Posted on 05/16/2010 11:23:11 AM PDT by rellimpank
Juan Cardona-Marquez can't legally buy a gun. He can't shoot one. He can't even touch one without committing a crime.
So how was it that the 22-year-old Milwaukee man - who threatened his girlfriend and was later charged with armed robbery and a string of burglaries - was able to rent a .45-caliber Glock handgun from Badger Guns and practice his aim on the store's shooting range?
The answer lies in a little-known quirk of federal gun laws.
Gun stores must check the criminal background of anyone buying a gun. But no check is required if someone rents a gun to use on the store's shooting range. In fact, a background check is not even allowed for rentals.
Prosecutors say a felon or other person legally barred from having a gun is breaking the law by handling one and could be charged. But they need proof.
"They can go and play with a gun, handle it, fire it, even take pictures with it to intimidate other people and nobody is going to know about it," said Joseph J. Vince Jr., a retired supervisor from the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
"If they have the gun in the store or out of the store, it is a danger to the public."
(Excerpt) Read more at jsonline.com ...
Yeah, ‘revamping’ is just a peachy idea. Let’s have the government that considers returning veterans, pro-lifers, and tea partiers to be potential terrorists ‘revamp’ the background check process. That’s one heck of a brilliant idea right there. I see where you get your user name.
You said in your nice little FreepMail to me that I don’t know you. Oh, but I do know you. You were a fervent Rudy Giulliani supporter who assured us all that his anti-gun past was behind him. And now, you’re here trying to ‘save us all’ from some non-existent problem of gun range suicides by doing background checks on everyone who wants to rent a gun. And to top it all off, you’re using the liberal tactic of telling everyone who questions your idea that they must be for guns in the hands of crazy people.
I know exactly who and what you are. It’s ‘common-sense regulation’, you’ll say. You’ll tell us you ‘have no problem’ with guns, yet you seem to want to make it more difficult for us to have or use them. On this particular thread, you even make the laughable assertion that you are a gun owner yourself who would ‘feel safer on the range’ if there was a background check.
I don’t know about any of the rest of my fellow FReepers, but I’ve never felt unsafe on a gun range in my life. In fact, I feel a hell of a lot safer there than I do in a ‘gun free school zone’.
What would make ME feel safer is if people like you would just mind your own damn business and leave our constitutional rights alone. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is pretty clear language.
No. They are Domestic Enemies that are an active threat to the rest of us.
Pull your head out of your arse, right now.
Seriously.
How do you propose to do the check without telling the government that the "law abiding sane people" are going to the gun range?"
How do you propose to do the check without telling the government that the "law abiding sane people" are going to the gun range?"
Hasn't been but since 1986 that they would *sell* a gun to anyone who walked in the door. I have a nice 1911A1 that was the last gun I bought from a dealer before the "background check" became manadatory for handguns, and a "serious social purposes" shotgun that I got before the check was required for long arms. Plus a nice WW-II carbine that I bought with no check, since it was from a private seller, not a dealer.
The receiver for my AR also did not require a background check, even though I bought it just over a year ago. Bought it from a dealer too.
Brain fade. That was when you could last buy a newly made machine gun. 1994 was when the "Brady law" went into effect requiring all those useless background checks. So 16+ years ago. Out of the 219 years since the Bill of Rights was passed.
But that pressure from the left will NEVER abate. Their goal is totalitarianism. Not saying that necessarily with reference to this issue, just an observation how the left works.
Yeah. But this same Milwaukee Sun Sentinel would be slobbering all over this thug, working to keep him from being DEPORTED!!!
You keep saying that as if it means something. After they've paid their debt to society, what other rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights (among others) do you wish to deny to these individuals?
As long as him aim is good there shouldn't be too much splatter into your stall.
So does letting just anyone that is born in this country just speak their mind. I mean, we should at least run them through a government check to see if they have badmouthed the government before allowing them to exercise their first amendment rights. Then we'll issue them a Free Speech permit.
I know where you’re coming from with this but if the cops were really all that worried about it they’d position an officer there to catch felons who rent guns.
Having shot at that Shoot Straight and the one in Apopka my biggest worry isn’t the gang bangers but the wackos who want to off themselves.
In the case of the mom and the son, frankly what was the son thinking about taking his unstable mom to the range? And then there is the Baker Act itself. Anyone can pretty much have someone “Baker Acted”. The fact that they’ve been Baker Acted doesn’t mean they’re loony or even been committed, only that they’ve been taken into a sort of protective custody until their competence can be judged. At that time if they are committed then I think they have to be truthful when asked if they’ve ever been committed. But if they are judged to be competent and released then why should they be on any list for any reason just because they’ve been Baker Acted?
I don’t know if there is a happy medium. Frankly, I just go to the range and watch who’s in there for a few minutes. If I don’t like what I see, I’ll wait :-)
Most gun clubs have membership fees. The one I shoot at, you must be a member to rent a gun: period end of story. They will not rent to a non-member.
I see no problem in denying a rental unless a member comes and signs off on the mental stability of their guest.
Easy way to weed out the nuts and wackos without infringing on my rights
Maybe the range needs a decon shower to wash off the possibly infectious blood borne pathogens.
Usually it’s liberals that draw stupid equivalencies between non-related things. Grats!
My position is that from the standpoint of a gun shop owner, my liability is decreased if I am able to ascertain who is coming in the store to rent a gun for range use. Many ranges are organized by “clubs” who know who their members are. If I owned a range in an “urban” area, I would be disinclined from a cost/benefit standpoint to renting to whomever walked in off the street.
LOL! I didn’t even notice your typos ;-)
The shower would be a great idea! This same range had a guy from across town show up, rent a gun and off himself about 7 or 8 years ago. Then recently the mom, son and I think one or two other guys. Copycats.
The range said they’d love to do backgrounds but the state isn’t equipped to handle it.
Actually the NRA isn’t for that at all. The NRA is for the idea if a person is safe enough to walk the streets, they have every Right as an American citizen.
If a person is so crazy and/or that dangerous, they should be behind bars where they belong.
And now, I’ll have to explain the facts of life to you that your parents forgot to tell you. People die. Stupid people die in stupid ways. There is no way to idiot proof every building roof so no one can jump off. No car in the world that can’t kill the occupants if the driver so chooses.
Stupid people can cut their wrists with broken bottles, jump off bridges, drink gasoline and paint thinner and stick their heads into plastic bags.
So quit legislating my guns.
Well you got me there. My view is colored by the fact that I think we let felons off far too easy as it is. I’m always in favor of increasing the penalty. That’s one of the reasons why I would be glad to deny them the right to bear arms. You commit a felony, you lose your civil rights. It’s as simple as that. Another is that I just don’t trust them.
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.