Straw Purchases and Reporting Stolen Firearms
The gunloons are in a tizzy about proposed legislation which compells gunowners to report stolen firearms within a certain time period.
The purpose of such legislation is to put a damper on straw purchases–where a person who cannot legally purchase a firearm has a surrogate purchase the weapon for him or her. Currently, a such firearms may be used in crimes and the straw purchaser can claim the weapon was stolen–after the fact. Thus, there is little chance of a straw purchaser being prosecuted. And where do many criminals get their guns?
In fact, there are a number of sources that allow guns to fall into the wrong hands, with gun thefts at the bottom of the list. Wachtel says one of the most common ways criminals get guns is through straw purchase sales. A straw purchase occurs when someone who may not legally acquire a firearm, or who wants to do so anonymously, has a companion buy it on their behalf. According to a 1994 ATF study on “Sources of Crime Guns in Southern California,” many straw purchases are conducted in an openly “suggestive” manner where two people walk into a gun store, one selects a firearm, and then the other uses identification for the purchase and pays for the gun. Or, several underage people walk into a store and an adult with them makes the purchases. Both of these are illegal activities.
The next biggest source of illegal gun transactions where criminals get guns are sales made by legally licensed but corrupt at-home and commercial gun dealers. Several recent reports back up Wachtel’s own studies about this, and make the case that illegal activity by those licensed to sell guns, known as Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs), is a huge source of crime guns and greatly surpasses the sale of guns stolen from John Q. Citizen. Like bank robbers, who are interested in banks, gun traffickers are interested in FFLs because that’s where the guns are. This is why FFLs are a large source of illegal guns for traffickers, who ultimately wind up selling the guns on the street.
What’s alarming about “law-abiding” gunloons is the excuses employed. One has claimed he doesn’t check his firearms daily. This excuse doesn’t really fly because how often is one’s home broken into, burgled, and the homeowner hasn’t a clue?
Some newspapers have gone as far as to publish CCW holders, these people could be prone to targeted burglaries where the burglar doesn’t disturb the house, and only takes firearms.
.
It’s not like we break out the guns every single day, a handgun for defense maybe, but most of them stay in their closet along with a desiccant pack.
.
If you only go shooting in the weekend (and still, who goes to the rage every single weekend, or hunting for that matter) it could really take up to a week before you even realize that anything’s missing.
Comment by Michael Hawkins — October 23, 2007 @ 6:35 am
Some newspapers have gone as far as to publish CCW holders, these people could be prone to targeted burglaries where the burglar doesn’t disturb the house, and only takes firearms.
Seems to me, you’re knocking down the gunloon argument that owning and carrying a firearm makes you less likely to be a crime victim.
Again, it’s highly doubtful a thief surreptitiously gains entrance into your home, steals only the firearms and leaves without a trace. Criminals simply aren’t going to ignore any cash or valuables you might have.
Look, if you’re not home–why aren’t your firearms locked up and/or hidden?
Comment by Administrator — October 23, 2007 @ 12:51 pm
Actually, gun owners are more likely to be victim of crime, or so the Bradies keep telling us.
Cash? Sure, but what other valuables are you talking about? a 100lbs TV that could net him a couple of hundred bucks? A bulky stereo system? How do those match up to a $500 to $1500 handgun which you slip into you pocket and nobody’s the wiser?
.
They SHOULD be locked up, bur locks can be picked or forced without any obvious signs, keys could be found around the house.
.
Now I know this comes across as “gunloonie paranoia”, but truth is that gun owners get the book thrown at them all too often as they get singled out by DA’s and judges who want to get though on “gun criminals”
This is just another law with plenty of “disproportionate use” potential.
.
Now, if it were to specify a certain amount of guns on several occasions, under set conditions (obvious burglary, robbery, …) then it would be meeting much less resistance from our part.
Comment by Michael Hawkins — October 23, 2007 @ 1:21 pm
Actually, gun owners are more likely to be victim of crime, or so the Bradies keep telling us
Actually, the stats tell us this, indicating gunowners are disproportionately involved with criminal activity.
Again, a thief in your home is going to steal whatever is of value. And he’s likely not going to be too concerned with you not noticing he’s been there–why should he be? If he gets arrested, he’s not going to get leniency for being neat.
Comment by Administrator — October 23, 2007 @ 2:30 pm