Gun Show Loopholes Tracked By New York City; Dealers Allowed Purchase To Undercover Gun Buyers Who Admitted Spotty Records


First Posted: 10- 7-09 11:26 AM   |   Updated: 10- 7-09 11:46 AM

What's Your Reaction?
Guns

NEW YORK (AP)-- New York City officials secretly videotaped dozens of firearm purchases they say were illegal at gun shows in states that have not closed the "gun show loophole."

The sting, described in a city report released Wednesday, was conducted at seven gun shows in Tennessee, Ohio and Nevada. Those states are among the many that permit private unlicensed dealers, known as "occasional sellers," to sell weapons at gun shows without conducting background checks.

Gun-control advocates say the loophole makes it easier for criminals to acquire guns and prevents law enforcement from being able to trace those weapons if they are used in crimes.

Nine states, including New York, have passed laws to close the loophole, requiring background checks on at least all handgun purchases at gun shows. Mayor Michael Bloomberg has long campaigned for Congress to close the loophole, and for states to do it on their own if the federal government does not.

Even in states that haven't closed the loophole, federal law bars "occasional sellers" from selling guns to people they have reason to believe would fail a background check.

This is where the Bloomberg operation says 19 out of 30 sellers broke the law during the investigation, in which undercover buyers wore tiny cameras concealed in baseball hats and purses and audio recorders hidden in wristwatches.

In each purchase, the investigator showed interest in buying a gun, agreed on a price and then indicated that he probably could not pass a background check.

Most sellers allowed the purchases anyway, responding in some cases by saying, "I couldn't pass one either," or "I don't care," according to the city's report.

Story continues below
advertisement

Two assault rifles and 20 semiautomatic handguns were bought this way, the report said.

The 11 who refused sales showed they knew the law.

"Once you say that, I'm kind of obligated not to," said one seller, according to the report. "I think that's what the rules are."

"Fact is, you done told me too much," said another who refused. "I wouldn't sell one to you at all."

The city has no legal authority over the dealers and is using its findings to make a point. A copy of the report is being sent to every member of Congress and the findings will be shared the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

"The gun show loophole is a deadly serious problem, and this undercover operation exposes just how pervasive and serious it is," the mayor said in a statement.

The undercover operation took place from about May to August and its $1.5 million cost was paid by city taxpayers. The city hired a team of 40 private investigators from an outside firm to make the purchases.

The sting comes three years after Bloomberg's administration conducted a similar operation focusing on illegal straw purchases at gun shops in Georgia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Virginia that authorities believe were responsible for selling guns used in crimes in New York City. (A straw purchase is when one person fills out the paperwork and buys the gun for somebody else.)

Bloomberg's administration brought a civil case against 27 gun dealers targeted in its 2006 investigation.

As a result of the suit, 20 dealers are being monitored by a court-appointed special master. One is out of business, two more are expected to be put under monitoring agreements and three were dropped from the suit. A final dealer settled with the city but the terms did not include a monitor.

Investigators in this year's sting also attempted straw purchases at gun shows, and were successful 16 out of 17 times.

The city said it was not planning civil action this time around.

NEW YORK (AP)-- New York City officials secretly videotaped dozens of firearm purchases they say were illegal at gun shows in states that have not closed the "gun show loophole." The sting, described...
NEW YORK (AP)-- New York City officials secretly videotaped dozens of firearm purchases they say were illegal at gun shows in states that have not closed the "gun show loophole." The sting, described...
Filed by T.J. Ortenzi  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
15
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo
Post Comment

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:

Mr. Bloomberg has proven that some politicians will use crime and violence to their own advantage by creating laws that limit the law abiding instead of doing the hard work of addressing the root causes of crime and violence. The “gun show loophole†is a great example. Most transactions at gun shows are between law abiding people for law abiding purposes. People like Mr. Bloomberg would like to rally support for their “tough on crime†attitude and garner support and votes by creating this problem/ep­idemic/etc­. and proving that they are doing something when the laws they propose or enact actually don’t do anything to stop crime or violence. The citizens of New York would be much better served if Mr. Bloomberg would focus on youth programs, community policing, neighborhood watch programs, jobs programs, education, and many other things that actually reduce crime rather than chase down two non-criminals in Kentucky performing a legal transaction.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:31 PM on 10/09/2009

