Jumpseating checking a firearm on Airways
06-16-2015, 05:06 PM
#1
New Hire
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Aug 2014
Posts: 4
Jumpseating checking a firearm on Airways
I'm jumpseating tomorrow and was going to check a firearm with airways express and was wondering if 1) anyone has done this or 2) anyone knows if it's the same protocol as if I were a regular PAX
Thanks!
Thanks!
06-17-2015, 04:09 PM
#4
Airborne bus driver
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: my seat smells funny
Posts: 224
I have bought a few guns here in Alaska as gifts for family members, then jumpseated to visit them. I agree with the previous posters, I didn't wish to upset the jumpseat-Gods, so I simply sent them along via a dealer and jumseated my happy gun-less butt along. I never want to be "that gal" who causes my company to loose jump privileges. Just my .02.
RadialGal
RadialGal
06-22-2015, 06:42 PM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Sleeping in the black swan’s nest.
Posts: 5,726
I've done it multiple times up to Alaska. There is absolutely no difference at the ticket counter if you are pass riding or jump seating. But if you are worried just buy a pass. If you need to jump seat do so at the gate after your gun is safely checked in. This is not a big deal.
06-23-2015, 05:49 AM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Position: JAFO- First Observer
Posts: 997
Please correct me if I am wrong, but isn't there a federal law on firearm purchases (along with BATF form 4473) which requires that the original purchaser must be the legal owner of said firearm?
06-23-2015, 06:32 AM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Sleeping in the black swan’s nest.
Posts: 5,726
No big deal.
06-25-2015, 06:45 PM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2014
Posts: 269
Yes and after you buy it you can legally transfer that firearm to anybody you wish as long as that person can legally own a firearm. If your state is run by communists, like Colorado and requires a background check for all transfers then simply go down to a gun store and have one done.
No big deal.
No big deal.
Have you seen this 2013 case;
ABRAMSKI v. UNITED STATES
In the case of Abramski v. United States the Court ruled in effect that the Virginia man; a former police officer purchasing the firearm at a discounted price, was acting as agent for the true buyer-his uncle. By declaring he was the “actual buyer” on the Form 4473, the Virginia man violated straw purchase law, because in effect he was acting as an agent for his uncle who had provided the funds for the purchase.
Abramski v. United StatesAbramski v. United States
06-27-2015, 12:08 PM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Sleeping in the black swan’s nest.
Posts: 5,726
No, it potentially NOW can be a big deal.
Have you seen this 2013 case;
ABRAMSKI v. UNITED STATES
In the case of Abramski v. United States the Court ruled in effect that the Virginia man; a former police officer purchasing the firearm at a discounted price, was acting as agent for the true buyer-his uncle. By declaring he was the “actual buyer” on the Form 4473, the Virginia man violated straw purchase law, because in effect he was acting as an agent for his uncle who had provided the funds for the purchase.
Abramski v. United StatesAbramski v. United States
Have you seen this 2013 case;
ABRAMSKI v. UNITED STATES
In the case of Abramski v. United States the Court ruled in effect that the Virginia man; a former police officer purchasing the firearm at a discounted price, was acting as agent for the true buyer-his uncle. By declaring he was the “actual buyer” on the Form 4473, the Virginia man violated straw purchase law, because in effect he was acting as an agent for his uncle who had provided the funds for the purchase.
Abramski v. United StatesAbramski v. United States
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Frisky Pilot
Regional
20
01-01-2022 05:02 PM
