Abramski v the United States is a case that questioned the legality of a lawful gun-purchaser buying a gun for another lawful gun-owner who resides in a different state and inaccurately listing that they are the actual buyer. Due to the Supremacy clause (86), it was up to the Supreme Court to make the final decision by looking further into the Gun Control Act of 1968, which was established to try and stop felons from obtaining a gun, and determining exactly what it prohibits.
In 2009, Bruce Abramski bought a gun for his uncle, Angel Alvarez, because after his years of service as a police officer, he was eligible for a discount at a local Virginia gun store. Before he purchased the weapon, three federally-licensed gun dealers told Abramski to …show more content…
Abramski’s position was that the district court overstepped its statutory authority when they prosecuted him with the straw purchaser doctrine because he was a lawful gun buyer. While United States stood steadfast in their position that the sale was illegal because the Gun Control Act prohibits Abramski from not disclosing the identity of the actual owner. Then, Abramski rebutted by pointing out that although falsely stated that he was the buyer of the gun, if he said he was going to sell it, it would have been completely legal. The United States came back and emphasized that Abramski not only lied on the form but also that the store would not have been able to sell the gun to his uncle because he lives in a different State.
This case and arguments went into account and finally after a Judicial Review (109), the Supreme Court concludedued, on June 16, 2014, that Abramski was to be sentenced to five years of probation and that gun laws need to be stricter. Justice Elena Kagan stated for the majority opinion that “it a federal crime for one lawful gun owner to buy a gun for another lawful gun owner” because it is the only way to ensure that the purpose of the Gun Control Act of 1968 is fulfilled and that weapons are kept out of the hands of dangerous
In 2009, Bruce Abramski bought a gun for his uncle, Angel Alvarez, because after his years of service as a police officer, he was eligible for a discount at a local Virginia gun store. Before he purchased the weapon, three federally-licensed gun dealers told Abramski to …show more content…
Abramski’s position was that the district court overstepped its statutory authority when they prosecuted him with the straw purchaser doctrine because he was a lawful gun buyer. While United States stood steadfast in their position that the sale was illegal because the Gun Control Act prohibits Abramski from not disclosing the identity of the actual owner. Then, Abramski rebutted by pointing out that although falsely stated that he was the buyer of the gun, if he said he was going to sell it, it would have been completely legal. The United States came back and emphasized that Abramski not only lied on the form but also that the store would not have been able to sell the gun to his uncle because he lives in a different State.
This case and arguments went into account and finally after a Judicial Review (109), the Supreme Court concludedued, on June 16, 2014, that Abramski was to be sentenced to five years of probation and that gun laws need to be stricter. Justice Elena Kagan stated for the majority opinion that “it a federal crime for one lawful gun owner to buy a gun for another lawful gun owner” because it is the only way to ensure that the purpose of the Gun Control Act of 1968 is fulfilled and that weapons are kept out of the hands of dangerous