Anti-gun Bloomberg is out of line here as alway's. According to the law in those states,"Occasional Sellers" have the right to refuse,or SELL a gun. Either way it's within the law. So if someone says heck,i probably would not pass a background check anyway,etc,etc,and the seller sells him a gun,no law is broken. A seller is not breaking the law,buy selling a gun to someone, who says how they feel about background checks. Some sellers may feel obligated not to sell,and others will sell. Either way is right. The only law that was broken here,is Bloomberg's law! I guess if you have his kind of money,you can do what you want.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:55 AM on 10/09/2009
photo

There is no gun show loophole.

“Probably wouldn’t pass a background check†does not equal “I’m a prohibited possessor.â€

I usually don’t pass instant checks because somebody out there has a criminal record and shares some of my personal information. I am not a prohibited possessor, and I have a concealed carry permit. I have been vetted as thoroughly as someone is likely to be vetted by city, state and federal organizations but I still usually get delayed in purchasing a firearm. For this reason, I am more inclined to purchase a gun from a private seller. The sellers in this “investigation†committed no crimes, but Bloomberg and cronies did commit state and federal crimes and conspired to commit said crimes. Perhaps Bloomberg should focus on running his dump of a city.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:23 PM on 10/08/2009
photo

People need to start a campaign with the New York State Attorney Generals office and with their congressman and senators to prosecute Bloomberg for these stunts. He is committing felony conspiracy in multiple states and on a federal level, trafficking in illegal firearms and endangering the public with his God complex.

He is the mayor, not J Edgar Hoover or the attorney general not that I think that I think that Holder would do anything about it. He has nothing to do with law enforcement other than to listen to Kelly lie to us about what a great job his department does in between shooting people for getting their wallets or being a police officer...­lol...Sorr­y, I hate Kelly and couldn't resist the shot.

Bloomberg is out of control and needs to be reigned in. He sets these people up in these gun shops and at gun shows, and when they do something that is legal he makes them out to be a criminal. I think as the mayor it would do him good to get a first hand look at the workings of Riker's.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:06 AM on 10/08/2009
- Eris23 I'm a Fan of Eris23 43 fans permalink

Can you cite exactly what law he has broken?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:49 AM on 10/08/2009
photo

Yes I can, Article 265.04(2) which is First degree criminal possession of a weapon and is a class B felony for being in possession of 22 firearms. He is also guilty of two counts under Article 265.02(7) Criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree for being in possession of two assault weapons. Also, 265.40 Purchase of rifles and/or shotguns in contiguous states meaning it is legal for a resident to purchase a rifle or shotgun in a bordering state. It is a violation of the Gun Control Act of 1968 (18 USC 921) to buy a handgun in another unless you are a Federal Firearms License Holder. Last time that I looked on a map Ohio, Tennessee and Nevada did not border New York and the one dealer was asking for an Ohio license so where is the rest of the footage of that transaction and the identification supplied by the investigators.

I don't even know what the City's laws are but it is a virtual gun free zone for civilians legally and regardless these were all illegal weapons under NY and federal law.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:11 PM on 10/08/2009

The Mayor has, on numerous occasions, admitted that he has broken the law in working these "sting" operations, as he has no authority outside NYC. I believe a couple of cases are still in the works accusing him and his staff of such violations of the law, since straw-purchases are a violation.
Semper fi

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:01 AM on 10/08/2009
photo

I’m tired of playing this reactionary game where a statist control proponent makes an emotional appeal based on misdirection or anecdotal “evidence†and we spend time refuting their ridiculous claims with actual facts and logic.

