New York City Sues 15 Gun Dealers in 5 States, Charging Illegal Sales

Cross-X

Shooting at the big range in heaven
Dealer
NES Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2005
Messages
8,502
Likes
258
Location
Metrowest, MA & Points South and West
Feedback: 9 / 0 / 0
New York City Sues 15 Gun Dealers in 5 States, Charging Illegal Sales

By DIANE CARDWELL
New York Times
Published: May 16, 2006

Testing a novel strategy in its aggressive campaign against illegal firearms, New York City sent teams of private investigators posing as gun buyers to stores in 5 states, catching 15 dealers making illegal sales, officials said yesterday.

An investigator buying a gun in South Boston, Va., as part of a sting operation aimed at the sources of guns used in New York crimes.
In the two-month sting operation, which city officials and gun control advocates said was the first of such wide scope, teams of operatives wearing hidden cameras traveled to Georgia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Virginia to make what are known as straw purchases, a violation of federal law in which one individual submits to the required federal background check for a gun that is clearly to be used by someone else.

All 15 dealers, whose guns have been linked to more than 500 crimes in New York City from 1994 to 2001, improperly sold a gun to the private investigators, officials said. The evidence is to be used in a lawsuit against the dealers filed yesterday in Federal District Court in Brooklyn and is being shared with federal law enforcement agencies.

"Our suit offers clear and compelling evidence that guns sold by these dealers are used in crimes by people ineligible to own a gun far more frequently than guns from other dealers," Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg said at a City Hall news conference announcing the operation. "In other words, these dealers are the worst of the worst."

In January 2001, a 12-year-old boy playing with a semiautomatic handgun from Mickalis Pawn Shop in Summerville, S.C., accidentally shot someone in the chest, officials said. It was one of 49 guns from the store linked to crimes in New York City. That year, one of 42 such guns sold by A-1 Jewelry & Pawn in Augusta, Ga., was used in the attempted murder of uniformed police officers.

The lawsuit seeks monetary damages from the 15 dealers and the appointment of a special master to monitor their sales closely. City officials said they might also ask the court to shut the gun businesses down.

The evidence collected is being shared with the Justice Department, including the United States attorneys with jurisdiction over the dealers, and with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, an agency that Mr. Bloomberg has said has been "asleep at the switch" in policing gun sales.

The operation is one of the steps the Bloomberg administration has adopted after seeing some of its efforts against the gun trade sputter. Since his second term started this year, Mr. Bloomberg has been outspoken on gun trafficking and has tried to focus national attention on the issue, coordinating with other mayors, pursuing lawsuits against gun manufacturers and lobbying Congress not to pass what he calls "godawful bills."

For instance, Congress has already limited the city's ability to obtain new data from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives tracing the origin of guns used in crimes and is considering bills that would essentially make those limits permanent.

The new sting operation, which Mr. Bloomberg plans to discuss with lawmakers in Washington today, is in part a response to a law passed last year that protects gun manufacturers and dealers from lawsuits unless they are engaged in illegal activity.

"Our opponents never tire of telling us that we ought to be going after the people who break the law with guns," Mr. Bloomberg said. "Well, O.K. You asked for something; you got it."

Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, said he had not seen the lawsuit yet and declined to comment on it, but he added that his organization was opposed to straw purchases. "They're against the law," he said.

Gun-control advocates praised the sting operation and the lawsuit. "The City of New York is disproportionately affected by rogue gun dealers who play a key role in this system, since the vast majority of crime guns used in the city come from other states with lax gun laws," said Jackie Kuhls, executive director of New Yorkers Against Gun Violence. "The legal action New York City is taking against these dealers sends a message that not all government officials are willing to look the other way."

Other cities, including Gary, Ind., Chicago and Detroit, have taken similar approaches in their own jurisdictions, sometimes using local law enforcement officials, said Elizabeth Haile, a staff lawyer at the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence. "This would be the first time that they looked at sources all over the country no matter what state it was," she said.

