How to prevent straw purchases?

[mbw]

Jim Wrote-

"My question is how to relieve the political pressure for an "assault weapons ban" while limiting the damage".

Answer-Demand proof of the problem before you enter into a discussion about how to solve a problem that may, or may not exist. Do not accept hearsay as evidence of the supposed problem. Let's see some real evidence with names, locations, numbers of weapons, types of weapons etc.

[tesla]

I don't think anyone in this forum believes that Mexicans are getting machine guns and other weapons of war from the U.S. We all know how difficult and expensive it is for a non-LEO to acquire a machine gun here.

What is ending up in Mexico is a certain number of handguns and semi-auto rifles from the U.S.

The strategic problem that the supporters of the RKBA have is that we don't have the political means to stop something from being done at the federal level. It takes only a bare majority to pass legislation in the House, and the Republicans can barely sustain a filibuster in the Senate.

My question is how to relieve the political pressure for an "assault weapons ban" while limiting the damage.

IOW, if you were running the NRA-ILA, what would do?

- Jim

Not all Democrats are anti-gun - http://www.nraila.org/media/PDFs/AWBLet ... der309.pdf

Are you certain that vigorously pointing out the cynical and illogical nature of their argument would really fail? I'm not, not yet... Perhaps I'm wrong, I'm certainly no Washington lobbyist. I do know, however, that I'm going to need some more convincing before I'm ready to admit defeat and beat a strategic retreat in the face of such a specious argument.

Increased enforcement of current laws? Yes, please.
Cash rewards for informants? Nice way of achieving the above. Love it!
New government powers, bureaucracies, and/or databases to control the sale and possession of guns? Umm, no thanks.

[seamusTX]

Are you certain that vigorously pointing out the cynical and illogical nature of their argument would really fail?

It has never worked before.

The 1994 AWB contained a provision that required the CDC to report on the effectiveness of the ban. They came to the conclusion that it had no demonstrable effect on crime.
I'm not sure if this is the study, but it contains similar conclusions: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In summary, the Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence

(This is about as clear a statement as you will get from the CDC.)

This has not stopped anti-RKBA congressmen and other public officials from continuing to call for another AWB and other "gun control" measures. The resistance of those "blue dog" Democrats may be the only factor preventing it now.

I don't think an AWB is a foregone conclusion. I already stated what I think may happen.

We are also losing ground in the court of public opinion. As little as I watch TV, I keep hearing about "machine guns" going from the U.S. to Mexico. That is either a lie or a statement made out of ignorance. I don't see what we can do other than write letters to the editor and maybe call it to radio talk shows -- both of which we should be doing.

- Jim

[Oldgringo]

I don't think anyone in this forum believes that Mexicans are getting machine guns and other weapons of war from the U.S. We all know how difficult and expensive it is for a non-LEO to acquire a machine gun here.

What is ending up in Mexico is a certain number of handguns and semi-auto rifles from the U.S.

The strategic problem that the supporters of the RKBA have is that we don't have the political means to stop something from being done at the federal level. It takes only a bare majority to pass legislation in the House, and the Republicans can barely sustain a filibuster in the Senate.

My question is how to relieve the political pressure for an "assault weapons ban" while limiting the damage.

IOW, if you were running the NRA-ILA, what would do?

- Jim

Not all Democrats are anti-gun - http://www.nraila.org/media/PDFs/AWBLet ... der309.pdf

Are you certain that vigorously pointing out the cynical and illogical nature of their argument would really fail? I'm not, not yet... Perhaps I'm wrong, I'm certainly no Washington lobbyist. I do know, however, that I'm going to need some more convincing before I'm ready to admit defeat and beat a strategic retreat in the face of such a specious argument.

Increased enforcement of current laws? Yes, please.
Cash rewards for informants? Nice way of achieving the above. Love it!
New government powers, bureaucracies, and/or databases to control the sale and possession of guns? Umm, no thanks.

