Posted on 06/13/2007 9:49:13 AM PDT by kiriath_jearim
California regulates gun sales between private parties that take place at “gun shows”. Neighboring Nevada does not. Now a recent academic study indicates that unregulated private transactions at Nevada gun shows are behind an apparent pipeline of guns used in crimes in California.
The study was made by Dr. Garen Wintemute who directs the University of California at Davis Violence and Prevention Research Program. It was based on two years of observations at more than 24 gun shows in California, Nevada and three other states.
70% of the dealers at the Nevada gun shows lacked Federal Firearms licenses.
Nevada does not require background checks or that records be kept on private party sales at gun shows – unlike California.
At least two dozen “straw” purchases – firearms bought by one person but intended for another “prohibited” purchaser – were observed.
California lawmakers – aware of this problem – moved to regulate its gun shows several years ago.
But in States like Nevada, the N.R.A. has been successful in blocking similar efforts. The result is that criminals evade California gun shows to make their purchases where the N.R.A. actions protect them.
The gun show promoter who staged these events was quoted as saying that California style regulation will “only punish law-abiding citizens”. How a background check “punishes” the law abiding is not made clear.
When pressed, the gun show operator grew adamant. “Do you really think these laws are going to do anything to slow (criminals) down?”, he asked. Well, they have forced criminals out of California gun shows and into Nevada. A federal law might drive them out of gun shows altogether.
70% of the dealers unlicensed. Over two dozen “straw” sales that put guns in the hands of ex-felons. 4000 gun shows each year in the U.S.A.
But gun show regulation somehow hurts the “law abiding”? While no law ever stands in the way of America’s brilliant criminal class?? The truth is that laws which help us sort out the criminals from the law abiding (through background checks) also Keep firearms out of the hands of the latter. Who would oppose that?
Unlicensed gun dealers. Unscrupulous gun manufacturers. Second Amendment extremists?
[Bill Cavala was Deputy Director of the Assembly Speaker’s Office of Member Services where he worked for over 30 years. He attended undergraduate and graduate school in the 1960’s and received a doctorate in political science at UC Berkeley. He taught political science at UC Berkeley during the 1970's while he worked part-time for the State Assembly.
Cavala left teaching at UC Berkeley and went to work for Assembly Speaker Willie Brown in 1981 until his tenure as Speaker ended in 1995, and he has worked for his five successors as Speaker up to and including Speaker Fabian Nunez.
Mr. Cavala manages election campaigns for Democratic candidates.]
Link to the “academic study” mentioned by Cavala is here:
http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/newsroom/protected/index.html
Because 70% OF THE DEALERS SELL TEE SHIRTS, ACCESSORIES AND NO FIREARMS!!!
“70% of the dealers at the Nevada gun shows lacked Federal Firearms licenses.”
If they don’t have a Type 01 FFL, then they aren’t dealers!
Another impotent Berkely pseuo-intellectual. It ahas been illegal since 1968 for an individual to buy a gun from another individual, (not a resident of his own state) without it going through an FFL. He is probably an Osama Obama Hussein voter.
So this study took TWO YEARS and "observed" 24 straw sales. So one a month. And then doesn't explain why they thought these were straw sales.
I smell a bogus study. Not to mention a red herring.
Oh, and they consider one gun a month a pipeline?
And, they know this HOW? Did they actually see the "prohibited" purchaser exchange money for the gun?
They know he's prohibited from buying, HOW?
If it were SO easy to buy a gun at a gun show you would see 20/20, Dateline, et al doing hidden camera purchases ad nauseum.
Ever see them do a show like that? No, because it hardly ever happens, period.
bump
70% of the dealers at the Nevada gun shows lacked Federal Firearms licenses.
What does this stat mean? All “dealers” at gunshows could mean guys who sale book, parts, antiques, knives. Yeas there may be on 30% actual gun dealers there.
Or do they mean that 70% of those selling guns are not license.
The stat seems fishy, when I go to my local gun show everyone with an array of guns is license and does the back ground check.
Correct! As a California resident who lives close to the border, I have attended many Nevada gun shows. You CANNOT buy a firearm in Nevada unless you are a resident. The only way an out-of-stater can buy a firearm in Nevada is pay for it then have the firearm shipped to a FFL dealer in California where the Federal paperwork and background check is done. Then you can pick it up after a 10 day waiting period. I know, because I have done this.
