Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 76

Thread: Huge black market for illegal guns on the internet

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    497

    Huge black market for illegal guns on the internet

    Among the findings:

    * 62 percent of private gun sellers -- 77 of 125 online sellers contacted -- agreed to sell a firearm to a buyer who said he probably couldn't pass a background check.

    * Besides Craigslist, unlicensed sellers also offered arms at alarmingly high rates with no questions asked at Armslist, Gunlistings, Glocktalk and the classified section of Utah news website KSL.com.

    * Sellers in five Southern states -- Tennessee, Kentucky, Louisiana, South Carolina and Virginia -- were the worst offenders, followed closely by dealers in Arizona, New Mexico, Utah and Texas.

    * Midwest sellers have the best record, with 48 private sellers refusing to make illegal sales.

    The report recommended Congress pass a long-stalled bill that would close the online and gun show loophole to allow background checks for all gun sales, a measure the National Rifle Association has fought for years.
    Illegal Gun Sales Run Rampant On Internet

    As usual the NRA is more worried about protecting profits than innocent lives.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Oregon,Linn County
    Posts
    1,930
    If I was going to buy or sell black market guns it sure isn't going to be online.
    I'd just stick a sign in my yard and say:LOOKY BLACK MARKET GUNS FOR SALE.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    4,366
    Quote Originally Posted by Brady View Post
    Among the findings:

    * 62 percent of private gun sellers -- 77 of 125 online sellers contacted -- agreed to sell a firearm to a buyer who said he probably couldn't pass a background check.

    * Besides Craigslist, unlicensed sellers also offered arms at alarmingly high rates with no questions asked at Armslist, Gunlistings, Glocktalk and the classified section of Utah news website KSL.com.

    * Sellers in five Southern states -- Tennessee, Kentucky, Louisiana, South Carolina and Virginia -- were the worst offenders, followed closely by dealers in Arizona, New Mexico, Utah and Texas.

    * Midwest sellers have the best record, with 48 private sellers refusing to make illegal sales.

    The report recommended Congress pass a long-stalled bill that would close the online and gun show loophole to allow background checks for all gun sales, a measure the National Rifle Association has fought for years.
    Illegal Gun Sales Run Rampant On Internet

    As usual the NRA is more worried about protecting profits than innocent lives.
    ...or you could just get your mother to buy what you want...right brady?

    What is this brady? No Lawyers - Only Guns and Money: More PSH From The Brady Campaign

    Between you and the doorpost, I heard Mrs. Giffords isn't going to do your dirty work for you. Is that right?

    Back to begging again?
    Last edited by Doc Jones; 12-17-2011 at 07:46 AM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    4,366
    Brady, why don't you tell all the nice people exactly how a mail order transfer takes place.

    I'll wait.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,537
    Quote Originally Posted by Brady View Post
    Among the findings:

    * 62 percent of private gun sellers -- 77 of 125 online sellers contacted -- agreed to sell a firearm to a buyer who said he probably couldn't pass a background check.

    * Besides Craigslist, unlicensed sellers also offered arms at alarmingly high rates with no questions asked at Armslist, Gunlistings, Glocktalk and the classified section of Utah news website KSL.com.

    * Sellers in five Southern states -- Tennessee, Kentucky, Louisiana, South Carolina and Virginia -- were the worst offenders, followed closely by dealers in Arizona, New Mexico, Utah and Texas.

    * Midwest sellers have the best record, with 48 private sellers refusing to make illegal sales.

    The report recommended Congress pass a long-stalled bill that would close the online and gun show loophole to allow background checks for all gun sales, a measure the National Rifle Association has fought for years.
    Illegal Gun Sales Run Rampant On Internet

    As usual the NRA is more worried about protecting profits than innocent lives.
    As usual Brady you present far more hyperbole and rhetoric than actual fact.

    It is not illegal for one private individual to sell or transfer a firearm to another individual in a private transaction, so long as the seller does not have reason to know or suspect the buyer is an individual legally prohibited from owning a firearm in the first place. No background check or license is required unless the seller is generating a significant portion of their income from the sale of firearms. Isolated and sporadic sales do not count.

