The Fourth Circuit, joining the Sixth and Eleventh Circuits, ruled against Abramski, holding that a gun buyer???s intent to sell a firearm in the future to someone who could have lawfully purchased the firearm himself was a fact ???material to the lawfulness of the sale??? for purposes of a false-statement charge under 18 U.S.C. ?? 922(a)(6); Abramski asks the Court to adopt the contrary position