On June 16, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that a law-abiding citizen cannot buy a gun for another law-abiding citizen.
Justice Elena Kagan wrote the majority opinion and Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the dissent.
As Breitbart News reported on January 25, the case centered on whether a law-abiding citizen could buy a gun he or she planned to sell to another law-abiding citizen. It arose when former police officer Bruce James Abramski purchased a Glock handgun so he could get a discounted law enforcement price, then “transferred the gun to his uncle in Pennsylvania.”
According to ABC News, Kagan wrote that “the federal government’s elaborate system of background checks and record-keeping requirements help law enforcement investigate crimes by tracing guns to their buyers.” She said this is undercut if a person can buy a gun for another person.
Scalia countered by writing that the language Congress used in fashioning background checks “does not support making it a crime for one lawful gun owner to buy a gun for another lawful gun owner.”
Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at firstname.lastname@example.org.