The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 13, 2013, 04:11 PM   #1
spanishjames
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 27, 2010
Posts: 541
CNN films illegal gun sales at gun shows.

CNN producers went undercover to various gun shows in the SC, TN, GA area and purchased three handguns, and an AR-15, from sellers who never asked for ID to verify residence. One seller didn't even ask "what he's going to do with the gun?". These types of reports are more fuel for the Universal Background Check proponents. I know there's bad apples in every bunch, but this is unacceptable, considering the push for stricter gun laws.

I was thinking, why not verify residence at the door, then issue armbands to those eligible to buy. But it's much simpler for each seller to ask for ID himself. These sellers broke the law, and are no help to the rest of us.

http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2013/04/1...ked/?hpt=ac_t4
__________________
Regret for the things we did can be tempered by time; it is regret for the things we did not do that is inconsolable."
-Sydney J. Harris
spanishjames is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 04:16 PM   #2
spanishjames
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 27, 2010
Posts: 541
Well now that I re-read the story, I noticed it doesn't mention when these were purchased. The prices seem a little low, $1150.00 for the AR, and 525.00 for Glocks. I hope no one is doing this today.
__________________
Regret for the things we did can be tempered by time; it is regret for the things we did not do that is inconsolable."
-Sydney J. Harris
spanishjames is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 04:43 PM   #3
Newton24b
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 10, 2009
Posts: 974
yet these wonderful upstanding 'citizens" from cnn refused to show proper id? just because they werent asked, they knew they were legally obligated to show proof of residence.

arent they smart enough to know they were breaking the law themselves/ its the famous "but officer i only bought those three ounces of cocaine so i could prove the guy on the corner was a drug dealer"
Newton24b is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 04:46 PM   #4
tomrkba
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 29, 2011
Posts: 634
Where does it say ID must be shown for private sales in these states?

Were the buyers of these guns residents of the state they were in? If only only one man bought them, he committed several Federal felonies.
tomrkba is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 04:59 PM   #5
UtahHunting
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 26, 2009
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 424
I watched this on CNN as well. Sometimes it feels like we are fighting a losing battle. The media and left will not rest until our rights are stripped away.
UtahHunting is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 05:04 PM   #6
JerryM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 4, 1999
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 1,884
The ones who sold the guns did not help our cause, but hurt it.
Jerry
__________________
Ecclesiastes 12:13 *¶Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
14 *For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.
JerryM is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 05:18 PM   #7
HiBC
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 13, 2006
Posts: 3,830
I have not been attending gun shows lately.In Colorado,the way it works,there is a table set up for background checks.Example,I was a private seller at a gunshow table.I had an old p-14 barreled action,just a bolt barreled action for sale.

A 4473 form had to be filled out and a background check done.

Signs were posted that the parking lot was being monitored and any transactions on the premises that went around the lawful process were subject to prosecution

It may be different in other states,but in my world,there is no gun show loophole ,it is no different to buy a gun at a gun show than it is at a gun store.

If it occurs that someone is filmed breaking a law,the answer is prosecuting the lawbreaker,not making more laws
HiBC is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 05:35 PM   #8
BumbleBug
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 11, 2013
Location: Near Heart of Texas
Posts: 540
As I follow all the gun law debates & discussion, I keep hearing about the "Gun Show Loophole". I've been too embarrassed to ask "What is the loophole?". Here in Texas the only loophole I know of was that someone at a gun show would show his CHL, buy a gun, then hand it over to his buddy, who was the real customer all along. I'm not even sure that is illegal, but they cracked down on that & now that is a thing of the past. Are there other loop holes I don't know of???

...bug
BumbleBug is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 05:36 PM   #9
g.willikers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 28, 2008
Posts: 5,406
Maybe we should thank the guys from CNN for showing how the gun laws are a waste of time.
So, they freely ignored federal law in buying guns out of their state of residency,
And then broke some more federal laws by transferring them to someone else - the "security people at CNN".
Proving that laws have no effect on those willing to take the risk to break them.
Is anyone at BATFE paying attention to these law breakers?
__________________
Lock the doors, they're coming in the windows.
g.willikers is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 05:38 PM   #10
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,213
Gun shows: Providing venues for reporters to commit felonies across this great land.