To build its case, the city chose roughly 60 gun dealers to investigate based on data it had received earlier from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Investigators from the James Mintz Group, a private investigation outfit, worked in pairs, with one looking at the merchandise, talking with the salesman and handling the weapon in making a decision to purchase while the other wandered the store, seemingly uninterested.

When it came time to buy the gun and fill out the forms for a background check, the first operative, often a man, would call in his partner, frequently a woman, who had not been part of the discussion of the weapon, officials said. The second investigator would fill out the background paperwork, and the first one would pay for the gun in cash.

In several instances, the gun dealer followed the law and refused the sale, but the 15 named in the lawsuit ultimately sold a weapon to one of the investigators, Mr. Bloomberg said,

One of the 15 outlets was Woody's Pawn Shop in Orangeburg, S.C., where officials have traced 98 guns connected to crimes in the city, including the death of a 31-year-old man in Brooklyn in 2001.

Chan Holman, the owner, said he would not jeopardize his business selling 100 to 150 guns a month by breaking the law.

"We do sell an awful lot of handguns, and I can't control what hands they end up in," he said in a telephone interview. "We just do the best we can to make sure they get into the right hands."
 
from another account:

Wearing hidden cameras, the investigators entered stores in teams of two and attempted "straw purchases," in which the buyer completes the paperwork and passes the background check, but later hands over the weapon to someone else who is not allowed to own a firearm.

How the @$# is a dealer supposed to know that's going to happen unless the buyer tells him? ?
 
The scenario is no different than me going to a shop to find a pistol for my wife who would like to shoot but is unlicensed. She goes to the counter and tries different pistols in her hand while I look around. When she decides what she likes, I buy it. What law is broken? I bought the gun, I'm licensed, it's my gun. When she shoots it, she'll be with me. No harm, no foul.
Frigging socialist bastards.
 
Doesn't the straw purchase law specificly apply to those who know the person they are buying it for is not allowed to own firearms?

Can a FFL have multiple NICS checks for the same purchase?

Doesn't the fact that they posed as a husband and wife give the FFL a reasonable belief that neither is ineligible for firearms?

Marriges are 50/50. So do not the firearms owned by one also fall into ownership of the spouse?
 
FunYun said:
Doesn't the straw purchase law specificly apply to those who know the person they are buying it for is not allowed to own firearms?

The Dealer has to have knowledge, or reasonable suspicion of a Straw Purchase. And the person that the gun is being purchased for can be perfectly legal to own a gun, and the deal is STILL a Straw Purchase.

FunYun said:
Can a FFL have multiple NICS checks for the same purchase?

No, since there's only ONE buyer.

FunYun said:
Doesn't the fact that they posed as a husband and wife give the FFL a reasonable belief that neither is ineligible for firearms?

No, it doesn't.

FunYun said:
Marriges are 50/50. So do not the firearms owned by one also fall into ownership of the spouse?

Nope, doesn't mean a thing. Marraige does not constitute ownership. Now, some places you can't have a firearm in the same residence as an ex-con, and that MAY apply.

And, I'll add that an FFL's spouse isn't automatically anything either, other than the spouse of an FFL. It has no effect on the license.
 
JonJ said:
The scenario is no different than me going to a shop to find a pistol for my wife who would like to shoot but is unlicensed. She goes to the counter and tries different pistols in her hand while I look around. When she decides what she likes, I buy it. What law is broken? I bought the gun, I'm licensed, it's my gun. When she shoots it, she'll be with me. No harm, no foul.
Frigging socialist bastards.

A lot of gun shops would not let your unlicensed spouse handle the gun
no matter if you were there or not. I don't know the law pertaining to this,
but unless I am very well known in a certain place, I have not been able to
touch a gun without showing my license. Even then, I take it out and
display it in order to make sure the shop knows that I am licensed
and am not putting the shop in jeapordy. My spouse has her LTC for that
and other reasons that have been articulated in previous threads.

