Gun dealers under the, err, gun
When criminals need guns, they have plenty of options in a country with nearly 100,000 licensed gun stores. But drug dealers and other crooks don’t shop just anywhere. They have their favorites.
In Compton, Calif., gangsters preferred Boulevard Sales & Service, a shop police said was so felon-friendly, some salesmen offered tips on how to buy a gun despite a criminal record.
In Philadelphia, shady gun buyers sent girlfriends to a suburban pawn shop, Lou’s Loan, where the staff wouldn’t raise a fuss if a young woman came by a few times a month to purchase cheap handguns. [because women don’t buy guns, right? – ed]
And on the outskirts of New Orleans, killers-to-be armed themselves at Elliot’s Gun Shop. Over the past five years, the store was the source of 2,300 weapons later linked to crime, including an astonishing 125 homicides, according to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
In fact, government figures show that an extremely small number of gun shops account for a spectacularly large number of weapons used in crimes.
Is that because those dealers live in high crime areas? But:
“I’ve never run into a situation where a dealer has intentionally violated the law,” said Richard Gardiner, a Virginia lawyer who represents gun dealers. If guns are being bought at these stores by criminals, “it is because they are being exploited by people who know how to beat the system.”
Indeed. Why would a dealer be alarmed if a young lady came in and bought a gun? Is she prohibited and does she have the cash are the only questions that need answering before the dealer sells to them. Gun dealers are not the gun police. That is the ATF’s job. And if a salesman is offering tips on skirting the law, that is a problem.
July 13th, 2007 at 11:03 am
Once again it comes to “If they were enforcing the laws already on the books…”
July 13th, 2007 at 3:18 pm
As I said to Uncle in e-mail, these are the types of people that gun rights activists ought to be giving the Zumbo treatment. (Uncle responds, in effect, “the ATF is saying it, so it must be false.” {g})
Seriously, though, if this is going on, it does way more damage to gun rights than a few dumb-ass remarks.
July 13th, 2007 at 3:28 pm
I did say:
I did not say in effect etc. I said I inherently distrust their claims due to their past behavior and think that they exaggerate quite heavily. That’s different.