Skip to main content

View Diary: Johns Hopkins study: After Missouri's gun background checks were ditched, more people were murdered (205 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Confused grammar in that 2nd sentence... (13+ / 0-)

    ...Meant to say that people who don't have a legal right to buy or possess a firearm DO try to buy them and get stopped by background checks. NRA and others claim that criminals don't try to buy guns legally so background check has no effect.

    Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

    by Meteor Blades on Wed Feb 19, 2014 at 02:09:49 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Oh, come on ... (2+ / 0-)

      You know as well as I that  1) not all people who have lost their gun rights NEED to have lost their gun rights ... and that not all people who have not yet done anything to deserve losing their gun rights,  have any business with  access to firearms.

      And you know as well as I that the Several States have different degrees of conscientiousness when it comes to reporting those of their citizens who really should not have gun rights.

      So, under the "you gotta pick your battles" concept ...  

      It seems to me the greater evil has been guns from lax-control states being sold into strict-control states and then showing up at crimes and crime scenes.

      Given the "Pick only one" choice ... I would have said that registration and tracking of the interstate "casual" commerce in guns was more important than trying to sort "good guys with guns" from "bad guys with guns" - based on published public records.

      Now, I'm not so sure.  A 25% rise in homicides JUST from relaxing the casual sales restrictions?   That is, as I said, "shocking."

      But, given that we're not likely to get EITHER registration and tracking OR "background checks for casual sales" at the national level ...

      •  You would be wrongmo (7+ / 0-)

        Most crime guns that were traced by the FBI are recovered from criminal investigations in the same state where the gun was legally sold.

         (caveat: not all crime guns are traced)

        "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

        by LilithGardener on Wed Feb 19, 2014 at 03:48:02 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  You understand that current federal law (3+ / 0-)

          makes it extremely difficult for EVEN the FBI to trace guns across state lines?

          That the results of background checks may not be retained longer than needed to complete the sale

          That the "bound book" that licensed dealers use to record individual sales can be audited only ONCE per year by ATFE and FBI agents ...

          So, maybe you 'splain me, how the FBI is supposed to track ANY guns across state lines, given those restrictions.

          Perhaps you know what percentage of  FBI investigations do not identify a source for the weapons ?   I certainly don't.

          And then, too ... is the FBI hardly investigates every domestic shooting and bodega robbery to find out where the involved guns came from.

          •  Every gun starts out in a legal sale (4+ / 0-)

            Guns have make, model, serial number, etc. and the FBI contacts the manufacturer. They know which distributor or dealer received which lots of each type of gun. The FBI then contacts the FFL to find out who the first legal purchser was. Even the the federal government is not allowed to keep track of who bought which gun, the FFLs must keep those records for every sale, when they fill out their part of form 4473.

            You're correct that the whole chain of ownership may not be known, since a gun may change hands multiple times between the first sale, and the last transfer before it is picked in a crime.

            Here's an interactive map showing how guns flow across state lines into criminal markets. The full report is available in the lower left corner, below the map. http://www.tracetheguns.org/...

            Note it's from 2010 based on 2009 trace data, so it's a bit out of date. Many states have changed their laws since then.  I'll be happy to discuss the map or the metrics further if your have any questions.

            "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

            by LilithGardener on Wed Feb 19, 2014 at 06:37:23 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  And you're right (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ThatSinger, Silvia Nightshade

            The FBI only traces guns recovered during federal investigations and any guns that local LEOs request traces for. Many jurisdictions don't trace all their crime guns.

            But all those traces remain in the FBI's database of lost or stolen guns. And when an FFL goes out of business their records get sent to the BATFE. (which have to be searched by hand, because NRA/ALEC got a law passed that they are not allowed to digitize them.

            "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

            by LilithGardener on Wed Feb 19, 2014 at 06:46:43 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  To say I disagree with the Thomas Court's (3+ / 0-)

            interpretation of the 2nd Amendment would be an understatement. :-)

            I support mandatory and permanent gun registration at every sale. This currently lacks majority support in many (thought not all) jurisdictions, even if Scalia-led rulings allowed it (which I'm not sure of). Registration doesn't strike me as "infringement" in any meaningful sense. (And no, I'm not worried about some Red Dawn dystopic fiction in which only privately-owned guns will save us from a tyrannical government. For that matter, in such a fictional scenario, I'd rather have my car than a gun.)

      •  Can you explain to me again (4+ / 0-)

        why we would need to "pick only one" from that menu? I'm not clear on what the problem would be with "all of the above."

