Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

FL: "Straw Purchase" v. Discrimination Crossfire Demonstrated
Gun Watch ^ | 25 November, 2016 | Dean Weingarten

Posted on 11/29/2016 4:13:54 AM PST by marktwain



Two teenagers go into a gun store. One is white. The other is black, and a Muslim. The white teen is advising the black teen on what to buy. Is it a "Straw Purchase"? Several stores have been sued for millions of dollars because they legally sold a gun to someone who later committed a crime.

Gun retailers have been exhorted to be careful in who they sell to. They have been told to exercise judgment. They have been told that when in doubt, refuse to sell. The Reese family in New Mexico, had their lives ruined, and spent a year in jail on such charges.

This is a pincer movement from gun haters. When a retailer refuses to sell because they are uncomfortable, they will be labeled as discriminatory. Gun retailers have, quite deliberately, been put into a no-win scenario. The "discrimination" side of this squeeze play was demonstrated in Florida at a Bass Pro store. From wcjb.com:
Bakr said, "There was an older gentleman there and he was kind of looking at me and I thought it was kind of strange, I told him something was kind of shady because he was staring at me and staring at the dude that was working with me."

Bakr went through the entire firearms buying process, and paid the $5 for the background check.

"That's when he told me he didn't feel comfortable selling me the firearm because he said that since I was with Heath, they thought I was going to buy it and give it to somebody younger," Bakr said. However, Smiley is 19, and has been sold guns before
.
The whole idea of stopping criminals and miscreants from obtaining guns by doing checks at the retail level is flawed.  It does not accomplish its stated purpose, because it is so easily circumvented.

If a person wants a gun to do evil, they are either legally prohibited or not. If they are not prohibited, they can buy a gun.  If they are prohibited, they can have someone else buy for them or purchase a gun that is stolen or manufactured in the black market.  There are nearly 400 million guns existent in the United States. Retail checks have been shown themselves to be ineffective in preventing crime in any measurable way.

What retail checks do is make it difficult for marginally motivated buyers, such as Bakr, to become gun owners. The vast majority of people prevented from buying guns are not a threat to anyone.  The effect of retail background checks is a chilling of the exercise of the Second Amendment.

The history of infringements on the Second Amendment is a history of racial discrimination.   Robert Sherrill, in The Saturday Night Special, wrote that the purpose of the 1968 Gun Control Act, which initiated the national regulation of guns at the retail level, was to keep guns from inner city black people.

The approach did not work, and it never has worked.  The crime and homicide rate skyrocketed after the 1968 law was passed. It did not come down until the revolution in legalizing concealed carry was underway.

We would be better served by repealing the entire 1968 law, and concentrating on removing guns from those who are legally prohibited from having them.

That is the approach used by project Exile.  It is the approach promoted by Harvard scholar David Kennedy.   It requires that police work with communities to concentrate on bad actors. This results in more legitimacy for the police.  When that happens, there are spectacular reductions in homicides.  It is the opposite of the approach in the Barack Obama administration, which promotes the de-legitimization of police.  That approach has resulted in the Ferguson Effect, enormous increases in urban homicides, and increased homicides of police officers.

Donald Trump has mentioned project Exile. He would do well to bring David Kennedy on board as a crime policy advisor.

Repealing the counterproductive GCA 1968 would be a positive step. I do not expect it in a Trump first term.

©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Link to Gun Watch


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; Politics; Society
KEYWORDS: banglist; discrimination; ffl; strawpurchase
The BATFE says go ahead, discriminate all you want, we will not do anything against you!

Then the Social Justice Warriors file lawsuits.

It is a pincer strategy.

1 posted on 11/29/2016 4:13:54 AM PST by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marktwain

On a few of the We Like Shooting Podcasts, Jeremy (a FFL) happily says that he has refused to sell, and said that the ATF encourages this.
That the ATF and FFLs work in concert with each other to prevent unauthorized hands from getting firearms.

Of course, his shop is in rural Ohio.
The SJWs wouldn’t last 5 minutes there.


2 posted on 11/29/2016 4:26:15 AM PST by RandallFlagg (Vote for your guns!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Repeal 1986 and 1934 GCAs as well.


3 posted on 11/29/2016 4:38:19 AM PST by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (Reverse Wickard v Filburn (1942) - and - ISLAM DELENDA EST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Anyone can understand why a gun shop in Florida would be nervous about selling a gun to a Muslim at this time.


4 posted on 11/29/2016 5:07:18 AM PST by MNDude (God is not a Republican, but Satan is certainly a Democrat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
Then the Social Justice Warriors file lawsuits.

