It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


In its latest gun inquiry, city faults online sellers. Many agreed to sales known to be illegal.

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 05:00 PM
Source: by Joseph Goldstein, New York Times NEW YORK Thursday, December 15, 2011

Here are a few quotes--- "Major Michael R. Bloomberg [New York city,] has dispatched private investigators to gun stores and gun shows as far away as Arizona to illustrate how some dealers are willing to sell firearms to people they believe are disqualified from owning them.

Now the major has turned his attention to the online marketplace; in a sting operation, the city hired private investigators to buy guns from sellers they found online. In many instances, the sales went forward even though the investigators told the sellers they were probably unable to pass a background check or were too young to buy a pistol legally, Mr Bloomberg said at a news conference on Wednesday.

While private gun owners can generally sell their weapons without checking into the background of the purchaser, they are forbidden by federal law to go forward with the transaction if they have reason to believe the buyer is barred from owning guns. Causes for disqualification include felony convictions or mental illness.

The investigators contacted 125 sellers in the last month, and in more than 60 percent of the cases, the sellers were apparently willing to go through with the deal even after the investigator explained that he would most likely fail a background check, city officials said."

This is just a little heads-up, that gun-grabber -- Major Bloomberg-- is on the warpath again; now taking his war to the civilian population of the United States of America.
edit on 15-12-2011 by Erno86 because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-12-2011 by Erno86 because: typo

edit on 15-12-2011 by Erno86 because: spelling

edit on 15-12-2011 by Erno86 because: added a few words

posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 05:24 PM
Many guns, many dealers many many many piles of paper work.

The more there are out there and people willing to buy them, they'll be the supply in whatever closest-to-the-law from possible.

Dealers will always break the law, but those willing to go the distance, few and fewer the more serious it gets. At the moment, everyones doing it because its easy, carrys a small penelty and is done on such mass its unlikly to come to light at all.

posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 05:37 PM
actually the penalties are ASTOUNDING if you get caught selling to someone you shouldn't .... as usual the state of new york sticking it's noses in other people's business.... it's not enough for them to take their own citizen's freedom they want to come for everyone elses as well.

Quite frankly I don't believe this "study" for a number of reasons.

1. For an online sale to legally go through across state lines you MUST transfer the guns between two FFL holders! This is NOT NEGOTIABLE and if you try to go around this you do so at your own risk. If you get caught transferring a firearm interstate without going through an FFL on both ends get ready to do at least 5 years in federal prison.

2. New York has a beef with free states allowing their citizenry to own guns without jumping through hoops like they make their citizens jump through.

3. Reference statement one and think about doing 5 to 15 in a federal lockup again.

posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 05:40 PM
reply to post by roguetechie

While this might be true where you are from in england the penalties in the US are NOT trivial and I have yet to meet a dealer willing to risk his freedom and way to make a living to sell you a 200 dollar throwaway pistol.

I'll thank you to not characterize firearms dealers in such a manner as you have. They are, as a group, a very law abiding bunch here in the US even when they disagree with said laws.

posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 05:42 PM
The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed!

Infringed: Act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on: "infringe on his privacy"

shall not be violated; shall not be encroached upon; shall not be defeated; shall not be frustrated;

Medieval Latin infringere, from Latin, to break, crush, from in- + frangere to break

If it is truly a RIGHT as guaranteed by our Constitution, they have no right or ability to interfere with a citizen's possession of a firearm. If they can infringe upon our rights, then they are not rights at all; merely privileges to be given or taken away as they desire.

posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 06:17 PM
What they're not telling you is that private citizens do NOT have access to the NICS system. Also the states in question allow the private sale of weapons between two owners.

The only requirement in nearly all of these states is that a photo ID must be shown establishing residency in that state to the seller.

If private citizens had access to the NICS system this problem would go away virtually over night. I would use it and so would many of my buddies who have bought and sold privately in the State of Nevada.

The only sellers REQUIRED by state and federal law to use the NICS system are FFL dealers. Everyone else is BARRED from accessing it.
edit on 16-12-2011 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 15 2011 @ 06:17 PM
reply to post by DarthMuerte

You are correct that is what the second amendment means. It means that any attempts by the state or federal government to control or regulate gun possesion by citizens of this country are illegal under the second amendment of the constitution of the United States. "Shall not be infringed".

posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 01:38 PM
If you are an FFL you have a duty to uphold the law. In these particular cases, revoke the licenses of those willing to look the other way. I can see where the grabbers want this to go eventually. The gun shows. Once again it is the duty of the private sellers and FFL's to follow proper procedure. The gun shows that I regularly attend make that very clear and warn that "secret shoppers" are always present and looking for an unlawful sale. If you are a seller and you F up, too bad because you make all of us look bad. Pay your penalty.

posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 01:48 PM
If you watch the related video it's pretty ambiguous when the buyer makes a crack about not passing a background check.

Im sure nearly all buyers have made a joke while filling out the FFL form. Adjudicated mentally defected? Fugitive from justice? Maybe, how would I know? Renounced my US citizenship? Can you even do that? NICS will catch the lies. Or at least its supposed to.

Plus, Clinton made it so private sellers cant access the NICS system. Now who's fault is that?
edit on 16-12-2011 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 16 2011 @ 02:04 PM
reply to post by thisguyrighthere

I've made a couple of cracks while filling out the forms in the past and never got a second look. The questions are rather silly when you think about it. I still remember seeing guns for sale in the classified section in the paper when I was a kid. I would always comb through the big Sunday section to see what kind of cool guns people were selling. That was many moons and a different world away from where we are now.

Incidentally, Holiday Gun Sales are booming right now. I went to my local shop last Saturday and the gun counter was about 3 deep with about 6 people working it. Just hope they crossed the t's and dotted the i's

posted on Dec, 17 2011 @ 12:10 PM
The current ongoing "sting" operation by Mayor Bloomberg, is just another one of his major anti-gun operations on his list. Bloomberg banned certain camoflage Durocoat paint designs on firearms in New York City. He went after gun dealers as far away as Arizona, for not crossing the t's and dotting the i's. Also.... Bloomberg is pals with a major anti-gun nut, and former Nazi Jew hunter--- Paul Soros.
edit on 17-12-2011 by Erno86 because: added a word

new topics

top topics


log in