TBP
 
The thing I am wondering about is the "Agents" would have no police powers in those other states. I don't see how it would be a real straw purchase unless they used felons for this. and then they would be commiting the felony itself?
My head hurts. and I am sick of these idiots.
 
In the case of a Straw Purchase, both parties can be legal, and the sale is till illegal. Dumb, but it's the law.

http://www.atf.treas.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/2005/p53004/p53004.pdf

15. STRAW PURCHASES
Questions have arisen concerning the lawfulness of firearms purchases from
licensees by persons who use a "straw purchaser" (another person) to acquire
the firearms. Specifically, the actual buyer uses the straw purchaser to execute the Form 4473 purporting to show that the straw purchaser is the actual purchaser of the firearm. In some instances, a straw purchaser is used because the actual purchaser is prohibited from acquiring the firearm. That is to say, the actual purchaser is a felon or is within one of the other prohibited categories of persons who may not lawfully acquire firearms or is a resident of a State other than that in which the licensee's business premises is located.
Because of his or her disability, the person uses a straw purchaser who is not
prohibited from purchasing a firearm from the licensee. In other instances, neither the straw purchaser nor the actual purchaser is prohibited from acquiring the firearm.
 
So in effect weren't these agents breaking the law? They are going out of state looking to commit a felony? Laws are so screwy. I mean, what would be the outcome if the 'agent' in question went out of the way to appear legit? IE being given ID to say they were legal in said state to purchase guns, and when it goes to NICS it comes back as there spot clean self?

Again, the NY AG is notorious for pulling this crap and going after businesses in other states conducting legal business practices for said state but illegal in NY. Hell, look at his attack on the Mutual Fund Industry as a whole. I wonder if Wall Street started thinking about a move and shut the NYSE? (Again, he wasn't targeting individual corps in his lawsuit, but the Multi billion dollar Mutual Fund Industry, which has a ton of capital in the NYSE).

Sweet Justice: VA AG puts out arrest warrants for the 'agents' charging them with felonies. I mean, if I was the VA AG I'd be very pissed to hear another state sent their lackeys into my state to stir things up without at least giving me a courtesy 'hey, I am checking out a few businesses that are popular with straw purchases in my state.'

Side note: Only NY was ahead of MA as far as population decline. I wonder why?
 
Straw purchases are confusing because there are two different crimes involved. One is always there, and the other may or may not be there. The confusion arises from the fact that most people are focusing on the second crime.

The first crime is simply making a false statement on the 4473, specifically that the person completing the form is the actual purchaser. If my daughter were to I were to walk into a dealer and fill out the 4473 and purchase a gun for my daughter with her money, that would constitute a felony, even though she's properly lincesed and could have legally made the purchase herself. This isn't the way that most straw purchases go down, however. In most cases, the purchase is made for someone who is disqualified for one reason or another from making the purchase. In this case there are usually a whole list of crimes committed by both parties (e.g., making a false statenment on the 4473, knowingly transferring a firearm to a disqualified person, possession of a firearm by a disqualified person, conspiracy, etc., etc., etc.)

In the second case, the crime is clear, but in the first case, it's a gray area. Did I actually purchase the firearm on behalf of another person, or did I simply purchase it myself as a gift to them? Even if they were in the shop and told me which one they wanted/liked, that still doesn't automatically rule out it being a gift. Even so, a dealer would have to be nuts to complete the transaction, since the possible downside for him or her far exceeds the profit involved.

What would be interesting to find out would be whether or not the "investigators" had any official standing to be conducting these straw transactions. In the likely event that they had none, then shouldn't BATFE be charging them with making false statements on a 4473, and Bloomberg and the rest with conspiracy to make false statements on a 4473? Of course it isn't realistic, but it seems to be the law afterall. [devil2]

Ken
 
Ken pretty well nailed it. I personally think BATFE ought to throw the book at them, assuming they weren't involved in the sting.

