Gun show incident - Opinions?
- Thread starter Kentucky_Rifleman
- Start date
- Status
Gouranga
Member
Far as I look at it. IF the seller thinks the guys are buying the firearm for illegal purposes, he simply should not sell. I would argue he has a moral obligation to not sell. Instead this dealer took his money, with no problem. Then turns him in,
How certain are you they were not messing with him. I could see a couple smart ***es sick of being treated like crud playing this game. The guy did pass a NICS check. Most real gangstas I have met would not have stood a chance at that.
How certain are you they were not messing with him. I could see a couple smart ***es sick of being treated like crud playing this game. The guy did pass a NICS check. Most real gangstas I have met would not have stood a chance at that.
When I worked in the business and someone asked about conversion to full auto, I had my script ready- 'You can't legally convert it to a machinegun, and if you continue to ask me about illegal activities I'm going to ask you to leave.'
Guns and more
member
- Joined
- May 6, 2008
- Messages
- 1,929
I could get this thread closed. So I'll remain quiet. Bite my lip. THR.
cambeul41
Member
I found this totally offensive --
MP7 in post 11 says:
MP7, please review "The Boy Who Cried Wolf." Excuse me, where is it you are from? You only specify a city.
To the rest of you, thanks for some good discussion.
MP7 in post 11 says:
MP7, please review "The Boy Who Cried Wolf." Excuse me, where is it you are from? You only specify a city.
To the rest of you, thanks for some good discussion.
Okay, when did asking how to covert a gun to FA become a crime? Only the act itself of making or attempting to convert a gun is a crime. There are LOTS of people who don't understand the specifics of the NFA laws regarding Machine Guns and such. If anything this was an opportunity for the dealer to inform them of the legal requirements for a FA firearm.
As for them deciding who would pass the NICS......that's not a crime in itself as long as the "purchaser" actually paid for the gun. As someone mentioned earlier there are a lot of people who don't know what past actions may prevent them from owning/purchasing a firearm. I can't tell you how many young guys I've run into who were ill informed and didn't know that firearm ownership is "easy" for a person who hasn't been convicted of a felony, domestic abuse, mentally ill, etc.
The dealer was wrong for judging them....especially after the NICS came back clean. And then to set them up and give them bad info showed a total lack of class and an enormous amount of greed!
As for them deciding who would pass the NICS......that's not a crime in itself as long as the "purchaser" actually paid for the gun. As someone mentioned earlier there are a lot of people who don't know what past actions may prevent them from owning/purchasing a firearm. I can't tell you how many young guys I've run into who were ill informed and didn't know that firearm ownership is "easy" for a person who hasn't been convicted of a felony, domestic abuse, mentally ill, etc.
The dealer was wrong for judging them....especially after the NICS came back clean. And then to set them up and give them bad info showed a total lack of class and an enormous amount of greed!
Asking a dealer crosses a certain line to be honest, I wasn't comfortable with it working at a shop, and the folks who asked the question were generally more criminal than clueless in my experience.
I certainly didn't want to explain to ATF Agent X why I was answering FA conversion questions in the shop - would you?
medalguy
Member
I've been a FFL holder many years although I'm not currently licensed. IMO the dealer was very much in the wrong. If he reported the kids to the police it could be argued that this was a set-up as far as the car violation (assuming there was one).
Personally I have been in a similar situation where a kid wanted to know how to convert a gun into a machine gun, and I told the kid I would not sell him any firearm. None at all. Please leave my table. My business and license is not worth assisting him or allowing him to knowingly violate the law. He was a little upset but I informed him if he did not leave I would call for police assistance at my table, and inform the police officer that he was wanting to know how to violate the law by illegally making a machine gun, and I had asked him to leave.
After I 'splained things to him, he left. I think this dealer should have done the same.
Personally I have been in a similar situation where a kid wanted to know how to convert a gun into a machine gun, and I told the kid I would not sell him any firearm. None at all. Please leave my table. My business and license is not worth assisting him or allowing him to knowingly violate the law. He was a little upset but I informed him if he did not leave I would call for police assistance at my table, and inform the police officer that he was wanting to know how to violate the law by illegally making a machine gun, and I had asked him to leave.
After I 'splained things to him, he left. I think this dealer should have done the same.
gatopardo
Member
Never assume anything. Looks and first impressions are deceiving.
