle aged woman in front of me in line when her turn came. She went through a variety of pistols and chose one. She was paying when she turned to a younger male and "this is the one you want, right?" The clerk about messed his pants. It was obvious that she was buying for it someone else. He told her that she could not say that, and if he had heard her say it he would not be able to sell it to her. Then he went ahead and completed the transaction when she said it was her son.

No identification asked of the young man to verify,if possible, her claim. Doesn't sound that different from the scenario in your story, but a very different outcome. Not sure which is the right way to do it, maybe it should be a bit of both.

Kind of the point we I am making.... I am not sure if I would have sold to this person in this case unless I can tell it's husband and wife, mother/son or this typoe of transaction. And it's not really any different than the how we've made purchased together in the past at Cabela's. The only difference in this case is that there was a waiting list and someone else complained that husband and wife were buying guns.

I do know from shopping there in the last week or so that they are having trouble with people buying bushmasters, in particular, for resale. According to them, "pawnshop owners and employees" are showing up and getting in line early to try to buy out the stock as it comes available for resale. cabellas has allegedly not raised prices on their stock to the extent of the others in the market place. In my area they have limited purchases of AR's to two per person and are issuing numbers to people in line based on the order in which they got there and how many come in a shipment. They are under tremendous pressure from the buying public and seem to be trying, albeit not always successfully, to what they think is the right thing in these trying times.

Yes, this is happening. I know that two of the people in line with us are doing just that. They are selling them on gun trader right now for a mater of fact. Again, if Scott had questions about why or what we would do with them, he should have asked and then made a decision. Not flat out lie about it. This was handled totally wrong by Scott.

[RX8er]

I think a well crafted business-like letter to Cabela's would be in order. At least let them know you feel you were singled out because of the next person in line and that the manager's interpretation is not in any way valid. While it may not get you anywhere, it will at least let them know that you had the issue, are dissatisfied with their service and they are losing a customer.

Yes, but I also want Kevin Norwood (Store Manager) to hold one of the DPMS models for her so she can walk in their and go through the check out process.

[fickman]

There's a creative way to stop the lines. . . I bought enough concert tickets in college to know.

Have a drawing for numbers at a given time that is announced ahead of time. If you wait for five hours, you have no advantage over somebody who showed up right on time.

Then, serve customers in the order of the numbers they drew.

The ticket sellers used to do this for at least two reasons:
1. It kept a large, unsightly, inconvenient line from snaking through their stores or sidewalks
2. It kept businesses that can afford to pay employees to stand in line from getting all of the tickets (to scalp)

I hated it back in college. . . I was willing to sit all night. . . basically, I hated it because it worked.

[The Annoyed Man]

....I am more interested in the opinion of whether a 'Straw Purchase' can be used as company policy enforcement, or strictly in regard to the potential violation of Federal Law.

Hi Jennifer, a corporation can do anything they want to, but the "straw purchase" claim in this case is pure baloney. It isn't a BATFE requirement that spouses count as one person. In fact, in this day and age of "wimmins libbers" in the white house, and all that stuff, nobody in government is going to claim that separate purchases made by spouses count as two purchases by one spouse; and in fact, the BATF does not make that distinction. A straw purchase, in legal terms, requires that the purchaser is buying a gun for a third party who would not be able to legally purchase that gun for themselves and who would not be able to successfully complete the 4473 for said purchase.

On two different occasions I've purchased handguns which I gave to my son when he was not of legal age to make those purchases himself........but they weren't straw purchases. I bought them, and gave them to him as gifts. Perfectly legal to do, so long as the recipient is legally able to receive and possess the item. He was over 18, so it was legal for him to have one, but not to buy one himself. Now, had he passed me money in compensation after the purchase was made, THAT would be a straw purchase.

Now, in the case of your friend and her husband, both filled out separate paperwork, and were paying for them separately. There is no straw purchase there.......at least not in any kind of prosecutable criminal sense. However, the store has a policy, and in the manager's judgement your friends' purchases were violating that policy, because neither the sexist pig behind the counter nor the male chauvinist pig manager could comprehend the possibility that a woman might want an AR15 just like the one MY wife has. So in that idiot's limited mental capacity, he assumes that the wife is buying a second gun for her husband........which is perfectly legal because he is perfectly legally able to buy one for himself......but not in compliance with the store's policy.