    The "article" you quote also makes no mention of any of the 77 contacted dealers being arrested. Can you explain why that is?

    Under already existing federal law firearms may only be shipped to FFLs, not private individuals without a background check. The only way around it is to arrange a local pickup, which is a violation of interstate commerce if the buyer and seller are from different states.

    It is also quite ludicrous to claim that there is a black market on the internet, which would make it accessible to absolutely anyone with computer access, the police and federal government included. If someone truly is trying to sell in such a manner they will likely be found and arrested in short order. Black markets require privacy and security against easy intrusion. Online want ads offer neither of these.
    Last edited by Xenamnes; 12-17-2011 at 08:36 AM.
    If one cannot have an argument without resorting to hyperbole, name calling and emotional rhetoric, then they have lost the argument from their first post.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by Xenamnes View Post
    As usual Brady you present far more hyperbole and rhetoric than actual fact.

    It is not illegal for one private individual to sell or transfer a firearm to another individual in a private transaction, so long as the seller does not have reason to know or suspect the buyer is an individual legally prohibited from owning a firearm in the first place. No background check or license is required unless the seller is generating a significant portion of their income from the sale of firearms. Isolated and sporadic sales do not count.

    The "article" you quote also makes no mention of any of the 77 contacted dealers being arrested. Can you explain why that is?
    NYC investigators dont have the authority to arrest people in other states. Duh!

    Quote Originally Posted by Xenamnes View Post
    Under already existing federal law firearms may only be shipped to FFLs, not private individuals without a background check. The only way around it is to arrange a local pickup, which is a violation of interstate commerce if the buyer and seller are from different states.

    It is also quite ludicrous to claim that there is a black market on the internet, which would make it accessible to absolutely anyone with computer access, the police and federal government included. If someone truly is trying to sell in such a manner they will likely be found and arrested in short order. Black markets require privacy and security against easy intrusion. Online want ads offer neither of these.
    The police can only catch the bad guys with a sting operation. Its not like most sellers are stupid enough to post in their ads 'willing to sell to felons'

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    497
    Kentucky Seller on Craigslist.org Agrees to Sell Assault Rifle - YouTube

    So there is a black market for guns on the internet! That proves Xenamnes wrong. Do I hear someone saying oops?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    4,366
    Quote Originally Posted by Brady View Post
    Kentucky Seller on Craigslist.org Agrees to Sell Assault Rifle - YouTube

    So there is a black market for guns on the internet! That proves Xenamnes wrong. Do I hear someone saying oops?
    GOA Awards Membership To Sarah Brady's Son - Gun Owners Of America

    GOA Awards Membership To Sarah Brady's Son



    Monday, 25 March 2002 00:00

    -- After gun control mom buys sniper rifle in straw purchase for son

    SPRINGFIELD, VA - Gun Owners of America today awarded Sarah Brady's son, Scott, an honorary one-year GOA membership.

    "Now that Scott Brady is the proud owner of a high-powered 'sniper' rifle, he will most certainly need a fuller understanding of the Second Amendment than he ever received at home," said Erich Pratt, Director of Communications for Gun Owners of America.

    In her recent book, Sarah Brady admits to having engaged in a straw purchase when she bought a .30-06 on her son's behalf, allowing him to avoid the required criminal background check.

    "We congratulate Scott for keeping his name 'off paper.' Because the gun was bought under his mother's name, he completely avoided the NICS registration system. This means authorities will never know he has the sniper rifle, a benefit which reduces the possibility that his gun could ever be confiscated by authorities.

    "Registration and confiscation have been problems even in this country. New York City registered long guns in the mid-1960s, after promising those registration lists would never be used to confiscate the guns," Pratt said. "But in 1991, Handgun Control, Inc., supported the city when it banned many of the very guns which were previously registered. Some homes even received visits from police, who confiscated the banned firearms from the clutches of non- compliant gun owners."

    According to published press reports, Sarah Brady's straw purchase may have been illegal under Delaware law.

