The March 14th Associated Press Exclusive story entitled "Pentagon gun was from Tenn. Police" is a perfect example of our failed gun policies in the United States. Lets review the simple facts. Because there is no national law requiring a criminal background check for all gun sales in the United States, including private sales in 33 States and at thousands of annual gun shows, John Patrick Bedell, with a long history of mental illness, was able to buy his two handguns at a Las Vegas gun show without a background check and then shoot Military Guards at the Pentagon. Incredibly one of the weapons, a 9mm Ruger had been confiscated from a convicted felon by the Memphis Tenn. police at a 2005 traffic stop and then traded to a gun dealer by the Department to raise money for the Memphis Police budget. The weapon then made it's way to a private gun seller at a Nevada gun show and the rest is history.
Unfortunately, it's not uncommon for Police departments to resell their service weapons. In fact, gun dealers will pay a premium for police weapons and then resell them to "private gun dealers" and criminals who perversely covet former police weapons. Many police departments like Boston have stopped this dangerous and short sighted resale practice and hopefully the Pentagon shooting will encourage all police departments across the US to follow their lead.
It's equally common for criminals and terrorists to exploit the same private gun sale loophole that the Pentagon shooter, John Bedell used. At thousands gun shows each year in the US, criminals and terrorists are allowed to purchase firearms from private gun dealers without an ID or background check. Although many dealers at gun shows are federally licensed and therefore legally required to contact the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NCIS) to ensure that a prospective purchaser is not prohibited from possessing firearms, private sellers have no such requirement. This dangerous "gun show loophole" has allowed criminals and terrorists to legally buy and sell guns in the US on a cash-and-carry, no-questions-asked basis for years. The following are just a few proven and frightening examples of how terrorists and criminals have bought guns undetected at US Gun Shows.
A manual titled, "How Can I Train Myself for Jihad" was found among the rubble at a training facility for a radical Pakistan-based Islamic terrorist organization. The manual contains a chapter on "Firearms Training" and singles out the US for its easy availability of firearms and states that al-Qaeda members in the US can "obtain an assault weapon legally, preferably AK-47 or variations". In Texas, Muhammad Asrar was arrested in an investigation of the Sept. 11 attacks. He pleaded guilty to immigration violations and illegal possession of ammunition. The Pakistani store owner said he had bought handguns, rifles and a submachine gun at gun shows since 1994. On September 10, 2001, just one day before the devastating attacks against the United States, Ali Boumelhem was convicted on a variety of weapons violations plus conspiracy to ship weapons to the terrorist organization Hezbollah in Lebanon. He and his brother Mohamed had purchased an arsenal of shotguns, hundreds of rounds of ammunition, flash suppressors and assault weapons parts from Michigan gun shows without undergoing background checks.
On April 20, 1999, in the deadliest High school shooting in United States history in Littleton Colorado, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold procured two shotguns, an assault rifle and a TEC-9 assault pistol and shot 26 students, killing 13 of them before turning the guns on themselves. Subsequent investigation by the ATF found that all four of the weapons had been purchased from private sellers at gun shows. Some of the guns were purchased for the killers by their friend, Robyn Anderson. Later, Ms. Anderson would state publicly that, had she been required to undergo a background check at the gun show, she would not have purchased the guns for the teens.
Branch Davidian cult leader David Koresh used Texas gun shows to make large gun purchases. According to an ATF arrest warrant, Koresh and his cult made "regular purchases of weapons and ammunition [from] flea markets and gun shows." In the end, authorities estimated that Koresh had at least 200 automatic and semi-automatic assault rifles stockpiled, plus thousands of rounds of ammunition. Finally Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh, was a "Private Seller" at Gun Shows. He along with accomplice Michael Fortier, admitted to stealing $60,000 worth of shotguns, rifles and handguns from an Arkansas gun collector's ranch and then reselling the stolen weapons at gun shows.
It's just common sense that buyers and sellers at gun shows be required to abide by the same reasonable standards that law abiding gun buyers and the majority of Federally Licensed gun dealers comply with. It's not too much to ask that criminals, terrorists and people with a history of mental illness who have been known to exploit the "Gun Show Loophole" undergo criminal background checks and show ID's before they buy guns in the US. The majority of Americans including gun owners like myself support closing this dangerous loophole. It's time for the President and Congress to act.
And all such purchases were legal. Do those purchases justify a heavily armed raid, especially when Koresh offered to let the ATF inspect his compound and weapons?
"Finally Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh, was a "Private Seller" at Gun Shows."
Seeing as he never used gun during the commision of his crimes, this point is rather moot.
It is rather common for police departments to sell old service weapons to licensed dealers in order to lessen the cost to the taxpayers for the purchase of new service weapons.
I got no problem with that whatsoever.
I sure would like to know where you came up with this "fact". It seems highly improbable that a gun dealer would purchase such arms at a premium becuse some person who can legally purchase them will do so at a premium because he, in turn, intends to sell them to a criminal who will pay a premium merely because they were supposedly owned by the police. How does the crook know that they were actually police weapons and thus agree to pay extra for same, even assuming arguendo he would even care that the Glock he is purchasing is a former police weapon or not?
Simply put John, your "fact" does not pass the smell test.
What's with the initial caps? Is "Military Guard" a proper noun?
As I recall, there was not a single automatic weapon found anywhere in the compound.
Old SF MJT
Why is this unfortunate?
So just to make sure we are all clear on the details, let's reiterate. Opponents of privave, non-NICS firearm transactions are also opposed to granting civilian access to the same NICS which they are demanding every firearms transaction go through. If the antis are so concerned about me selling my property to Bob down the block wihtout having Bob go through a background check, why would they oppose me having access to NICS so I could run a background check on Bob to meke sure he is legally allowed to own a gun?
I can think of only one scenario which would explain their opposition to civilian, non-FFL access to NICS: it simply doesn't fit their agenda of controlling the types and quantities of firearms available to civilians and has nothing to do with a genuine concern for public safety.
So, John. Where do YOU stand on non-FFL access to NICS? I think we've asked you this question before and have yet to receive a response.
I mean non-FFL access to NICS. FFL holders typically ARE civilians.
Law abiding firearm buyers don't have to go through a background check. They only time they do is if they buy from an FFL. Purchases from garage sales, friends, classified "want ads", etc do not require background checks.
1. They procured the firearms well before 20 April, 1999.
2. There was no assault rifle present. Assault rifles are full-autos.
3. There is no term "assault pistol". You are thinking of "assault weapon".
And why exactly is this perverse?
"Later, Ms. Anderson would state publicly that, had she been required to undergo a background check at the gun show, she would not have purchased the guns for the teens. "
And she is lying. She already knowingly bought firearms for them fully aware that they wanted her to do so so they would avoid police attention (even though the boys could have passed a check themselves).