And as another poster pointed out, most "dealers" at Nevada shows are selling t-shirts or equipment, not firearms. There are usually a few antique dealers there too selling pre-1898 firearms for which NO paperwork or Federal transfer is required under law.
“Unlicensed gun dealers. Unscrupulous gun manufacturers. Second Amendment extremists? “
Questionable statistic gathering practices aside- There is no such thing as a “Second Amendment extremist”.
You people in California have known how to bugger the system long enough for your own gains (not leveled at fellow freepers). Instead of crying “foul” whenever you think something’s wrong, exploit it as well. Make the system even.
Same goes for when they level their lawyers on rich people. If someone made money, they did something right! Imulate them, don’t punish them. They are examples.
Deregulate the economy and abolish gun control laws. The rest of this countries “problems” will likely level out.
Sure. Just like the Federal laws that keep drugs out of the hands of criminals.
Perhaps what this is really all about is establishing yet another black market on which organized crime can make tons of cash. I guess drugs and gambling aren't enough any more.
Hmmm. I’ll be in Vegas at the end of this month, perhaps I’ll pick up a gun or three.
This guy is a known anti-gun "researcher". Completed biased. This study is worthless.
Let’s just do away with background checks altogether. They presume guilt and its still illegal for felons to possess guns. All it does is make it hard for law abiding citizens to buy guns. Criminals won’t obey the law anyway, and it creates a barrier to entry (FFL) to the legal market. I remember walking into a store with my dad, and him putting his money on the counter and walking out with what would be today classified as an assault rife (M1 Carbine). That’s the way it should be, even for machine guns. Call me an absolutist, I guess.
Nevada does not require background checks or that records be kept on private party sales at gun shows – unlike California.
At least two dozen “straw” purchases – firearms bought by one person but intended for another “prohibited” purchaser – were observed.”
So there is a lack of a requirement to fill out 4474’s, records are not kept, yet they observed straw purchases in the absence of requirements or documentation. How?
From the “study” ...
“Also in Florida, Wintemute saw a woman in her twenties buying a rifle with a bayonet and 30-round magazine from a licensed retailer while her male partner, who had selected the firearm, stood 15 feet away while she completed the paperwork. As the background check was being run on her, the man talked with the retailer about the rifle and then bought ammunition for it once the background check had been completed.”
Ever had a knowledgeable friend along with you when purchasing a firearm? That’s what it looks like to me. Even so, so what? If the guy is a former felon and has lost his right to possess firearms, bust him! Meanwhile leave me alone, and cut the nonsense about this not hurting lawful business. The agenda of this puke is to end the sales of guns altogether. And don’t get me going as to why private party sales should be legal.
Here’s the compromise this guy and the other gun-grabbers would never accept.
Subject ALL gun transaction to a background check, but in a manner that the seller verifies the qualifications of the buyer, without the government ever knowing who made the purchase, or of what gun.
All I care about is that there are plenty (hundred million+) of guns that are not in the confiscation database. I don’t mind being carded for liquor or gun purchases.
But the gun grabbers really do want to have the database ready, so their storm troopers can knock down doors when they ban guns, and so that there will be less resistance when they load certain folks onto the boxcars.
I belong to a gun club in Washington State and regularly go to gun shows. I have purchased firearms from private parties and FFL dealers, it all depends on who is selling what and for how much.
At the gun shows I attend, if you are making a private party sale, you ask to see the drivers license of the person you are selling the firearm to make sure that they are a resident of this state. That way you aren't engaging in interstate commerce. If a California resident is buying firearms in Nevada for secret transport back into California there are probably dozens of existing regulations that are being violated and new laws won't make the purchaser respect the newest requirement anymore than the others.
A straw man purchase is absolutely illegal and at the gun shows I go to there are signs everywhere against doing this. The truly sad thing is that a father can't legally go into a store or show with his son and pick out and pay for a rifle of his son's choosing as a birthday present and be open and honest about it. That sucks in my minds.
"2 dozen strawman purchases that put guns in the hands of ex-felons..." I find it really hard to believe this statistic. If this really is prevalent, then there are existing laws that need to be enforced against those making the strawman purchases and against those felons possessing a firearm, both of which are federal offenses.
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.