    So I suppose now you will just get them from bloomberg and his MAIG dealers huh brady?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,537
    Quote Originally Posted by Brady View Post
    NYC investigators dont have the authority to arrest people in other states. Duh!
    While this is correct, there is absolutely nothing preventing the police of New York from contacting the authorities of the corresponding states and informing them of what they have discovered, allowing them to arrest and/or charge these 77 individuals. For what reason did the police of New York not do this?

    The police can only catch the bad guys with a sting operation. Its not like most sellers are stupid enough to post in their ads 'willing to sell to felons'
    It would appear rather interesting that only the police of New York are conducting such "sting operations" rather than the police of the other 49 states. This is also not the first out-of-state sting operations they have been sent on. However none of the other firearm-focused sting operations have lead to arrests or convictions either.

    Quote Originally Posted by Brady View Post
    Kentucky Seller on Craigslist.org Agrees to Sell Assault Rifle - YouTube

    So there is a black market for guns on the internet! That proves Xenamnes wrong. Do I hear someone saying oops?
    If you wish to engage in a game of tit-for-tat Brady then this is not the board to be doing it. It is necessary to exercise proper restraint and not bicker about isolated and unverifiable matters.

    And there is also this matter. Columbus, NM Mayor, Police Chief Indicted On Weapons Charges » Immigration Clearinghouse

    The mayor and police chief of the Village of Columbus, N.M., were among city officials indicted Thursday morning on allegations of firearms violations and drug trafficking.

    The defendants charged in the 84-count indictment include Angelo Vega, the Columbus chief of police; Eddie Espinoza, the mayor of Columbus; and Blas Gutierrez, a village trustee in Columbus.

    Ten of the eleven defendants were arrested without incident this morning by teams of federal, state and local law enforcement officers, and will make their initial appearances Friday in the federal courthouse in Las Cruces. Defendant Ignacio Villalobos has not been apprehended and is considered a fugitive, according to the U.S. attorney’s office in New Mexico. The officers also executed ten search warrants at eight residences, one business establishment, and at the office of the Columbus Police Department.
    Hickman indicted on third federal weapons charge, trial date moved - Leesville, LA - Leesville Daily Leader

    Former Leesville Chief of Police Bobby Hickman has been indicted on a third federal weapons charge, U.S. Attorney Stephanie Finley told Leader staff Tuesday afternoon, while a federal judge has agreed to move the trial date for the former Leesville chief of police.
    Tickle The Wire El Paso FBI Agent Indicted on Charges of Selling Weapons Without a License and Lying

    An FBI agent accused of buying and selling weapons and ammunition without a license, then lying about it, was indicted Thursday by a federal grand jury.

    John Thomas Shipley, 39, was charged with one count of dealing firearms without a license, four counts of causing a firearms dealer to maintain false records and one count of making a false statement to federal authorities.
    Perhaps it is you who should be saying "oops" Brady?
    If one cannot have an argument without resorting to hyperbole, name calling and emotional rhetoric, then they have lost the argument from their first post.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    660
    Quote Originally Posted by Xenamnes View Post
    As usual Brady you present far more hyperbole and rhetoric than actual fact.

    It is not illegal for one private individual to sell or transfer a firearm to another individual in a private transaction, so long as the seller does not have reason to know or suspect the buyer is an individual legally prohibited from owning a firearm in the first place. No background check or license is required unless the seller is generating a significant portion of their income from the sale of firearms. Isolated and sporadic sales do not count.

    The "article" you quote also makes no mention of any of the 77 contacted dealers being arrested. Can you explain why that is?

    Under already existing federal law firearms may only be shipped to FFLs, not private individuals without a background check. The only way around it is to arrange a local pickup, which is a violation of interstate commerce if the buyer and seller are from different states.

    It is also quite ludicrous to claim that there is a black market on the internet, which would make it accessible to absolutely anyone with computer access, the police and federal government included. If someone truly is trying to sell in such a manner they will likely be found and arrested in short order. Black markets require privacy and security against easy intrusion. Online want ads offer neither of these.

    From the OP article:
    But unlicensed "private sellers" are exempt from conducting background checks. This so-called "gun show loophole," along with the Internet, now accounts for about 40 percent of U.S. sales, fueling what law enforcement officials say is a huge black market for illegal guns.

