Gun Seller's Case Reveals Hurdles Of Enforcement

PARKVILLE, Md. -- Sanford M. Abrams began selling guns from his shop in Baltimore County in 1996 and almost immediately started losing track of them.

In 1997, he couldn't account for 45. In 2001, it was 133. In 2003, there were 422 firearms missing -- more than a quarter of his inventory -- including semiautomatic assault rifles, 12-gauge shotguns and Glock 9mm pistols, according to federal investigators.

This year, a decade after he started losing track of guns, Abrams's store lost its firearms license. But he still intends to sell guns.

Tale of Abrams and his Valley Gun Shop -- which regulators describe in court records as "a serial violator" that has "endangered the public" -- illustrates the difficulty government regulators face in shutting down even those dealers found to have persistently flouted the nation's gun laws. The controversy is the subject of fierce debate in Congress.

Abrams, a member of the National Rifle Association's board of directors, did not dispute the substance of more than 900 violations of federal gun laws filed against his store. But he called them unintentional recordkeeping errors that posed no threat to public safety and said it is impossible for anyone to comply with all firearms regulations.

Dispute has heightened scrutiny of new federal legislation, strongly backed by the NRA, that federal officials said would cripple their ability to revoke gun licenses. The bill, which would make it more difficult to close down gun shops without evidence of criminal intent, also could allow Valley Gun to resume sales of firearms, the lawmaker sponsoring the measure said.

Even if the bill is defeated, Abrams plans to use a provision in existing law to sell 700 guns left over from his shop's inventory at a soon-to-be-opened store called Just Guns, which will sell them on consignment.

The record keeping is pretty much Rule One through Rule Ten in the business, and anyone who doesn't can't be trusted to have a dealer's license, plain and simple.

Re-read Rule # 2 for the Federal Government.

I seem to recall a fellow named John Lee Malvo who not too long ago went on a shooting spree. Caused a lot of damage, both in the original crime (killing and terrorizing folks), and in the more intangible, but equally important public perception of gun owners.

I doubt any of us would care to be lumped in with the likes of Malvo but, in some eyes, lumped in we are. During the subsequent investigation it was revealed that the weapon used by Malvo came from a Washington state gun store (Bullseye Shooters Supply). It turns out that the AR-15 that was used by Malvo and Muhammad "fell through the cracks" at Bullseye (records show it shipped to the store, but no paper trail of it leaving the store). Damn!

The criminal incompetence of folks who have no business dealing in guns left all of us open to the gun-grabbers who weren't hesitant to seize upon the opportunity to characterize us all as J.L. Malvo's. I can see your point DB - We have to work from within the structure as it exists, not how we would like it to exist. As much as I see the desirability of this legislation, if you're going to be dealing in guns show some freaking common sense!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.