Let me make this clear:

First, empirical evidence clearly demonstrates that gun control laws have no positive effect on violent crime and in many cases actually result in an increase in crime rates.

Second, even if gun control laws did reduce violent crime, the measure of safety gained would not be worth the measure of liberty and personal responsibility lost. The purpose of gun control has nothing to do with guns and everything to do with control.

Third, the Second Amendment to the Constitution is not a privilege granted to some certain people by the government, it is an affirmation of natural rights that exist outside of governmental control, just like the rights to free speech, to worship freely, to be free from unreasonable search and seizure and so on. Government did not grant the right and therefore cannot revoke it.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:00 PM on 10/07/2009
- Toby Knops I'm a Fan of Toby Knops 4 fans permalink
photo

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Gun control does nothing to infringe these rights. What gun control does do is make people who have sacrificed their rights as citizens unable to purchase weapons that can be used for nefarious purposes. Background checks do not prevent people from being able to legally purchase guns, they are solely to prevent felons from doing so. If a non-felon is so aggrivated by having to wait a couple of days to purchase a semi-automatic weapon, I would rationally question their motivation in purchasing their weapon.

Also I'd like to see your empirical evidence. Reference it and cite it if you are going to use it to defend your position, otherwise anyone can make any claim.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:23 PM on 10/07/2009
- djcrsn I'm a Fan of djcrsn 17 fans permalink

Waiting periods are downright useless, but I do support the instant check system

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:53 PM on 10/07/2009
photo

Control = infringe.

Controlling which weapons are available to law abiding citizens does infringe on rights. Performing instant background checks does not infringe on the rights of those who have not forfeited those rights. Waiting periods are no more than annoying for most of us (thankfully there is no waiting period in AZ), but for a battered wife or the victim of a stalker, or anyone else who has just been the target of a violent crime, three hours may mean their life, let alone 30 days. Can you imagine the terror a person feels while their abusive ex lover repeatedly violates a restraining order and the gun store won’t sell them a gun for a month? So you would “rationally question their motivation?†Let me spell it out for you: stark terror of a physically powerful person intent on doing them harm. That’s their motivation. Would you prefer they get raped again or killed?

Do you know what semi-automatic means? Can you define the term?


Is APA format acceptable?

Kates, D. B. (2007). Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide? Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy , p649-694.
Lott, J. R. (1998). More Guns, Less Crime. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Roth, J. A. (1999). Impacts of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban: 1994–96. National Institute of Justice.
I hope that suffices for the scope of this discussion.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:04 PM on 10/07/2009
photo

Compare the violent crime statistics in Australia since they essentially disarmed their population, and before. Why should a legal purchaser have to wait when a police officer can pull you over for a speeding ticket and know everything about in less than 5 minutes? The background check system that firearms dealers use is the same way, bloomberg and his goons are the criminals here. They committed multiple felonies under 4 state jurisdictions, federal statutes plus violating the laws of the city that he is supposed to be the caretaker of.

The mayor is not a law enforcer, he is a politician. He is a city official and that is where his power is supposed to end. If he wants something done like this then needs to go to Commissioner Kelly and then he goes to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. It is there jurisdiction to investigate this since it is on a federal level and a gun equals a firearm so they go hand in hand.

bloomberg is a megalomaniac and needs to be brought up on charges by the states who's laws he violated. We know that no one in the obama administration would have the guts or the integrity to do anything about this.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:20 AM on 10/08/2009
photo

Don’t see a reply.

Game.

Set.

Match.

You statists don’t have a leg to stand on.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:16 PM on 10/08/2009
- Eris23 I'm a Fan of Eris23 43 fans permalink

It still won't get you the national stage, Mike. Your highest hopes peak out at Governor.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:51 PM on 10/07/2009
- Smirk I'm a Fan of Smirk 28 fans permalink
photo

Duh. Anything for a buck.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:03 PM on 10/07/2009

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect