What Should Happen To The Person/s That Sells Guns Illegally

[OKTexas]

He bought the AR from Academy Sporting Goods, they do background checks.


.

No is it confirmed the AF did not report this to the right systems..

If so that is a pretty big screw up!

He wouldn't have cleared the background check if they had.


.

The system is not fool proof, it is not 100%. He may have slipped through the cracks. But until they say more, we will not know what transpired.

Aren't you saying pretty much the same thing as this?

It just shows how components of a law can fail and the ineligible will be allowed to buy guns.

.

Maybe, but I was trying to see where the failure happened..

I think you can start with the USAF JAG office.


.

 

[Kosh]

No is it confirmed the AF did not report this to the right systems..

If so that is a pretty big screw up!

He wouldn't have cleared the background check if they had.


.

The system is not fool proof, it is not 100%. He may have slipped through the cracks. But until they say more, we will not know what transpired.

Aren't you saying pretty much the same thing as this?

It just shows how components of a law can fail and the ineligible will be allowed to buy guns.

.

Maybe, but I was trying to see where the failure happened..

I think you can start with the USAF JAG office.


.

"They key difference between dishonorable discharge and bad conduct, as kind of a rule of thumb, is that a bad conduct discharge is for behavior that rises to the level of a misdemeanor, and a dishonorable discharge rises to the level of a felony," Spencer told CBS News on Monday. "The place where this gets relevant to something like firearms is that a dishonorable discharge gets treated like a felony conviction."

Federal law prohibits those who have been dishonorably discharged from buying a firearm, but the law does not prohibit those who have received a bad conduct discharge. Texas law prohibits those with domestic violence convictions from owning firearms, but it is not clear if Kelley's bad conduct discharge for assaults on his then-wife and their child fall under that provision.

 

[whitehall]

Why does someone feel the need to ask "what should happen if someone sells guns illegally"? Look up the freaking penal law, it's a felony. A bigger question is what should happen to agents of the government who sell guns illegally? If the alleged anti-gun left was interested in arresting gun runners why didn't they call for the arrest of Barry Hussein, his A.G. and federal henchmen for shipping over 3,000 illegal weapons to Mexican drug cartels? When you add on felony murder for the death of a Border Patrol officer it adds up to substantial charges and yet the left ignored it.

 

[OKTexas]

He wouldn't have cleared the background check if they had.


.

The system is not fool proof, it is not 100%. He may have slipped through the cracks. But until they say more, we will not know what transpired.

Aren't you saying pretty much the same thing as this?

It just shows how components of a law can fail and the ineligible will be allowed to buy guns.

.

Maybe, but I was trying to see where the failure happened..

I think you can start with the USAF JAG office.


.

"They key difference between dishonorable discharge and bad conduct, as kind of a rule of thumb, is that a bad conduct discharge is for behavior that rises to the level of a misdemeanor, and a dishonorable discharge rises to the level of a felony," Spencer told CBS News on Monday. "The place where this gets relevant to something like firearms is that a dishonorable discharge gets treated like a felony conviction."

Federal law prohibits those who have been dishonorably discharged from buying a firearm, but the law does not prohibit those who have received a bad conduct discharge. Texas law prohibits those with domestic violence convictions from owning firearms, but it is not clear if Kelley's bad conduct discharge for assaults on his then-wife and their child fall under that provision.

Try looking to federal law and the Lautenberg amendment. Any conviction for domestic violence is a disqualifier.


.

 

[miketx]

To people like this violent thug killer, Devin Patrick Kelley, that viciously murders multiple people in cold blood for no reason whatsoever?

LOL! No link or proof, just another smear on guns. You go girl.

 

[Dr Grump]

[

We've tried it your way for decades now, and things constantly get worse. Which is just more proof of how mindless all left-wingers are. We keep trying your system more and more, and things get worse and worse, and you never consider "hey maybe our system doesn't work!". Well the rest of us are not as dumb as those on the left.

The solution is to kill criminals, and arm lawful citizens. That's the fix.

Total utter crap. You haven't tried it 'the left's way' ever. The US is one of the most armed societies in the western world and continues to have one of the highest murder rates per head of population. More guns aren't working.

 

[Slade3200]

I don’t know, I’m just asking questions at this point. I have not researched the subject. My first instinct is, I’d personally like to be able to sell a gun to a friend without it being a crazy hard or expensive process

Exactly, the only way to enforce background checks on private sales it to have a federal registry on every gun in the country. There are about 500 million firearms in private hands at this time and the federal courts say a felon CAN NOT be prosecuted for failing to register a firearm, because they would be incriminating themselves. Are you going to require law abiding citizens to do things a felon can't be required to do? That's exactly where the left is wanting to take this issue.


.

