Gun Show Gossip

[Lutherf]

This is purely anecdotal and second hand but a client who kind of does the gun show circuit around the SW just informed me that the ATF has started something new. According to him the agents (undercover) are posing as private sellers and busting buyers who don't ask for ID from the seller. He mentioned that they are confiscating whatever is for sale at the table and searching the homes of the buyers. I don't know how much of this is just drama and how much is legit but as far as I know there is no requirement for a buyer to identify whether a seller is a prohibited person.

I'm assuming that this hinges on interstate transfers and if the seller says something like "I'm from New Jersey and want to sell this rifle" there might be some culpability on the buyer's part but it's an interesting tactic if it's happening as he says.

 

[Paleocon]

This is purely anecdotal and second hand but a client who kind of does the gun show circuit around the SW just informed me that the ATF has started something new. According to him the agents (undercover) are posing as private sellers and busting buyers who don't ask for ID from the seller. He mentioned that they are confiscating whatever is for sale at the table and searching the homes of the buyers. I don't know how much of this is just drama and how much is legit but as far as I know there is no requirement for a buyer to identify whether a seller is a prohibited person.

I'm assuming that this hinges on interstate transfers and if the seller says something like "I'm from New Jersey and want to sell this rifle" there might be some culpability on the buyer's part but it's an interesting tactic if it's happening as he says.

If these operations involve encouraging people to break the law (for the purpose of justifying an arrest or otherwise) then they are immoral.

 

[Paleocon]

As a legal matter, direct sales between private individuals from different states are prohibited. It has to go through a licensed seller, and if it's a handgun that licensed seller must be from the buyer's state.

 

[Lutherf]

As a legal matter, direct sales between private individuals from different states are prohibited. It has to go through a licensed seller, and if it's a handgun that licensed seller must be from the buyer's state.

Right. But as a rule it's incumbent upon the SELLER to insure he's not making a transfer to a prohibited person. In this case they seem to be putting that responsibility on the buyer and, as far as I know, it's not illegal to purchase a firearm from a prohibited person.

 

[TurtleDude]

This is purely anecdotal and second hand but a client who kind of does the gun show circuit around the SW just informed me that the ATF has started something new. According to him the agents (undercover) are posing as private sellers and busting buyers who don't ask for ID from the seller. He mentioned that they are confiscating whatever is for sale at the table and searching the homes of the buyers. I don't know how much of this is just drama and how much is legit but as far as I know there is no requirement for a buyer to identify whether a seller is a prohibited person.

I'm assuming that this hinges on interstate transfers and if the seller says something like "I'm from New Jersey and want to sell this rifle" there might be some culpability on the buyer's part but it's an interesting tactic if it's happening as he says.

probably time for congress to cut their budget again. They tend to do this to try to get their arrest figures up without really going after the problem people (like Bike gangs running automatic weapons etc).

 

[Lutherf]

probably time for congress to cut their budget again. They tend to do this to try to get their arrest figures up without really going after the problem people (like Bike gangs running automatic weapons etc).

I'd be interested to see exactly what went down. The guy I got this from is a good source for "something happened" but he's also eccentric enough that the details are often not as originally stated.

 

[TurtleDude]

I'd be interested to see exactly what went down. The guy I got this from is a good source for "something happened" but he's also eccentric enough that the details are often not as originally stated.

the big sting a few years ago was this

an agent would go into a gun show

ask someone the price on a handgun. ask what the "out the door" price was (meaning cost and taxes). and then ask what the cost was for no paperwork. Most dealers were smart enough to decline any further negotiations at that point or if they were private sellers-say so. but every once in a while someone would be stupid and would say add 100 bucks to the price. or in some cases-accept an offer from the buyer for more cash

and then the ATF would usually raid the guy a week or two later and seize all his firearms

 

[chuckiechan]

What does an I.d. Get you?

It sounds like the governments "create a new criminal class" every month program.

ATF's history under Obama tells me it should be dissolved and rebuilt

 

[Lutherf]

Now that I think about it, I bet what they're doing is looking at the buyers as if a purchase is an indication that the guy is actually "in the business" of dealing in guns. If that's the case then they are tightening the rules a WHOLE lot.

 

[TurtleDude]

The other trick ATF would do is this. They would watch a guy who had a table of "privately owned" firearms (non licensed) and see if the guy were to buy a gun.

and if a gun was bought-often from one agent, another agent would go up to the guy and say something like this

"Hey I really was liking that Colt 1911 you just bought but the guy you bought it from sold it to you before I could make him an offer. will you sell it to me if I pay your 50 bucks more than you paid for it?

and if the guy said yes, he would be busted for dealing without a license. sometimes it sticks but sometimes a judge will consider it entrapment. I used to see the same thing at Dead shows in Cincinnati. a narc watches a DH buy some acid from a dealer. Goes up to the buyer and says-Hey the guy you bought from is out-can I buy a couple hits off you and when the original buyer complies, he gets busted for Trafficking. two kids I know did 6 months in the state pen for that but another case with another judge-the judge threw it out

 

[Lutherf]

What does an I.d. Get you?