On a side note, if you're purchasing a firearm as a gift, it's a good idea to be related to the receiving party. Very easy to prove you're purchasing a firearm as a gift for a spouse, parent, sibling or your son or daughter. The BATFE and the court will easily see it that way, as well as the dealer. Outside those people, it's easy for them to make their case.
 
It seems like the gun dealers who were targets of this sort of sting could easily say they didn't notice the straw purchase arrangement. It seems like it's sort of the dealers' word against the feds.
Feds: "It was TOTALLY obvious that we were setting this up."
Dealer: "Ceratainly now. I'm an observant guy. Everything was above board."
I'm sure that lawyers could tell me where I'm wrong about that.

This, from the article, sounds damning:
"When it came time to buy the gun and fill out the forms for a background check, the first operative, often a man, would call in his partner, frequently a woman, who had not been part of the discussion of the weapon, officials said. The second investigator would fill out the background paperwork, and the first one would pay for the gun in cash."
But of course the police/BATF are going to try to break the defendants with news articles before the case gets to trial.

Also, if Bloomberg can bust 15 out-of-state dealers, what's to stop him from threatening every dealer in the US? If he wins any of these, what's to stop him from sending a form letter to every dealer saying "Stop selling AK-47s, or we'll be harassing you from now 'til the day you close shop." It sounds like these guys broke the law, but I'm loath to say that someone like Bloomberg is doing the right thing.
 
There may some legitamacy to their reasons.. but I suspect this is all part of the grand plan to eliminate guns- period. They are doing whatever the hell is legally possible to make gun posession extremely difficult. Dealers of all kinds are going to be less likely to do ANYTHING in NY. Many dealers outside of MA won't even sell legal pre ban mags to us just out of fear....

Now I'm not condoning any kind of illegal behavior in the least but the anti gun folks realize there are better ways to eliminate guns than trying to fight the right to own firearms... The ripple effect will surely be worse than this sting.... and I'm sure they know it. Gun shops will simply avoid business in NY, etc. JMOO.
 
Lugnut said:
There may some legitamacy to their reasons.. but I suspect this is all part of the grand plan to eliminate guns- period. They are doing whatever the hell is legally possible to make gun posession extremely difficult. Dealers of all kinds are going to be less likely to do ANYTHING in NY. Many dealers outside of MA won't even sell legal pre ban mags to us just out of fear....

Now I'm not condoning any kind of illegal behavior in the least but the anti gun folks realize there are better ways to eliminate guns than trying to fight the right to own firearms... The ripple effect will surely be worse than this sting.... and I'm sure they know it. Gun shops will simply avoid business in NY, etc. JMOO.

This is not good news for gun owners anywhere.

What Bloomburg, Menino and a few other lib blue state mayors are looking for is a federal "one handgun a month" law and/or retaining records of firearms purchases above and beyond a 4473.

I'm still waiting for the other shoe to drop and have these asshats file a federal court complaint based on the interstate commerce clause of the Constitution.

The scary part is that it could become a reality. Right now, the Republicans are in some very deep shit and control of Congress is pretty much dependant on whether or not the Dems fumble the ball.

The 2006 elections will be very interesting.
 
It seems as if I wasn't the only one with this take on the whole thing. Any time I find myself with Alan Gottlieb, I consider myself in good company.

http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/stories/0518edequal.html
The private investigators New York hired to conduct this sting must have made deliberately false statements on federal firearms purchase forms. That's a felony. They should be prosecuted. If Bloomberg sent them to do this, he's an accessory, if not a conspirator.

Ken
 
See the videos on www.nyc.gov. As much as I don't like NYC's mayor and maybe even what he did- it's clear what happened. At least ONE of the stores showed serious negligence IMO.
 