And this is where we may differ but I don’t think a registry is such a bad idea. With the way tech is now a days it could be a quick and easy thing

So you have no problem being required to do something illegal owners can't be required to do. Registration won't be free, transfers won't be free, yet criminals can do anything they want and not spend a dime. I have a big problem with that.


.

Criminals can also steal a car and drive it without a license. That doesn’t mean we should make all cas free and stop issuing drivers licenses. Yes I realize there is a second amendment but I’m not talking about taking guns away I’m talking about the best ways to regulate for the safety of our public

Well when you come up with an effective way to regulate the criminal gun market, I'll be happy to discuss how the law abiding should be regulated. You might want to take a refresher course on the 14th amendment and the equal protection clause.


.

I don’t think it’s possible to regulate a criminal market. That is a law enforcement issue, wouldn’t you agree?

 

[Lewdog]

If someone sells a gun illegally, they should lose their right to sell guns for the rest of their lives, they should forfeit all the guns they have, and they should lose their ability to own guns... on top of a fine. Putting them in jail isn't going change things but make it worse for the innocent people in their family.

If you lock up a husband and father you are punishing the whole family...

If they are selling guns illegally and you take away their right to sell guns legally, you have taken nothing away. They will still sell illegally and will still own guns illegally. You are in a sense saying, do nothing. You really think that will work?

You'd be amazed how many people change their direction in life when they are given a second chance. And I didn't just say to take away their rights to sell guns. I said to take away their right to OWN guns as well.

And they still will have illegal guns and still sell illegally. You are doing nothing. You'd be amazed how many are career criminals and should be punished. Sorry, you break the law, you pay the consequences. The illegal gun that you sold illegally kills 26 people, then you are culpable in the murder. Otherwise it is silly to have the laws at all.

And there are laws against murder, and people still murder people, so should we quit wasting money on arresting and imprisoning murderers? It's a ridiculous argument and you have NO IDEA how many of the people who lose their license to sell guns and one them will still do so illegally. And what does it matter if they do? They were breaking the law in the first place, so even if just ONE person that loses their license for selling a gun illegally stops because of the new law, that's better than doing absolutely nothing at all.

 

[OKTexas]

Exactly, the only way to enforce background checks on private sales it to have a federal registry on every gun in the country. There are about 500 million firearms in private hands at this time and the federal courts say a felon CAN NOT be prosecuted for failing to register a firearm, because they would be incriminating themselves. Are you going to require law abiding citizens to do things a felon can't be required to do? That's exactly where the left is wanting to take this issue.


.

And this is where we may differ but I don’t think a registry is such a bad idea. With the way tech is now a days it could be a quick and easy thing

So you have no problem being required to do something illegal owners can't be required to do. Registration won't be free, transfers won't be free, yet criminals can do anything they want and not spend a dime. I have a big problem with that.


.

Criminals can also steal a car and drive it without a license. That doesn’t mean we should make all cas free and stop issuing drivers licenses. Yes I realize there is a second amendment but I’m not talking about taking guns away I’m talking about the best ways to regulate for the safety of our public

Well when you come up with an effective way to regulate the criminal gun market, I'll be happy to discuss how the law abiding should be regulated. You might want to take a refresher course on the 14th amendment and the equal protection clause.


.

I don’t think it’s possible to regulate a criminal market. That is a law enforcement issue, wouldn’t you agree?

Yet it makes sense to you to disadvantage and add costs to the law abiding? That's playing right into the leftist agenda. If they can't take your guns, they want to price them out of the citizens reach. Just look at the taxes and other crap blue states are coming up with. In NY City it takes about 6 months and 600 to a 1000 dollars just to get permission to have a hand gun in your home. Only the elite get concealed carry permits there.


.

 

[Slade3200]

And this is where we may differ but I don’t think a registry is such a bad idea. With the way tech is now a days it could be a quick and easy thing

So you have no problem being required to do something illegal owners can't be required to do. Registration won't be free, transfers won't be free, yet criminals can do anything they want and not spend a dime. I have a big problem with that.


.

Criminals can also steal a car and drive it without a license. That doesn’t mean we should make all cas free and stop issuing drivers licenses. Yes I realize there is a second amendment but I’m not talking about taking guns away I’m talking about the best ways to regulate for the safety of our public

Well when you come up with an effective way to regulate the criminal gun market, I'll be happy to discuss how the law abiding should be regulated. You might want to take a refresher course on the 14th amendment and the equal protection clause.


.

I don’t think it’s possible to regulate a criminal market. That is a law enforcement issue, wouldn’t you agree?

Yet it makes sense to you to disadvantage and add costs to the law abiding? That's playing right into the leftist agenda. If they can't take your guns, they want to price them out of the citizens reach. Just look at the taxes and other crap blue states are coming up with. In NY City it takes about 6 months and 600 to a 1000 dollars just to get permission to have a hand gun in your home. Only the elite get concealed carry permits there.