Justin Holder
Member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2010
- Messages
- 484
So the dealer should go against his better judgment for the sake of being politically correct?
Seems I remember something about the Virginia Tech shooter being on the no sale list, but he was still able to buy a handgun after "passing" the background check.
How would that have turned out differently had someone crossed the politically correct line and seen him for what he was.
I see bad things in some folks' futures based on the responses I'm seeing!
As soon as the dealer heard 'em discussing who had a background check, he should have nixed the sale. If the dealer heard this discussion, how plausible is it for him to deny he had a question 'bout who the gun was actually for? Sounds like he's opening himself up for legal problems along with his two 'customers'.
I've seen folks try to purchase a gun, find they're a dollar or two short (1 cent AFA that goes legally), try to borrow the money off a buddy, and the gun goes back in the case-NO SALE.
Smart dealers ain't gonna play around when it comes to possible straw sales.
As soon as the dealer heard 'em discussing who had a background check, he should have nixed the sale. If the dealer heard this discussion, how plausible is it for him to deny he had a question 'bout who the gun was actually for? Sounds like he's opening himself up for legal problems along with his two 'customers'.
Really? Do we know who the gun is actually for in this case (and did they lie answering question 12A on the 4473 form)? Probably more accurate to state it's not a crime if the OWNER of the gun actually paid for it.
I've seen folks try to purchase a gun, find they're a dollar or two short (1 cent AFA that goes legally), try to borrow the money off a buddy, and the gun goes back in the case-NO SALE.
Smart dealers ain't gonna play around when it comes to possible straw sales.
JTHunter
Member
Some very interesting comments and opinions here on this subject.
Folks, it seems as if it boils down to this:
with the comments about conversion and background check, the dealer would have been well within his right to stop the sale there, before even running the check as he probably should have done.
If he had nixed the sale, he would have been completely justified in talking to the LEO about those two deadheads. The fact that he allowed the sale and gave out the false info, THEN talked to the LEO, makes ME uncomfortable.
The only thing I can think of is that he might have been afraid of some kind of "argument" with these two if had stopped the sale before running the check. Of course, he could have lied and told them that the NICS turned them down. That way, the buyers would not be as likely to blame the vendor and create an incident. Then the dealer could have still talked to the LEO and given him the info from the NICS paperwork.
Sound reasonable?
Folks, it seems as if it boils down to this:
with the comments about conversion and background check, the dealer would have been well within his right to stop the sale there, before even running the check as he probably should have done.
If he had nixed the sale, he would have been completely justified in talking to the LEO about those two deadheads. The fact that he allowed the sale and gave out the false info, THEN talked to the LEO, makes ME uncomfortable.
The only thing I can think of is that he might have been afraid of some kind of "argument" with these two if had stopped the sale before running the check. Of course, he could have lied and told them that the NICS turned them down. That way, the buyers would not be as likely to blame the vendor and create an incident. Then the dealer could have still talked to the LEO and given him the info from the NICS paperwork.
Sound reasonable?
You don't in fact know they are gangsters. they "look like gansters" to you. Maybe they are ignorant of the laws. When I wanted my first gun, I went to the range, asked a bunch of stupid retarded questions. Yes I know that now. I didn't even think I would qualify, because I thought I'd need to show clear present threat to buy one. I went home bought a gun laws book educated myself on my state's laws. Went back bought the gun, and ammo. Went home and put it away. Couldn't touch that thing for next 2 months. I was morbidly afraid of it going off by itself.
Intentionally setting someone up for a run in with the LEO, and then offering the bait to the cops. Yuk. That dealer stinks. He's worse than the guys he assumes are gangsters. Where is his integrity?
Intentionally setting someone up for a run in with the LEO, and then offering the bait to the cops. Yuk. That dealer stinks. He's worse than the guys he assumes are gangsters. Where is his integrity?
Deus Machina
Member
That's very true, and very possible. But after them asking the dealer to sell it under the table, and then debating which of them would most likely pass the background check, that speaks of either ignorance that should be dealt with first, or outright planning to do something illegal.
On the other side, yeah, that dealer really needs to reconsider how he does business. He should have denied to sell to them at all, or at least faked out the NICS check. I wouldn't want to be associated with those guys.
THE DARK KNIGHT
Member
The dealer felt so "uneasy" about the sale and felt the need to tell a police officer, but he had no problem taking the guy's cash, huh?