        "These are not candidates. These are the empty stand-ins for lobbyists' policies to be legislated later." - Chimpy, 9/24/10

        by NWTerriD on Wed Feb 19, 2014 at 03:57:23 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Amplifying the "casual" commerce idea - think (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Silvia Nightshade

        about corrupt FFLs that don't have to keep an inventory of their stock and you can imagine some bad things happening. If background checks at the retail level cause a spike in the murder rate, what does it mean if a corrupt FFL sells in bulk to people that shouldn't have them, and they drive to Chicago and mark up the merchandise and turn a profit ... the retail sales rep gets a cut and I'm guessing the FFL cuts a % at the retail transaction - everyone wins, right?

        "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

        by We Shall Overcome on Wed Feb 19, 2014 at 05:24:20 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Dealers failing to police sales are not an issue (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          FrankRose

          From a White House report:  

          10. It isn’t true that most gun acquisitions by criminals can be blamed on a few bad dealers. The report concedes that in 1998, “1,020 of 83,272 federally licensed retailers (1.2 percent) accounted for 57.4 percent of all guns traced by the ATF.” However, “Gun sales are also relatively concentrated; approximately 15 percent of retailers request 80 percent of background checks on gun buyers conducted by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.” Researchers have found that “the share of crime gun traces attributed to these few dealers only slightly exceeded their share of handgun sales, which are almost equally concentrated among a few dealers.” Volume, not laxity, drives the number of ill-fated sales.
          Bold in the original.  

          I'm a 4 Freedoms Democrat.

          by DavidMS on Wed Feb 19, 2014 at 06:58:46 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I think they are making this point, in order to (0+ / 0-)

            not allow the focus to go away from other problems. In other words, they are making the point so that the issue of corrupt FFLs (a few bad apples) isn't used as a scapegoat that would take focus off of other issues that lead to gun violence.

            I would think nothing would please the gun lobby more, than to learn that the problem is just a few bad apple FFLs.

            I'd also caution that the White House/CDC report included "research" from Gary Kleck. The CDC report is a good first step, but that report is politicized in that it's a "bipartisan" effort with the NRA (that's generally against research that could undermine gun sales) getting to have friendly researches included.

            That's not to say that you can indeed put too much focus on corrupt FFLs, but I was making the point about them to underscore the issue of background checks - ie, the data in Missouri shows w/o BCs murders spiked ... and corrupt FFLs are indeed another problem that do make an impact:

            It was a crime spawned by greed three years earlier, 500 miles away, at Ed's Pawn Shop in northwestern Mississippi.

            Michael Elliott bought a 45 caliber Smith and Wesson pistol for a man named Quawi Gates. Elliott's profit was $100.

            Police recovered that very weapon from the scene of Wortham's murder and the ATF traced it back to when Elliott bought it in 2007.

            Gates, a Chicagoan from Englewood, was going to school at Rust College in Holly Springs, Mississippi. He was charged with being the ringleader of a trafficking operation that supplied weapons to Chicago's Gangster Disciples. ... The Feds said Mississippi's gun laws make it easy for criminals to acquire weapons through straw purchasers - people who knowingly buy guns for someone else and then lie on the purchase paperwork, claiming they are buying it for themselves.

            http://www.myfoxchicago.com/...

            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

            by We Shall Overcome on Wed Feb 19, 2014 at 07:34:22 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Few points (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              FrankRose, theatre goon

              Firstly, this report shows that the problem isn't in the FFL system, FFL holders are quite serious about making sure that customers properly complete 4473s and reliant state forms correctly and the submitting them correctly.  I can't speak to your direct experience, but this is what I have always seen in every gun store.  

              Secondly, the plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'.

              Third, there bad actor in your anecdote was not the FFL.  

              Fourth, have you ever seen a 4473?

              I'm a 4 Freedoms Democrat.

              by DavidMS on Wed Feb 19, 2014 at 08:39:14 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Haven't seen a 4473, but have comment with (0+ / 0-)

                those that have and have read plenty about FFLs to know that some are corrupt.

                Yes, FFLs were ancillary to the debate on background checks.

                Yes, there are corrupt FFLs.

                Yes, corrupt FFLs are a problem.

                Yes, it's important to include corrupt FFLs in a discussion focused on guns getting into the wrong hands.

                No, corrupt FFLs are not the biggest problem there is.

                Finally:

                "Third, there bad actor in your anecdote was not the FFL."

                You misspelled the word - "the"

                "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                by We Shall Overcome on Thu Feb 20, 2014 at 06:28:28 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Did you read what I linked to a few posts above? (0+ / 0-)

                  http://www.dailykos.com/...

                  There is direct evidence that FFLs are not the problem.  Given that FFLs conduct background checks I don't see how the two are not linked.  

                  Its not much different than the antiabortion extremists going on about the "abortion industry" and its obscene profits.  

                  I'm a 4 Freedoms Democrat.

                  by DavidMS on Thu Feb 20, 2014 at 05:36:57 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site