.

Im wouldn't support measures like that... Like I said I own guns and don't think it should be hard or expensive to buy sell or use them as long as you are a law abiding citizen. NYC does have crazy tough laws on gun owners. As far as I understand that was a decision that city leadership and the voters made, which they have the right to do. I also recall NYC as being one of the most dangerous cities in the US a few decades ago and now it has made tremendous strides. I don't know if there is a correlation to the gun laws or if that was part of the program, but it is interesting.

 

[OldLady]

I read he bought the gun from a sports store. It seems they didn't run the background check -- or-- isn't there some law that if the results aren't back within 48 hours, they have to sell you the gun anyway?
Maybe he gave a fake name?
Who knows, but it wasn't an "illegal" street sale.

 

[Kosh]

I read he bought the gun from a sports store. It seems they didn't run the background check -- or-- isn't there some law that if the results aren't back within 48 hours, they have to sell you the gun anyway?
Maybe he gave a fake name?
Who knows, but it wasn't an "illegal" street sale.

Well it seems the NBC far left narrative has panned out to not be true!

In April 2016, Kelley purchased the Ruger AR-556 rifle he allegedly used in the shooting from a store in San Antonio, Texas, a law enforcement official said. There was no disqualifying information in the background check conducted as required for the purchase, a law enforcement official told CNN.

Texas gunman killed his grandmother-in-law and 25 others at church - CNN

 

[beagle9]

Criminals can also steal a car and drive it without a license. That doesn’t mean we should make all cas free and stop issuing drivers licenses. Yes I realize there is a second amendment but I’m not talking about taking guns away I’m talking about the best ways to regulate for the safety of our public

Well when you come up with an effective way to regulate the criminal gun market, I'll be happy to discuss how the law abiding should be regulated. You might want to take a refresher course on the 14th amendment and the equal protection clause.


.

The far left does not care about the Constitution.

It is all about the narratives they can run, nothing else.

So far none on the far left has been able to provide any evidence to any existing laws that would have stopped many of these mass shooting!

And as you have already stated (and I will paraphrase): Gun laws only affect law abiding citizens!

Actually it appears the AF didn't enter this guys conviction for domestic violence in the NICS system, if they had he wouldn't have been able to buy the guns. It just shows how components of a law can fail and the ineligible will be allowed to buy guns. He went through the background checks.


.

Is this speculation or has it been confirmed officially?

He bought the AR from Academy Sporting Goods, they do background checks.


.

. So he passed the background check ? What kind of background check is required (a monopoly get out of jail free card)?

 

[sartre play]

Exactly, the only way to enforce background checks on private sales it to have a federal registry on every gun in the country. There are about 500 million firearms in private hands at this time and the federal courts say a felon CAN NOT be prosecuted for failing to register a firearm, because they would be incriminating themselves. Are you going to require law abiding citizens to do things a felon can't be required to do? That's exactly where the left is wanting to take this issue.


.

And this is where we may differ but I don’t think a registry is such a bad idea. With the way tech is now a days it could be a quick and easy thing

So you have no problem being required to do something illegal owners can't be required to do. Registration won't be free, transfers won't be free, yet criminals can do anything they want and not spend a dime. I have a big problem with that.


.

Criminals can also steal a car and drive it without a license. That doesn’t mean we should make all cas free and stop issuing drivers licenses. Yes I realize there is a second amendment but I’m not talking about taking guns away I’m talking about the best ways to regulate for the safety of our public

Well when you come up with an effective way to regulate the criminal gun market, I'll be happy to discuss how the law abiding should be regulated. You might want to take a refresher course on the 14th amendment and the equal protection clause.


.

The far left does not care about the Constitution.

It is all about the narratives they can run, nothing else.

So far none on the far left has been able to provide any evidence to any existing laws that would have stopped many of these mass shooting!

And as you have already stated (and I will paraphrase): Gun laws only affect law abiding citizens!

This has nothing to do with the far left or the constitution , the conversation is about can we do anything about the selling of illegal guns.

 

[OldLady]

I read he bought the gun from a sports store. It seems they didn't run the background check -- or-- isn't there some law that if the results aren't back within 48 hours, they have to sell you the gun anyway?
Maybe he gave a fake name?
Who knows, but it wasn't an "illegal" street sale.

Well it seems the NBC far left narrative has panned out to not be true!

In April 2016, Kelley purchased the Ruger AR-556 rifle he allegedly used in the shooting from a store in San Antonio, Texas, a law enforcement official said. There was no disqualifying information in the background check conducted as required for the purchase, a law enforcement official told CNN.

Texas gunman killed his grandmother-in-law and 25 others at church - CNN

How could that be? In Texas, DV convictions don't keep you from owning a gun?

