While working on research for something else, I visited several “gun control” websites. I looked over their proposals and most were the run of the mill, gun control group demands:
– Background checks for every gun sale – Ban assault weapons – Ten round limit on magazines
But when I got to Gabrielle Giffords’ group “Americans for Responsible Solutions” along with the above, I found three suggested solutions that I could support:
– Enact Strong Laws Against Gun Trafficking – Stiffen Penalties for Straw Purchasers – Strengthening the Current NICS Background Check System.
Americans for Responsible Solutions
I can support stronger laws against gun trafficking and stiffer penalties for straw purchasers as long as the laws are well written, easily understood and enforced with common sense. What do I mean?
Eight States have passed laws requiring ALL gun transfers to be conducted through a licensed gun dealer who has a Federal Firearms License (FFL). In some States, the law was intentionally written to be confusing and open to interpretation. People thought they were closing the “gun show loophole” and stopping back alley gun deals. What they got was totally different. In some States, if you ask your neighbor to store your gun while you are on vacation, handing him your gun is an illegal transfer and you are breaking the law. If your buddy wants to try out your new gun at the range, handing him your gun is an illegal transfer and you are breaking the law.
The people who proposed these type laws will say that it is ridiculous to think that the law would be applied to these type situations. Really?
The internet abounds with reports of overzealous enforcement of laws similar to this. Like the 72 year old New Jersey man facing up to ten years in prison for having a 1700’s era flintlock pistol in his car. Read the story:
72 Year Old Man Faces Prison for 1700’s Era Flintlock
Or the Washington DC resident facing one year in jail and a $1000 fine for having a dud shotgun shell in his car. Read the story:
Man Faces Prison for Dud Shotgun Shell
Here’s a good one: a recently discharged Army Medic, a veteran of both Iraq and Afghanistan, on his way to drop off his medical records at the DC Veterans Affairs Office was arrested when security police found a few 9mm rounds in his medial backpack leftover from the last time he was on the range. His treatment, in full view of the public was appalling. Read the story:
Army Medic Faces Prison for Forgotten 9mm Rounds
Would you consider the above to be common sense enforcement?
Stiffer penalties for straw purchasers is an idea I could support, but only if they are actually prosecuted. Too often, laws are passed to give the impression that something is being done to solve a problem, but it is never enforced. Take the AFT Form 4473, the form you fill out when you buy a gun from a licensed dealer. When you sign the form, you are verifying that the information is correct. Putting false information on the form in an attempt to obtain a firearm is a felony punishable by up to ten years in prison and a/or $10,000 fine. The stiff penalty is supposed to be a deterrent.
Yet in the 2010-2012 time frame, of the 72,600 applications denied based on the background check, only 62 were considered for prosecution and only 44 were actually prosecuted. It’s hard to make a mistake on the form. You pretty much know if you are a convicted felon, fugitive from justice, addicted to a controlled substance, convicted of domestic violence, received a dishonorable discharge or an illegal alien.
Joe Biden: We Don’t Have Time to Prosecute
Just to be clear, a Straw Purchase is one one person buys a gun with the sole intent of immediately turn it over to another person, usually someone who is forbidden by law to possess a gun.
So would stiffer penalties for straw purchasers help stop the flow of guns to criminals or just be another law that won’t be enforced. Or worse, only used against law abiding gun owners? If my long time neighbor was looking for a specific gun that is hard to find, and I find it for a really good price and it was the last one the dealer had and my neighbor was out of town and I buy it and sell it to him when he returns home, am I a straw purchaser subject to the new stiffer fine?
Again, the people who proposed these type laws will say that it is ridiculous to think that the law would be applied to these type situations. Actually, it already is. A former police officer used his Law Enforcement Officer discount at a local gun shop to save his uncle some money. When the facts came out, even though there was no criminal intent and his uncle had no restrictions against owning a firearm, he was charged and convicted of making a straw purchase. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction.
Strangely enough, the guys that prosecute straw purchases are part of the same bunch that allowed hundreds of straw purchases to be completed and the guns walk across the border to Mexico where they were used in a number of crimes including the murder of a Border Patrol Agent.
Strengthening the Current NICS Background Check System is something that could only help and I don’t think the government could screw it up or use it against law-abiding gun owners. Are you wondering why 72,600 people would falsify their firearms application knowing they wouldn’t pass the background check? Well, for one, if they get caught, there’s only a small probability that they will be prosecuted. The other is that the information in the system is nowhere near complete, so maybe their application will make it past the background check..
The Federal court information is automatically loaded into the NICS system. State court information is voluntarily submitted. Some States submit a lot of information. Some States submit very little. Not many States submit medical information dealing with mental health because of privacy issues. So any improvement to the system could only help generate more accurate background checks.
One last thing to note. Every gun control group worthy of the name is for background checks for all gun transfers. If you want to sell your gun to your neighbor, you go to a FFL dealer who does the background check through the NICS system. The same incomplete system the dealer uses for new gun sales. You would think improving the NICS system would be a priority for all gun control groups, yet the only group that mentions it is Gabrielle Giffords’ group “Americans for Responsible Solutions”.
The real reason for all gun transfers going through a licensed dealer, it creates an unofficial gun registration system. Licensed gun dealers have to keep a written record of every gun that crosses their counter. Theoretically, over a period of time, the owner of all guns would be recorded. All legal guns that is. Criminals would most likely not transfer their guns through a dealer.
This is a good thing, right? Not really. Canada has recently repealed a gun registration law because after 14 years and a cost of $2.7 billion, it has never, ever been credited with solving or preventing a single crime. Read the story:
Canadians Repeal Registration Law
But it does make it easier to round-up, seize or confiscate privately owned firearms. That will never happen here, right? Wrong. It already is. In New York, the police cross check obituaries against gun registration list. If a gun owner dies, the police arrive within days of the reported death and confiscate the firearms. Read the story:
NY Police Confiscate Weapons of the Dead
In many localities that have local registration programs, if your mental health is questioned by a neighbor you are having a dispute with or a vindictive ex-spouse, the police will confiscate your firearms. Getting them back isn’t always easy.
In summary, there are areas of agreement with some gun control groups proposals, but only if the original concept of the proposal is followed and the law is not interpreted in such a way as to punish legal gun owners.