It sounds like the governments "create a new criminal class" every month program.

ATF's history under Obama tells me it should be dissolved and rebuilt

If you're a private seller then making sure that the buyer has an ID from the state you're in is simple due diligence. That being said, I suspect that this deal is more about redefining who is "in the business" than it is anything else.

The problem is that while ATF is tearing into your computer and paperwork doing their investigation it's costing you a ton in legal fees and your firearms are likely locked away until a determination can be made. If it's going down that way then it's a straight up intimidation tactic.

 

[LaMidRighter]

probably time for congress to cut their budget again. They tend to do this to try to get their arrest figures up without really going after the problem people (like Bike gangs running automatic weapons etc).

I would be happy with them having a budget of absolute zero starting next fiscal year, and every year after.

 

[TurtleDude]

I would be happy with them having a budget of absolute zero starting next fiscal year, and every year after.

they should have been permanently eradicated after the WACO photo op debacle



the useful part of the ATF-the TTB-left with treasury while the LE component (the jack booted storm troopers according to long time DEMOCRAT rep John Dinged of Michigan) went to DOJ/ Homeland security IIRC

 

[LaMidRighter]

What does an I.d. Get you?

It sounds like the governments "create a new criminal class" every month program.

ATF's history under Obama tells me it should be dissolved and rebuilt

Why even rebuild them? Just dissolve the agency and incarcerate any agents that followed illegal executive orders, all the higher ups that engaged in inappropriate rules changes, then nail them again for every single unwarranted search and seizure operations and once more for any unwarranted sting operations. Make them serve consecutive sentences and let it be an example to every other agency. Then sue the **** out of them.

 

[LaMidRighter]

they should have been permanently eradicated after the WACO photo op debacle



the useful part of the ATF-the TTB-left with treasury while the LE component (the jack booted storm troopers according to long time DEMOCRAT rep John Dinged of Michigan) went to DOJ/ Homeland security IIRC

They didn't get half of the people in that operation that they should have, and even the ones they got didn't get what they legally deserved.

 

[Paleocon]

Right. But as a rule it's incumbent upon the SELLER to insure he's not making a transfer to a prohibited person. In this case they seem to be putting that responsibility on the buyer and, as far as I know, it's not illegal to purchase a firearm from a prohibited person.

Prohibited individuals are separate from interstate sales. Buying from out of state is punishable, no?

I don't approve of sting operations period, but that seems to be the reasoning here.

 

[Lutherf]

Prohibited individuals are separate from interstate sales. Buying from out of state is punishable, no?

I don't approve of sting operations period, but that seems to be the reasoning here.

If you travel from CA to AZ to buy a gun from a private seller you are committing a crime but that isn't what happened here. In this case the buyer was presented with an opportunity to purchase a gun from a private seller and was apprehended because he didn't check the buyer's ID.

 

[TurtleDude]

If you travel from CA to AZ to buy a gun from a private seller you are committing a crime but that isn't what happened here. In this case the buyer was presented with an opportunity to purchase a gun from a private seller and was apprehended because he didn't check the buyer's ID.

interesting case. I don't know if the government will win this one

 

[Paleocon]

If you travel from CA to AZ to buy a gun from a private seller you are committing a crime but that isn't what happened here. In this case the buyer was presented with an opportunity to purchase a gun from a private seller and was apprehended because he didn't check the buyer's ID.

If someone in CA buys a gun from someone who traveled there from AZ, that's illegal, correct?

 

[chuckiechan]

Maybe it's time for criminal penalties for directors who take their agencies rogue.

I can name three or four off the top of my head.

 

[Lutherf]

If someone in CA buys a gun from someone who traveled there from AZ, that's illegal, correct?

I don't think buying it is illegal though selling it in such a circumstance would be.

 

[VanceMack]

The law in my state says only that I must not KNOWINGLY sell to a criminal or someone not legally able to own a firearm. If the transfer does occur and there is no proof of knowledge of illegal status, the person restricted from purchasing or possessing the firearm is responsible and faces a 3rd degree felony.

The onus is always on the restricted person both for purchase and sale.

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

I don't think buying it is illegal though selling it in such a circumstance would be.

The transfer of a handgun out of state must go through an FFL in the state of the buyer. However, if the seller buys the handgun out of state then moves to a different state and then sells the gun in that state the transaction is legit.

I know in my state it is illegal to knowingly sell a firearm to a criminal. You can usually satisfy this criteria by asking to see an in-state driver license when buying or selling a gun. The criteria is unequivocally satisfied by showing an in-state concealed carry license.