I think we're all on the same page. The objective is to fix our problem, and we do have a problem, before someone else fixes it for us.

[anygunanywhere]

The answer is not more laws.

The answer is ETHICS.

BUSINESS ETHICS.

If someone who barely speaks english wants to buy your whole stock of ARs and wants to pay with cash call the ATF. We all know about the massive spike in firearms sales recently.

Firearms dealers must take the lead in reporting suspected straw purchases.

FIREARM OWNER ETHICS.

Firearms owners, us, we, must report abuses to the ATF. Put the local ATF number in your cell phone. Call the number and speak to an agent. Tell them you want to verify the correct number to call to report a suspected straw purchase or the like.

The only thing more despicable than a politician that wants to take away our 2A rights is a firearms smuggler.

Anygunanywhere

[jimlongley]

The answer is not more laws.

The answer is ETHICS.

. . .

The only thing more despicable than a politician that wants to take away our 2A rights is a firearms smuggler.

Anygunanywhere

And you cannot legislate ethics, or honest politicians.

[ClarkLZeuss]

I haven't read this entire thread, so sorry if this has already been said. But here's my thought: since straw purchases are almost definitely made with cash, maybe these should be treated differently by the gun store or the NICS check. You know, like when someone purchases a one-way plane ticket with cash at the airport, on the day of the flight, with no luggage, they get a little extra attention from the TSA.

I hate to even mention the dreaded word "registration," but I think that may be the first real concrete step in this process. Think of it this way: if they make a law that your name / DL / SSN will be recorded with the serial number of the gun, and that any crime committed with that gun lies at your feet (UNLESS you report the gun missing), I think that would deter straw purchasers quite a bit. For while they may have no conscience problem with helping gang members get guns, they probably also want to stay out of trouble. By keeping their identity matched to the guns they help buy, they can no longer remain anonymous suppliers. Then, if there is a pattern of multiple purchases and multiple reports of theft, send in the BATFE to interview the purchaser.

I'm new to gun ownership, so this may actually be a horrible idea, I don't know. Just the first thing I thought of.

[Purplehood]

If someone who barely speaks english wants to buy your whole stock of ARs and wants to pay with cash call the ATF. We all know about the massive spike in firearms sales recently.Anygunanywhere

So if my ex comes up to the counter and orders every AR in sight, and does it in flawless, unaccented English (which she taught as a HS teacher) are you going to let her slide? After all, she was born in Mexico.

[Oldgringo]

I haven't read this entire thread, so sorry if this has already been said. But here's my thought: since straw purchases are almost definitely made with cash, maybe these should be treated differently by the gun store or the NICS check. You know, like when someone purchases a one-way plane ticket with cash at the airport, on the day of the flight, with no luggage, they get a little extra attention from the TSA.

I hate to even mention the dreaded word "registration," but I think that may be the first real concrete step in this process. Think of it this way: if they make a law that your name / DL / SSN will be recorded with the serial number of the gun, and that any crime committed with that gun lies at your feet (UNLESS you report the gun missing), I think that would deter straw purchasers quite a bit. For while they may have no conscience problem with helping gang members get guns, they probably also want to stay out of trouble. By keeping their identity matched to the guns they help buy, they can no longer remain anonymous suppliers. Then, if there is a pattern of multiple purchases and multiple reports of theft, send in the BATFE to interview the purchaser.

I'm new to gun ownership, so this may actually be a horrible idea, I don't know. Just the first thing I thought of.

Registration is beyond a horrible idea! Your and my name, etc. would be attached to any gun we buy, sell, trade, gift, etc; and, I'm not a lawbreaker, how about you?

The cash purchase idea crossed my mind also.

[seamusTX]

I hate to even mention the dreaded word "registration," but I think that may be the first real concrete step in this process. Think of it this way: if they make a law that your name / DL / SSN will be recorded with the serial number of the gun, and that any crime committed with that gun lies at your feet (UNLESS you report the gun missing), ...