Unless they manage to get this one assigned to Jack "I'll always rule against any gun dealer or manufacturer" Weinstein, precedent doesn't exactly provide a lot of support for Bloomberg in this one, as the NY Daily News notes.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/local/story/418741p-353672c.html
Mayor Bloomberg isn't the first big-city boss to pull a sting operation on gun dealers.
In a 1998 probe dubbed Operation Gunsmoke, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley had undercover cops posing as gang members go into area gun stores.

Grainy video shot by investigators seemed to show gun merchants gladly allowing straw purchases - the practice of legally authorized citizens buying guns for others.

The sting was a public relations success, with footage shown on "60 Minutes" and elsewhere. But the operation had less success in court, where it was used in a civil case and several criminal prosecutions.

"It failed because they were unable to show the dealers willfully did anything wrong," said John Lott, a former University of Chicago law professor and the author of controversial books "More Guns, Less Crime" and "The Bias Against Guns." . . .

Ken
 
Straw Purchase

[thinking] The straw purchase comes into play when the buyer transfers possession totally to the new "owner". The main point is the new "owner" is not legally able to own firearms.

By purchasing a handgun and allowing a family member to shoot is not a straw purchase.

I had a friend who set the standard for a transfer of a firearm in a landmark case in New Jersey years back. The case is still studied today during promotional examinations. He "while intoxicated" started playing Russian Poulette" which his duty firearm. Somehow a friend took possession of it and wound up dead. While he was found Not Guilty of the homicide charge, he was found Guilty of an Improper Transfer of a Firearm and terminated along with the criminal punishment. Simply allowing someone to "possess" a handgun temporarily can be considered a transfer in some cases. [thinking]
 
KMaurer said:
Unless they manage to get this one assigned to Jack "I'll always rule against any gun dealer or manufacturer" Weinstein,

It seems like some folks are not above lying to get their case in front of Weinstein.
 
**update**

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/story/419645p-354356c.html

Mike's gun shop stings may put holes in 18 cases

Mayor Bloomberg's decision to hire private investigators to conduct undercover stings at Southern gun shops has potentially jeopardized several criminal cases, law enforcement sources charged.

Four cases were compromised and an additional 14 were put at risk by the six-week sting aimed at gun stores in Georgia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Virginia, the sources said.

The sources argued that several suspects being watched by authorities had frequented some of the 15 gun shops - but are now cleaning up their acts or lying low because of the publicity. None of the ongoing cases was linked to New York, the sources said.

"A bunch of private eyes straight out of 'Barnaby Jones' run their own sting operation and all the real enforcement agencies find out about it on the day they are having a press conference? Not good," said a law enforcement source in Washington.

The Justice Department held a meeting last week to review potential problems, another source said.

"The goal is to lock up gun criminals, not file civil lawsuits with publicity stunts," the source said.

But the city's criminal justice czar dismissed the complaints.

"What we did can only complement any ongoing investigation," said Criminal Justice Coordinator John Feinblatt, adding his office had received only positive feedback, as well as requests to share the evidence gathered. The NYPD was not involved in the sting.

"Agencies will marry the video evidence we gathered with other evidence to make a far richer, far stronger and far more airtight case," Feinblatt said.

City officials said the sting was not a stunt - but a necessary campaign given how few gun shops are investigated and shuttered for flouting laws governing firearm sales.

Alison Gendar
 
From the legal interest section at the NRA convention, via David Hardy:

ATF has said they will be investigating every aspect of these "sting" sales (and there were ATF people present who repeated that). This may be bad news for the city, since IF the sales were illegal straw sales, their investigators committed felonies.

One gun was traced TWICE in NYC. The first time was for a crime, so it would have to have been confiscated. Only explanation for how it would later be on the street is that someone in NYC PD is selling seized guns on the street.

BTW, surprise, surprise, surprise. By some strange conincidence, the suits somehow got assigned to Jack "The-Fix-Is-In" Weinstein.

Ken
 
Back
Top Bottom