It appears that the plot thickens, No??

Status
Not open for further replies.

alan

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
2,601
Location
sowest pa.
NEWS RELEASE
WHY ARE MAYOR DALEY, SUPT. CLINE NOW
QUIET ABOUT CRIME GUN OWNED BY COPS?
BELLEVUE, WA – After politicizing the tragic Aug. 27 shooting spree at Windy City Core Supply in Chicago, both Mayor Richard Daley and Acting Police Supt. Phil Cline—who blamed the crime on the availability of guns—are now strangely silent following revelations that the murder weapon had been previously owned by two Chicago police officers, both of whom failed to register the gun with the city as required by law.

The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) today accused the city of making the only registered owner of the pistol, a 58-year-old homeless man, into a scapegoat in the case. Milton R. Beuck, who sold the pistol to one officer in 1994, did not keep a record of that transaction for ten years, as required by law. He is now in jail for that, and for an unrelated drunk driving warrant, on $100,000 bond.

"It's a misdemeanor offense," said CCRKBA Executive Director Joe Waldron, "but it's enough to allow the police and Chicago courts to deflect some culpability for the shooting away from two cops through whose hands the gun passed undocumented, and from the court system that continued to allow killer Salvador Tapia to remain free. Both officers who owned the pistol are now deceased, but neither registered the gun with the city when it was in their possession, even though they presumably knew that was the law."

"Why would any Chicago police officer have an undocumented handgun, purchased in a bar, when more normal channels are available," Waldron wondered. "Why would a second officer buy an undocumented gun from the first one? How and where would a homeless man have kept a record of a transaction that took place in a bar, with a police officer, nearly ten years ago?"

"More important is the sudden silence of both Mayor Daley and Acting Supt. Cline," Waldron noted. "They were quick to push an anti-gun agenda, complaining about the availability of guns on Chicago streets, until it was revealed that the murder weapon had been owned consecutively, without proper registration, by two different cops."

"Those officers are gone, and the courts never dealt with Salvador Tapia," he added, "so Mr. Beuck is a scapegoat. If a lawsuit arises out of this case, as they frequently do, would the estates of the two deceased officers who had that gun between the time Beuck owned it and the time it was used in the shootings be held liable? Would the city? Perhaps Mayor Daley should think about this before any further pronouncements about firearms in his city. It may be easy to get an undocumented gun in Chicago, and now it appears to be even easier if the undocumented gun belonged to a Chicago police officer."

With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is one of the nation's premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States.


-END-

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Copyright © 2003 Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, All Rights Reserved.
Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms
James Madison Building
12500 N.E. Tenth Place
Bellevue, WA 98005 Voice: 425-454-4991
Toll Free: 800-426-4302
FAX: 425-451-3959
email: [email protected]
 
Maybe I'm dense, or maybe I don't think with the bureaucratic mind; but how dose anyone know who owned the gun when they never registered it to their names? This sounds a bit strange.

Did the estates of the officers just pop up and say "Oh, yeah, my <fill in the blank> owned that murder weapon."

What am I missing? A little help here?
 
I don't know if the entire state has registration there, but I can give an ohio example.

I live in the sticks and can buy a gun from a dealer with only a 4473 being needed. If I moved to columbus, I think they have registration, I am expected to register my gun with the city. So the city can't just check all 4473s, they need me to tell them I need to be registered. I forget where in ohio you have to register stuff, I have read of it and now just avoid heading north.

I do know in illinios that chicago has some laws the rest of the state avoids, so I am guessing that is it.

In this case the background check on the serial number of the gun would turn up on 4473s I guess.

It would seem plausible, but I don't know for sure and I avoid that state as well.
 
Jimpeel...
I recall reading in another article that there were witnesses to the three applicable "known" transfers of that weapon. From registered owner to cop 1 and subsequently from cop 1 to cop2.

Not conclusive but ...

Sam
 
Being fairly familiar, perhaps more than that, with the firearms situation in NYC, once upon a time, I lived there, and over the years, having run into some people from Chicago, I'd be hard put to decide, at least re firearms, which was the more crooked, NYC or Chicago.

As I recall, some wag once criticized the Chicago P.D. Another sprug to their defense, with the following, not a direct quote. There is mostly one problem with the Chicago PD, that being that they do not seem to be on the same side as are the majority of the population there. If that could be taken care of, problem solved.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top