In all seriousness, though, I haven't looked up TN, SC, or GA law, but I question whether the seller was, in fact, required to check ID.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 05:44 PM   #11
Nathan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2001
Posts: 2,057
Spats,
I agree. Could be state law....,but we do know CNN broke the law buying out of state....When do the prosecutions begin?
Nathan is online now  
Old April 13, 2013, 05:53 PM   #12
yankytrash
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 17, 2001
Location: Farnham, Va
Posts: 2,183
ID is not required.
__________________
Right turn, Clyde.
yankytrash is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 06:05 PM   #13
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
I don't know of any requirement to ask for an ID. I have never heard of any requirement to ask what a buyer intends to do with a gun, and I would think a seller who asked that kind of thing would often as not be told to mind his business. Sure, it might be along the lines of "shoot it, obviously," but that would just be a polite and light way of saying MYOB.

OTOH, if a buyer says things like, "I wanted to buy this last week, but the transaction got refused at the gun shop," that would raise flags.

BumbleBug, what you described was a straw purchase, and it is very illegal. There is no "gun show loophole" that allows that. The same thing can happen at an FFL's gun shop, and it's hard to prevent, unless the straw purchaser decides to buy in bulk or does something else that creates suspicion.
MLeake is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 06:18 PM   #14
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,213
I just ran a quick search (LexisNexis) on TN, SC, and GA. Interestingly, GA has a provision that prohibits insurance companies from excluding or denying coverage based on a person's or a person's family's lawful ownership or carrying of firearms. That tidbit aside, I see nothing in any of the codes for any of those states that requires a seller to request ID.

I've heard a buyer state his intentions when buying a gun ("I've been looking for a new turkey gun," for example). I might even discuss my intentions along those lines with a potential seller, but I can also see getting creeped out by the question, depending on how it came up in the conversation.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 06:27 PM   #15
spanishjames
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 27, 2010
Posts: 541
The reporter did say some vendors refused to sell without proof of residency. If you don't need to show, or ask for ID, then how do you know the buyer's a resident of your state? I believe any sale across state lines require an FFL everytime.
__________________
Regret for the things we did can be tempered by time; it is regret for the things we did not do that is inconsolable."
-Sydney J. Harris
spanishjames is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 06:34 PM   #16
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,213
Under 18 USC 922, a sale is prohibited where a seller knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the buyer does not reside in the same state as the seller. That does not mean that the seller is required to investigate the buyer's state of residence.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 06:38 PM   #17
BudW
Member
 
Join Date: November 11, 2010
Location: Black Hills
Posts: 63
Need to boycott the left leaning press and let the advertisers know
BudW is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 06:40 PM   #18
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,213
Any time we see these stories where a reporter has broken federal law, we should forward the link to BATFE.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 07:47 PM   #19
spanishjames
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 27, 2010
Posts: 541
Quote:
Under 18 USC 922, a sale is prohibited where a seller knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the buyer does not reside in the same state as the seller. That does not mean that the seller is required to investigate the buyer's state of residence.
Then there's the loophole the antis are up in arms about. In Illinois, we have a FOID which is needed to possess a firearm. I assumed you had to, at the very least, need to show an ID/DL to prove you're 21 for a handgun, and a resident of that state.
__________________
Regret for the things we did can be tempered by time; it is regret for the things we did not do that is inconsolable."
-Sydney J. Harris
spanishjames is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 08:02 PM   #20
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,850
Well, the law will jump into action like they did for David Gregory.

Tutorial on the loophole:

1. It was first portrayed incorrectly that you could buy guns at shows without NICS. Implied that even FFL dealers could do such legally. That is not the case. If a dealer does that - it's a crime.

2. When that was pointed out, it was claimed that the gun show was a convenient meeting locale for private sales. That expedited illegal sales. Thus the gun show was an attractive nuisance for criminal activity. Austin, TX made that claim against its shows.

Number 2 is now the argument for having NICS for private sales at shows.