We're halfway there now.

When you buy a firearm from an FFL, your name, address, etc., and the serial number of the firearm are recorded on the Form 4473. That form stays in the dealer's hands until he goes out of business, at which time it goes to BATFE.

Under current law, that data should not go into any electronic database.

If a weapon is found in association with a crime, the police can request a trace. BATFE then manually tracks the weapon from the manufacturer to the first retail purchaser.

At that point, the police can contact the first retail purchaser and ask him what he knows about the weapon. He may say that it was stolen or he sold it to a private party whose name he did not record. Unless the police have some other evidence linking that person to the crime, that becomes a dead end.

What some lawmakers propose to fix that perceived problem is requiring all private purchases to go through an FFL, and make it an offense to fail to report the loss or theft of a weapon.

Those steps would make legitimately sold second-hand weapons traceable. If someone claims that a weapon was stolen and he didn't report it, prosecutors can then put pressure on him to see if he can remember selling it.

If someone reports a stolen weapon every month, there's obviously something fishy going on.

Some states have these measures already. There is no evidence that they reduce straw purchases or criminal use of firearms.

Part of the reason that they don't work is the huge number of firearms already in private hands in the U.S. -- hundreds of millions -- that have been bought and sold privately or inherited with no paper trail. There is no way to link those weapons to an owner.

Our side is rightfully concerned about misuse of gun registration. For example, if someone was shot with a .40-caliber bullet, does every owner of a .40-caliber pistol who could possibly have committed the crime become a suspect?

- Jim

[ClarkLZeuss]

Yeah, listening to you guys, and playing out the logical consequences of registration, probably means bad news for legitimate gun owners. But I think what has to happen is to get real familiar with the common habits of straw purchasers. Cash purchases seems like one indicator. So what could be done from there? And what are some other habits?

[jimlongley]

I hate to even mention the dreaded word "registration,"

. . .

I'm new to gun ownership, so this may actually be a horrible idea, I don't know. Just the first thing I thought of.

More than being a horrible idea, it's not just a first step down a slippery slope, it's the first step off a cliff.

[seamusTX]

... I think what has to happen is to get real familiar with the common habits of straw purchasers. Cash purchases seems like one indicator. So what could be done from there? And what are some other habits?

BATFE has plenty of material on profiling straw purchasers. Some of the characteristics are

• buyer being coached by another person
• nervous, apprehensive buyer
• obviously unfamiliar with firearms
• not trying to negotiate the price
• not interested in details of the weapon
• not trying the action

The question is what to do when a straw buyer is suspected. BATFE can question him, and they sometimes do. The straw buyer might crack when the agent explains that straw purchases get a 10-year prison sentence, and prosecutors can offer him a break for turning in his contact or participating in a sting.

I don't what they can do beyond that, under current law.

- Jim

[ninemm]

On the federal grand jury on which I served, we had a dozen or so cases where a straw buyer was purchasing a gun for a convicted felon at a gun show. According to the testimony of the ATF agent (as I remember it) it seems like every time, the felon for whom the gun was being purchased waited in the car (rather than going into the show - for fear of being recognized). The ATF agents said that is was fairly easy for them to spot straw buyers (using many of the signs seamusTX mentioned above). When the buyer got to the car, the first thing they did was to give the gun to the felon. The ATF agents would then arrest both the buyer and the person receiving the gun. I can't remember exactly what the charge was for the straw buyer but the felon was charged with unlawful possession the instant he touched the gun. He also most likely had his probation revoked. I don't recall any cases where the straw buyer went to the parking lot, put his purchases in the trunk or behind the seat and drove away alone. I think the only ones who got caught were the ones so stupid as to have the felon in the car waiting. This was three or four years ago. Maybe by now, ATF agents can also recognize the actions of straw purchasers who are smart enough to go to the gun show alone.

[seamusTX]

Thanks for the insights.

- Jim