Fact of the matter is, regardless of laws if the dealer was such a stand up guy, he would have said "no thanks" on the sale. But he didn't care the guys kept trying to "buy under the table" and their asking of how easy they could commit an NFA violation with that thing. He just took the money, then went to the cops after the fact.
Three things:
The dealer probably wasn't truly worried, if he was he would not have sold the gun.
Second, the guy passed a NICS check and was legally transporting the firearm. So what could the cop possibly do? Harass a guy who is not doing anything illegal (yet) based on racist stereotypes?
Third, the gun dealer should know better than to sell a gun to clowns asking about violating various federal laws.
Greedy son of a.....
EDITED TO ADD: Big T-shirts, stupid teeth, script writing/portrait tattoos, wearing ballcaps of teams you don't like but they match your outfit, and a high melanin count don't make someone a gangster. I see this a lot on here and no offense, a lot of you probably live in rural places and there's no such thing as a real urban gang where you live. But you really should not call people gangsters if they are not. Especially not people who are wannabes or just following a style of music they like. I could throw on a Harley T-shirt, some boots and a bandana tomorrow but would that make me a biker?
Unless someone is throwing signs, or wearing flags, or their tattoos are gang tattoos, they aren't a gangster. It's not really something you can fake, either. You wear the wrong flag in the wrong place and someone will lay you out. I've been on the bus before and seen people literally turn their sweatshirts inside out before their stop because that's not their color to wear. Only the stupidest of the stupid wear colors that aren't their own, and they sure as hell do not get gang tattoos. Most gangs will literally cut the tattoo out of you if you are caught faking it. So yeah.
Fact of the matter is, regardless of laws if the dealer was such a stand up guy, he would have said "no thanks" on the sale. But he didn't care the guys kept trying to "buy under the table" and their asking of how easy they could commit an NFA violation with that thing. He just took the money, then went to the cops after the fact.
Three things:
The dealer probably wasn't truly worried, if he was he would not have sold the gun.
Second, the guy passed a NICS check and was legally transporting the firearm. So what could the cop possibly do? Harass a guy who is not doing anything illegal (yet) based on racist stereotypes?
Third, the gun dealer should know better than to sell a gun to clowns asking about violating various federal laws.
Greedy son of a.....
EDITED TO ADD: Big T-shirts, stupid teeth, script writing/portrait tattoos, wearing ballcaps of teams you don't like but they match your outfit, and a high melanin count don't make someone a gangster. I see this a lot on here and no offense, a lot of you probably live in rural places and there's no such thing as a real urban gang where you live. But you really should not call people gangsters if they are not. Especially not people who are wannabes or just following a style of music they like. I could throw on a Harley T-shirt, some boots and a bandana tomorrow but would that make me a biker?
Unless someone is throwing signs, or wearing flags, or their tattoos are gang tattoos, they aren't a gangster. It's not really something you can fake, either. You wear the wrong flag in the wrong place and someone will lay you out. I've been on the bus before and seen people literally turn their sweatshirts inside out before their stop because that's not their color to wear. Only the stupidest of the stupid wear colors that aren't their own, and they sure as hell do not get gang tattoos. Most gangs will literally cut the tattoo out of you if you are caught faking it. So yeah.
Last edited:
Sorry for offending quite a few here with my misread.
And thanks for KY Rifleman adding info on the ethni... color.
Well then "classism" would be what i meant. And i meant the seller
showing his resentment by the act of setting them up with
an illegal action - and then snitching.
HIS gun rights should be revoked.
(IAmazing what a sore spot the "r" word is.
Many of it is perception reflexes. Not ideology.
i am not exempt at all.)
And thanks for KY Rifleman adding info on the ethni... color.
Well then "classism" would be what i meant. And i meant the seller
showing his resentment by the act of setting them up with
an illegal action - and then snitching.
HIS gun rights should be revoked.
(IAmazing what a sore spot the "r" word is.
Many of it is perception reflexes. Not ideology.
i am not exempt at all.)
Isn't by the mere fact that the dealer advised the buyer to transport the gun "illegally" which was his intent by instruction make him complicit in "conspiracy". He felt and had prior knowledge that a crime was about to be commited by his instruction evidenced by the fact he felt compelled to notify police. At what point does this transform from moral to legal?
Greed is one thing but to then allow a questionable sale to occur and knowingly trick someone into commiting a crime they otherwise would not have at the behest of a "professional" is deplorable.