Screw these people.
We need to get back to "We reserve the right to refuse service" and it doesn't matter whether you're black, white, yellow or brown.
It might be that I don't like the political slogan on your shirt. No sale, go find another gun store.
Not baking your cake, not renting my space for your queer "wedding".

DOJ needs to get out of our lives.

5 posted on 11/29/2016 6:07:25 AM PST by grobdriver (Where is Wilson Blair when you need him?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grobdriver

I agree. The simplist solution may be a Supreme Court that protects freedom of association as a Constitutional right under the Tenth Amendment.

The entire idea of “discrimination” as a concept that has criminal or civil penalties for private actors needs to be torn our by the roots.


6 posted on 11/29/2016 6:32:31 AM PST by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide

I think you mean repeal the 1968 Gun Control Law. The law Reagan signed was designed to alleviate the onerous provisions of the 1968 law, namely the ammo registration books and the saw against rifles and shotguns being sold across state lines. Unfortunately we lost the right to buy new machine guns at the same time.
Still can’t buy a handgun across state lines.

I still remember the good old days when a teen could march into a gun or hardware store, gas station, clothing store, grocery store and buy a firearm and ammo, no questions asked. Cash and carry. Or drop a letter in the mail and have one shipped to you.


7 posted on 11/29/2016 7:35:47 AM PST by Ruy Dias de Bivar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

I cannot imagine how the bakers, and florists would view the cruel and unusual punishments heaped upon them by virtue of their desire to serve whom they will, and not who they are forced to serve. Common sense alone dictates man will not be forced by any law to go against his life principles. Thus freedom of association must be a right, or man is a slave.

Perhaps as an example one could use the entire Bill of individual Rights. The third says we are not force to house soldiers without our consent. Surely that might apply to anyone, not just soldiers? The fourth, seventh, eighth, ninth and tenth amendments also have merit.

The legal system such as it is has been turned upside down by the abandonment of long held common sense and tradition.


8 posted on 11/29/2016 7:38:32 AM PST by wita (Always and forever, under oath in defense of Life, Liberty and. the pursuit of Happiness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar

Teen characteristics have made some drastic changes since you and I were one of that crowd. I can remember strangers at the stores telling teenagers to “Hold the door for that Lady. Can’t you see she has her arms full?” and the reply was, “Yes, sir”.

Nowadays, the reply would be profane.


9 posted on 11/29/2016 10:15:09 AM PST by B4Ranch (Conservatives own 200,000,000 guns and a trillion rounds of ammo. If we were violent you'd know it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar

This article is about the 1968 law.

You can’t lose a right. It can only be infringed.


10 posted on 11/29/2016 11:17:59 AM PST by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (Reverse Wickard v Filburn (1942) - and - ISLAM DELENDA EST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MNDude

One of my favorite gun store customers was a Muslim in south Florida. His family owned a convenience store off of Southwest 10th Street in Deerfield Beach. It is a lovely neighborhood; very scenic and rustic in many regards. One of the neighborhood’s indigenous persons came in one night and announced a robbery.

They shot him and called the police. The police inspected their weapons during the investigation. They chastised the family for using cheapo solid ammunition in their .38s and told them to buy some quality hollow points because their job would be much easier if the robber had not survived.

My customer came in, told me this, and bought some Hydrashocks.

God was praised, as was the Broward County Sheriff’s Office.


11 posted on 11/30/2016 7:26:34 AM PST by sig226
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

On further reflection, this tale sounds a bit hard to believe. It’s not because Elmer Fudd might act like a jerk at a gun store, particularly a Bass Pro Shop. Rather, there’s a whole interchange that happens when a first time hunter wants to buy a gun.

It’s normal for him to bring his friend who, “knows about guns.” The buyer and the friend pick something from the rack and the buyer asks a few question while the friend and the salesman answer. It goes through “what are you going to hunt?” and “what’s your budget?” and “do you want to use a scope with it?”

That goes on for a while and I can see the Bass Pro staff not recommending an AR or an AK for a hunting rifle. It also makes me wonder about the friend, who observed that he is old enough to buy a gun. The article doesn’t mention the gun he wanted. Age is only a factor if it was a handgun and there are lots of inappropriate choices for handgun hunting in Florida.

The friend said he immediately asked if it was because his friend was black or a Muslim. I understand Bass Pro’s corporate paranoia about straw sales. ATF fined several Wal Marts for them. But this doesn’t smell right.


12 posted on 11/30/2016 10:54:50 AM PST by sig226
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson