8 % OF U.S. GUN DEALERS SELL ILLEGAL GUNS USED IN CRIME

[Nasty Jack]

When a criminal wants a gun he or she doesn't steal it like cops and the National Rifle Assn.tell us. They obtain it through a legal straw purchase, which means getting someone else with the right credentials to buy it for them. The next source is legally licensed but corrupt at-home and commercial gun dealers. And these same Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs), also report lost, missing or stolen firearms every year, a total of 23,775 since September of 1994. National Public Radio also reports that people arrested for a crime using a gun say, "it is easy to obtain guns illegally." What this tells us is that there are a lot of irresponsible gun owners out there buying guns for criminals. Plus almost 10,000 corrupt gun dealers willing to sell guns to anyone, including criminals. And the National Rifle Assn. insists we need even more guns on the street.

http://nastyjackbuzz.blogspot.com/

[clffrdjk]

1. Don't bother following the link, it just goes to this spammers blog.

And not even the specific story he is quoting.

Care to post anything that backs your claims up?

[sarisataka]

2. I like SPAM

[clffrdjk]

4. I went looking for a good spam meme

But that Monty Python bit takes the cake.

[Nasty Jack]

8. Reply

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/guns/procon/guns.html

[clffrdjk]

9. How did flaming lib get your link an hour before you did?

Ok so now we know where you copy and pasted from, but where is the report?

[ileus]

13. Is this that Italy guy back again???

[clffrdjk]

14. Could be, I can't remember if he was pushing a blog or not.

[ileus]

15. He ONLY linked to his blog. MikeB20002 or something like that.

[clffrdjk]

16. That's right now I remember.

Same mo aswell, hit and run. He kind of tapered off after it was found he was posting from a gov building in Italy.

[friendly_iconoclast]

22. He is actually a guy from Oregon, who "retired" the 'expat from New Jersey' persona...

...after I outed him:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117279271#post6

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117288301?com=search

He hasn't posted at DU since 2013

[oneshooter]

26. Diffrent fella, google his name n/t

[friendly_iconoclast]

29. I meant MikeB30200 is from Oregon, not Nasty Jack

I should have made that clearer...

[krispos42]

3. YOUR BILLY MAYS KEY IS STUCK IN

JUST FYI!!!11!

[beevul]

5. The mid-90s called.

They want their talking points back.

[flamin lib]

6. Forget the OP

Here's the link:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/guns/procon/guns.html

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

7. See post #5

Found that link as well. Any thoughts?

[Shamash]

10. No such thing as a "legal straw purchase"

A "straw purchase" is defined as "the illegal purchase of a firearm by one person for another", as you might read on the ATF web site along with reports of prosecutions for same.

[friendly_iconoclast]

23. That from a declared 'legal professional':

https://professionals.justia.com/profile/jack-e-dunning-sr-1485899

[pablo_marmol]

11. Tell me you're kidding Nasty!!

"When a criminal wants a gun he or she doesn't steal it like cops and the National Rifle Assn.tell us. They obtain it through a legal straw purchase, which means getting someone else with the right credentials to buy it for them."

As another member pointed out, there's obviously NO SUCH THING as a "legal" straw purchase! But beyond that, how would you expect criminals to act?! What's your plan for stopping this completely?! Ban civilian ownership of all firearms? Yeah --- that's feasible. Not.

[ileus]

12. legal straw purchase...no such thing.

[Straw Man]

17. First of all ...

... a "straw purchase" is a crime committed by the buyer, not by the retailer. So your "8% of U.S. gun dealers" banner is meaningless.

Secondly, given the above, there is no foundation for your figure of "10,000 corrupt gun dealers," which I assume you arrived at by taking 8% of the over 120,000 FFLs in the US. If there were evidence for any of this, arrests and indictments would have, or should have, been made in numbers that reflect this figure. Absent that, it's all conjecture, and rather libelous conjecture at that.

[flamin lib]

18. The straw sale is illegal, the purchase is legal. nt

[sarisataka]

19. Strike that; reverse it

A straw purchase or nominee purchase is any purchase wherein an agent agrees to acquire a good or service for someone who is unable or unwilling to purchase the good or service themselves, and the agent transfers the goods/services to that person after purchasing them.

The purchase is the illegal act. The sale is legal as the purchaser is eligible to make the purchase. It is what happens afterwards that is illegal.

The seller can be held responsible only if he is somehow aware that the purchaser is acting on behalf on a disqualified person.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

20. you're just being overly technical

Colt, Ruger, etc. and all their distributors, dealers and so on all know the details of every buyer and whether the sales should or should not be made.

[Straw Man]

21. Absolutely wrong.

The straw sale is illegal, the purchase is legal.

Nope. You've got it exactly backwards -- the seller's actions are legal. The seller does the required background check and then legally transfers the firearm. The buyer then hands it over to his/her lowlife "prohibited person" partner, which is the illegal part. The purchaser completed the transaction under false pretenses, including falsely signing a statement that he/she is the "actual buyer" -- in other words, buying it with his/her own funds and keeping it in his/her own possession. The seller did not commit a crime as long as he/she did the background check, which all FFLs are required by law to do.

[flamin lib]

28. I got it right.

The purchase from the ffl was legal.

The sale to the prohibited person MIGHT also have been legal.

It is illegal to KNOWINGLY sell to a prohibited person.

How should I know if someone I sell to is prohibited? Just because he has tears tattooed on his cheek doesn't mean he is a felon. How am I to know?

If,as you say the first buyer was to knowingly transfer the gun to a prohibited person, then yes the buyer committed a crime. If on the other hand the gun was sold to a stranger the seller can reasonably claim to not know the end buyer was prohibited.

As C&R holder I've been over this with the ATF. I have to get an ID from a state issued picture ID and not reasonably suspect that the buyer is prohibited. Without a C&R I don't even have to do that.

[Straw Man]

30. No. The purchase was ILLEGAL.

The purchase from the ffl was legal.

"Straw purchase" is clearly defined and illegal: difficult to prove, but illegal nonetheless.

The sale to the prohibited person MIGHT also have been legal.

It is illegal to KNOWINGLY sell to a prohibited person.

In a classic straw purchase, there is no "sale to the prohibited person." The buyer is using the prohibited person's money and buying the gun the prohibited person specified. The straw buyer merely hands it over to prohibited person once they are safely away from prying eyes. The straw purchaser knows that the person to whom he/she is giving the gun is prohibited because otherwise the whole charade wouldn't have been necessary.

You've got it wrong.

[Eleanors38]

24. "ILLEGAL GUNS." What are these? I have yet to see one, although a de-miled Ma Deuce

caught my attention a couple years back.

[Eleanors38]

25. Uh, no.

[Eleanors38]

27. WHAT YOU SELLING THERE, JACK? CAN OF BEANS?

SALE! HOLY THUNDER™ LIMA BEANS! THE LIFT-OFF YOU NEED!

[Puha Ekapi]

31. Holy Thunder

Lima Beans will give you a real bad case of the Nasty Jacks. You're likely to be on the shitter for hours.