Greed is one thing but to then allow a questionable sale to occur and knowingly trick someone into commiting a crime they otherwise would not have at the behest of a "professional" is deplorable.
Orion8472
Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2008
- Messages
- 3,638
It sounds to me like the dealer only did one thing right. NOT selling a gun to them under the table. The rest of his actions were ill advised at best, stupid at worst. If you have someone who is interested in buying a gun, they don't "discuss with their buddy as to which of them would pass the NICS". They will do the paper work themselves. Them actually DISCUSSING should have been a red flag that the possibility that the gun purchaser wouldn't BE the person who was going to be keeping it was VERY high, and then not been a part of it.
Him giving bad advice as to how to transport a weapon was absurd, however.
Him giving bad advice as to how to transport a weapon was absurd, however.
xcgates
Member
We truely don't know what really went on. When I lived in NY, I went on an impulse trip to a different state (Mass?) with a friend and his dad to a gunshow. I had only bought one gun before, and that was from a local store. I sure had never bought from out of state. So I ended up asking some questions of some of the dealers that probably would sound to some people like I was trying to buy under the table, because I really wanted to buy something, but hadn't come prepared with a local FFL.
Even now I'm not sure I can keep straight the laws on selling guns interstate.
Even now I'm not sure I can keep straight the laws on selling guns interstate.
Bubbles
Member
Or a Bloomberg "sting" operation.
Hunterdad
Member
If I was a dealer and I had someone come into my shop and ask how to convert a gun to full-auto, I would ask them to leave.
That's fine. Nobody thinks any less of you. Nor would we think less of a dealer who liked to stay out of the Federal pen, and therefore wouldn't deal with you.
Perfect instructions for how not to make it through your day.
We're talking about potential Federal crimes here, not social cliques at the Junior High cafeteria. I think that perspective has been lost by many.
Last edited:
Deus Machina
Member
Which I'm classifying under both.
Indeed, first impressions are very often correct, and never listening to them is a good way to end up in a bad situation.
A better method would be "assume, but hide it and confirm."
mgmorden
Member
This one is easy. They fact that they were dressed "thuggish" is completely and utterly irrelevant. People are free to dress as they please, and as said by several other members here, you can be wrongly judged by your appearance.
Even discussing about conversion to full auto I would toss up to them possibly just not being aware of the law (since they obviously asked where it would be legal to store the gun, they're trying to at least be legal if pulled over, which would preclude it being modded to full auto). I'd have just responded to that with the simple (and true) statement that none of these guns can be legally converted to full auto.
The important part is the request to sell the guns off the books/under the table. At that point, "thug", camo wearing hunter, or bible toting preacher, the dealer should refuse to do further business with them. That's an attempt to circumvent the system, and I would go no further at that point.
Not only continuing to sell the gun, but then deliberately lying to them in order to get them in trouble was wrong. He shouldn't have done it, and when you heard the misinformation you should have corrected it (not laying the blame for this on you - just saying it would have been prudent to do so).
Even discussing about conversion to full auto I would toss up to them possibly just not being aware of the law (since they obviously asked where it would be legal to store the gun, they're trying to at least be legal if pulled over, which would preclude it being modded to full auto). I'd have just responded to that with the simple (and true) statement that none of these guns can be legally converted to full auto.
The important part is the request to sell the guns off the books/under the table. At that point, "thug", camo wearing hunter, or bible toting preacher, the dealer should refuse to do further business with them. That's an attempt to circumvent the system, and I would go no further at that point.
Not only continuing to sell the gun, but then deliberately lying to them in order to get them in trouble was wrong. He shouldn't have done it, and when you heard the misinformation you should have corrected it (not laying the blame for this on you - just saying it would have been prudent to do so).
xcgates
Member
ArmedBear, what I meant was don't assume when all we have is the one-sided perspective of a bystander not directly involved. This is a general problem that exists online. Too many are quick to jump on a bandwagon.
I don't hold it against a dealer that won't sell to me. Heck, I love motorcycles, and I see dealers selling high-end sportbikes to people I don't think I'd sell to, as they behave and act like they will kill themselves, and potentially others doing something retarded on the public roads
I don't hold it against a dealer that won't sell to me. Heck, I love motorcycles, and I see dealers selling high-end sportbikes to people I don't think I'd sell to, as they behave and act like they will kill themselves, and potentially others doing something retarded on the public roads
- Status