 

[Kosh]

And this is where we may differ but I don’t think a registry is such a bad idea. With the way tech is now a days it could be a quick and easy thing

So you have no problem being required to do something illegal owners can't be required to do. Registration won't be free, transfers won't be free, yet criminals can do anything they want and not spend a dime. I have a big problem with that.


.

Criminals can also steal a car and drive it without a license. That doesn’t mean we should make all cas free and stop issuing drivers licenses. Yes I realize there is a second amendment but I’m not talking about taking guns away I’m talking about the best ways to regulate for the safety of our public

Well when you come up with an effective way to regulate the criminal gun market, I'll be happy to discuss how the law abiding should be regulated. You might want to take a refresher course on the 14th amendment and the equal protection clause.


.

The far left does not care about the Constitution.

It is all about the narratives they can run, nothing else.

So far none on the far left has been able to provide any evidence to any existing laws that would have stopped many of these mass shooting!

And as you have already stated (and I will paraphrase): Gun laws only affect law abiding citizens!

This has nothing to do with the far left or the constitution , the conversation is about can we do anything about the selling of illegal guns.

Says the far left drone!

The gun was not illegal and yes it is about the far left not being able to cite anything that would really help.

The Constitution is always in play no matter how much the far left just sees it as a GD piece of paper!

 

[beagle9]

To people like this violent thug killer, Devin Patrick Kelley, that viciously murders multiple people in cold blood for no reason whatsoever?

Anyone who sells/gives/lends a gun to another person (non-family member) w/o a background check should be criminally liable for any crimes committed with the gun.

. Would be a way to slow down what should be an illegal transferring of guns.

 

[Kosh]

I read he bought the gun from a sports store. It seems they didn't run the background check -- or-- isn't there some law that if the results aren't back within 48 hours, they have to sell you the gun anyway?
Maybe he gave a fake name?
Who knows, but it wasn't an "illegal" street sale.

Well it seems the NBC far left narrative has panned out to not be true!

In April 2016, Kelley purchased the Ruger AR-556 rifle he allegedly used in the shooting from a store in San Antonio, Texas, a law enforcement official said. There was no disqualifying information in the background check conducted as required for the purchase, a law enforcement official told CNN.

Texas gunman killed his grandmother-in-law and 25 others at church - CNN

How could that be? In Texas, DV convictions don't keep you from owning a gun?

He was court-martialed in 2012 for assault on his spouse and assault on their child, according to Stefanek. He served a year in confinement, received a bad conduct discharge and had his rank reduced.

It was not reported as DV it was reported as bad conduct discharge.

 

[OldLady]

I read he bought the gun from a sports store. It seems they didn't run the background check -- or-- isn't there some law that if the results aren't back within 48 hours, they have to sell you the gun anyway?
Maybe he gave a fake name?
Who knows, but it wasn't an "illegal" street sale.

Well it seems the NBC far left narrative has panned out to not be true!

In April 2016, Kelley purchased the Ruger AR-556 rifle he allegedly used in the shooting from a store in San Antonio, Texas, a law enforcement official said. There was no disqualifying information in the background check conducted as required for the purchase, a law enforcement official told CNN.

Texas gunman killed his grandmother-in-law and 25 others at church - CNN

How could that be? In Texas, DV convictions don't keep you from owning a gun?

He was court-martialed in 2012 for assault on his spouse and assault on their child, according to Stefanek. He served a year in confinement, received a bad conduct discharge and had his rank reduced.

It was not reported as DV it was reported as bad conduct discharge.

Oh, wow. Although it was reported that way, was he allowed to own a gun? Because if he was, the armed forces should take a look at that.

 

[sartre play]

So you have no problem being required to do something illegal owners can't be required to do. Registration won't be free, transfers won't be free, yet criminals can do anything they want and not spend a dime. I have a big problem with that.


.

Criminals can also steal a car and drive it without a license. That doesn’t mean we should make all cas free and stop issuing drivers licenses. Yes I realize there is a second amendment but I’m not talking about taking guns away I’m talking about the best ways to regulate for the safety of our public

Well when you come up with an effective way to regulate the criminal gun market, I'll be happy to discuss how the law abiding should be regulated. You might want to take a refresher course on the 14th amendment and the equal protection clause.


.

The far left does not care about the Constitution.

It is all about the narratives they can run, nothing else.

So far none on the far left has been able to provide any evidence to any existing laws that would have stopped many of these mass shooting!

And as you have already stated (and I will paraphrase): Gun laws only affect law abiding citizens!

This has nothing to do with the far left or the constitution , the conversation is about can we do anything about the selling of illegal guns.

Says the far left drone!

The gun was not illegal and yes it is about the far left not being able to cite anything that would really help.

The Constitution is always in play no matter how much the far left just sees it as a GD piece of paper!

There is nothing in the constitution or amendments to the constitution about what we could/should do about illegal gun sales