The use of loophole changed from implying away for FFL sales to avoid NICS to that of private sales to criminals being made easy.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is online now  
Old April 13, 2013, 08:24 PM   #21
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,213
Quote:
Originally Posted by spanishjames
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spats McGee
Under 18 USC 922, a sale is prohibited where a seller knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the buyer does not reside in the same state as the seller. That does not mean that the seller is required to investigate the buyer's state of residence.
Then there's the loophole the antis are up in arms about. In Illinois, we have a FOID which is needed to possess a firearm. I assumed you had to, at the very least, need to show an ID/DL to prove you're 21 for a handgun, and a resident of that state.
I have a two-part response. First of all, just because Illinois is more restrictive than necessary does not mean that the rest of us are working through a loophole. Second, IMO, a loophole is an unintended consequence of some ambiguity in a law. Private sales being exempt from background checks are not a loophole. That's how private sales have always worked in the vast majority of states in this country since 1776. It's also how the overwhelming majority of private property sales operate.

We in the gun community have got to stop treating private sales as some kind of aberration or loophole.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 09:05 PM   #22
spanishjames
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 27, 2010
Posts: 541
Quote:
I have a two-part response. First of all, just because Illinois is more restrictive than necessary does not mean that the rest of us are working through a loophole. Second, IMO, a loophole is an unintended consequence of some ambiguity in a law. Private sales being exempt from background checks are not a loophole. That's how private sales have always worked in the vast majority of states in this country since 1776. It's also how the overwhelming majority of private property sales operate.

We in the gun community have got to stop treating private sales as some kind of aberration or loophole.

I don't believe the FOID system should be the law of the land. It's simply all I've known since that law has been in place longer than I've been alive. I just believe it's unwise to sell a gun to a stranger without knowing if they're a resident of the same state. The easiest way to verify residency is to look at their DL/ID. I belive it's also illegal to sell a handgun to someone under 21 years of age. Would it be wise to sell a handgun to a young person without making sure they're 21?

A private sale in and of itself is not a loophole. Not having to provide proof of residency or age is. If I lived in Georgia, and was selling a gun, I'd at least make sure the buyer was a fellow Georgian. That's just me.
__________________
Regret for the things we did can be tempered by time; it is regret for the things we did not do that is inconsolable."
-Sydney J. Harris
spanishjames is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 09:24 PM   #23
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,213
What you suggest is the wise move, spanishjames. Personally, if I were doing a private sale to a stranger, I would ask to see a CHCL, if possible. I, however, do not necessarily want to treat all unwise moves as "loopholes." A loophole is an unintended consequence of poor drafting. Unless I am mistaken, the exclusion of private sales from background check requirements was intentional.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 09:49 PM   #24
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,641
Quote:
I was thinking, why not verify residence at the door, then issue armbands to those eligible to buy. But it's much simpler for each seller to ask for ID himself. These sellers broke the law, and are no help to the rest of us.
Why? The anti's have claimed for years that gun shows are hot beds of criminal activity, but they have never provided a shred of evidence. The only criminal sales they've been able to document (and oh how they've tried!) have been the ones their own agents initiated.

The percentage of crime guns traced to gun shows? Less than 1% [pdf]. Show me that gun shows are a significant problem, and then we can talk about adding impediments to free trade there.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old April 13, 2013, 10:28 PM   #25
spanishjames
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 27, 2010
Posts: 541
Quote:
Why? The anti's have claimed for years that gun shows are hot beds of criminal activity, but they have never provided a shred of evidence. The only criminal sales they've been able to document (and oh how they've tried!) have been the ones their own agents initiated.
The percentage of crime guns traced to gun shows? Less than 1% [pdf]. Show me that gun shows are a significant problem, and then we can talk about adding impediments to free trade there.
Precisely because the anti's continually try to break the law at gun shows, is the reason that sellers at gun shows should dot their I's, and cross their T's. These agents are just as bad as those that try to disturb hunters doing nothing illegal. They just don't like hunting (guns), so they do anything to make a legal activity look "immoral". In the case of the gun shows, they try to prove how easy it is to buy a gun, legally or not. In one of the sales at the gun show, they say "it only took 70 seconds from offer to purchase". So what! Why does it have to take longer?

We're not just fighting a legislative war. We're also fighting a propaganda war. My main concern is not the private sale, so to speak, but rather our losing the battle of perception with these documented, broadcasted, examples of the anti's argument for the need for "universal" background checks. They say it's too easy for criminals and the mentally unstable to buy a gun, and here's their proof. We may know the truth, but they own the news. And that's all the too-busy voter needs to hear.
__________________
Regret for the things we did can be tempered by time; it is regret for the things we did not do that is inconsolable."
-Sydney J. Harris
spanishjames is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.12452 seconds with 7 queries