    One online gun dealer was linked to both the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre that killed 32 people and the mass mass shooting at Northern Illinois University in 2008 that left five dead. Guns purchased illegally online also have been linked to police shootings, gun trafficking and sales to minors.

    City investigators posing as illegal purchasers asked five sellers to meet in person to exchange cash for guns. All five agreed, selling investigators four handguns and a semi-automatic assault rifle while being recorded with hidden cameras.
    From you:
    Under already existing federal law firearms may only be shipped to FFLs, not private individuals without a background check. The only way around it is to arrange a local pickup, which is a violation of interstate commerce if the buyer and seller are from different states.
    The OP article refutes everything you’re saying about the law. That’s the whole point of the subject.
    He Lived in the Perfect Midfield Time

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,537
    Quote Originally Posted by jet57 View Post
    The OP article refutes everything you’re saying about the law. That’s the whole point of the subject.
    Unless a local pickup is arranged during the communication between the seller and the buyer the firearm may not be shipped to any location through the mail, that is a fact.

    Simply because two individuals enter into a transaction of a firearm without federal oversight does not mean it is a black market sale. For it to be a black market sale it must qualify as illegal, and with the exception of a handful of states it is not illegal to sell a firearm without a background check being carried out.

    It is also quite difficult to charge someone with selling to a prohibited individual unless the prosecution can successfully prove that the seller knew or had reason to know that the buyer was legally prohibited from ownership or purchase first place. The mere act itself is not enough to prove anything concrete.
    If one cannot have an argument without resorting to hyperbole, name calling and emotional rhetoric, then they have lost the argument from their first post.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    7,353
    The black market and the private market are one and the same.
    "They asked if I had found Jesus and I didn't even know He was missing."

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    660
    Quote Originally Posted by Xenamnes View Post
    Unless a local pickup is arranged during the communication between the seller and the buyer the firearm may not be shipped to any location through the mail, that is a fact.

    Simply because two individuals enter into a transaction of a firearm without federal oversight does not mean it is a black market sale. For it to be a black market sale it must qualify as illegal, and with the exception of a handful of states it is not illegal to sell a firearm without a background check being carried out.

    It is also quite difficult to charge someone with selling to a prohibited individual unless the prosecution can successfully prove that the seller knew or had reason to know that the buyer was legally prohibited from ownership or purchase first place. The mere act itself is not enough to prove anything concrete.
    Once again: you haven't the slightest idea what the hell you're talking about: you're making it up as you go along.

    The OP source story alone refutes everything you're saying.

    You're not funny anymore; you're sad.
    He Lived in the Perfect Midfield Time

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,537
    Quote Originally Posted by jet57 View Post
    Once again: you haven't the slightest idea what the hell you're talking about: you're making it up as you go along.

    The OP source story alone refutes everything you're saying.

    You're not funny anymore; you're sad.
    So you're saying the Gun Control Act of 1968 did not outlaw the mailing of firearms between private individuals?
    If one cannot have an argument without resorting to hyperbole, name calling and emotional rhetoric, then they have lost the argument from their first post.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,530
    Quote Originally Posted by Xenamnes View Post
    So you're saying the Gun Control Act of 1968 did not outlaw the mailing of firearms between private individuals?
    Straw man. Where it was claimed that the private sellers under investigation were mailing firearms to buyers?

    "Members of the 15-person investigative team posed as illegal purchasers, asking sellers to meet in person to exchange guns for cash. Investigators recorded telephone calls with the sellers, and used concealed cameras to videotape their in-person interactions where guns were exchanged for cash."
    Probe Finds 62% of Private Gun Sellers Sell to Prohibited Individuals | KLPW Radio

    The issue is that many private sellers are willing to sell firearms to prohibited individuals.
    "Indeed, not a word in the constitutional text even arguably supports the Court’s overwrought and novel description of the Second Amendment as 'elevat[ing] above all other interests' 'the right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home.' Ante,at 63."
    -Justice Stevens on the Heller ruling

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •