Conservative Daily News - The best news, analysis and opinion articles written by a collection of citizen journalists. Covering a range of important topics in blogs, op-ed, and news posts, these upstanding patriots are bringing back American exceptionalism with every entry..

New York Times demonstrates why universal background checks will fail

feinstein

Photo credit: Marc Langsam

An article posted on NYTimes.com attempts to convince readers of the reasons that universal background checks should pass. Instead, it demonstrates what the NRA and gun rights activists have said all along – criminals don’t follow the law.

Yesterday, The New York Times website posted an investigation into an internet firearms classifieds site in order to make the case that universal background checks are a necessity. Using several conversations with a felon, the reporter shows just how criminals get guns and then makes the case that, by some miracle, universal background checks would fix it.

The intentions and background of the prospective buyer were hidden, as is customary on such sites. The person posting these ads, however, left a phone number, enabling The New York Times to trace them to their source: Omar Roman-Martinez, 29, of Colorado Springs, who has a pair of felony convictions for burglary and another for motor vehicle theft, as well as a misdemeanor domestic violence conviction — all of which bar him from having guns

..

The mere fact that Mr. Roman-Martinez was seeking to buy and sell guns on Armslist underscores why extending background checks to the growing world of online sales has become a centerpiece of new gun legislation being taken up in the Senate this week.

First, if the New York reporter were to engage in selling a gun to the Colorado Springs felon, the transfer is already required to go through a licensed gun dealer (FFL) which would, in all cases, result in a background check. Federal law requires that gun transfers across state lines require a background check and transfer through a licensed dealer. The problem demonstrated by the Times article is that oddly, criminals don’t follow laws – SHOCK!

Assuming both parties lived in the same state, federal law does not require a background check. Even if it did, it is a fair assumption that Mr. Roman-Martinez would find someone else either ignorant or irreverent of existing law. The only ones that would be left following the law are law-abiding citizens engaged in the exchange of personal property or the handing-down of family treasures.

The naivety presented in the article is typical of politicians and journalists more interested in confiscating guns than protecting the public. The author goes on to incorrectly state how the current gun laws work:

Notably, 94 percent of the ads were posted by “private parties,” who, unlike licensed dealers, are not required to conduct background checks.

Only if the trade is conducted within their own state, and then only if their state has no additional laws requiring permits or checks, is this true. In many cases, background checks are already required, but are not being performed. By omitting these caveats until much later in the article, the author makes it seem like these transactions are taking place only because universal background checks aren’t in place. Requiring more situations in which a background is supposed to be performed will most certainly not prevent those bent on skirting the law from doing so.

As if to further accentuate the point that more laws don’t make better citizens, the article shows that many people are already illegally engaged in the gun trade.

The examination of Armslist raised questions about whether many sellers are essentially functioning as unlicensed firearms dealers, in contravention of federal law. The law says that people who “engage in the business” of selling firearms need to obtain a license and conduct background checks on customers. While the definition of engaging in business is vague, The Times found that more than two dozen people had posted more than 20 different guns for sale in a several-month span.

By law, buying and selling this many guns already requires a Federal Firearms License (FFL). It doesn’t appear that the subjects of the Times investigation are following that law either.

If somewhat direct proof that liberal  gun control won’t do anything – how about direct proof?

A 2011 undercover investigation by the City of New York examined private party gun sellers on a range of Web sites, including Armslist, to see if they would sell guns to someone who said that they probably could not pass a background check. (Federal law bars sales to any person the seller has reason to believe is prohibited from purchasing firearms). Investigators found seventy-seven of 125 online sellers agreed to sell the weapons anyway.

Almost 80% are willing to sell a gun to someone who they believe would not pass a background check – against federal law. That means, already illegal… So making it illegal to sell a gun without a universal background check will have the same law-abiding citizens performing the same checks they already are and criminals skirting the system the same way they do today.

Rich Mitchell is the Sr. Managing Editor of Conservative Daily News. His posts may contain opinions that are his own and are not necessarily shared by Anomalous Media, CDN, staff or .. much of anyone else. Find him on twitter, facebook and google+
Conservative Daily News allows a great deal of latitude in the topics contributors choose and their approaches to the content. This is due to our approach that citizens have a voice, not only the mass media. Readers will likely not agree with every contributor or every post, but find reasons to think about the topic and respond with comments. We value differing opinions as well as those that agree. Opinions of contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of CDN, Anomalous Media or staff. Click here if you'd like to write for CDN.
Put This Story in your Circles and Share with your Friends

Tags: , ,

Comments (3)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Incepeunsuh says:

    The ??Project Runway?? designers go back-to-school as 11 tween and adolescent painters from the Harlem School from the Arts become their inventive consultants.

    Here??s hoping there??s pizza, donuts and Red Bull within the workroom.

    And sew it goes:

    The Challenge: The designers ought to collaborate on an original painting with their young muses and after that, generate an avant-garde design determined by the teen-spiration. Their designs will have to push boundaries but not be ??too literal.?? In other words, go weird or go household.

    The Making-it-Workroom Drama: Many of the designers just don??t understand how to kid around. Viktor Luna ??needs a cocktail?? after painting with a hyper-opinionated, 12-year-old Skye. Laura Kathleen fashions quite flowers with 11-year-old Kai, the Dali Lama of art, who preaches that ??failure?? is superior. Um, Kai clearly hasn??t been critiqued by judge Michael Kors.
    Meanwhile, Olivier Green glues his fairly chiffon bodice to his model, breaking the ??PR?? rules and gets a tongue-lashing demerit (but not detention) from mentor Tim Gunn.

    The Runway Show: Is an Expressionistic mess and we??re avant performed with it. The catwalk options undesirable prom dresses, a hooker wolf suit, a dress Gunn dubbed ??Take Me to Geronimo?? along with a denim interpretation of FedEx delivery boxes.

    The Guest Judge: Designer, shoe maven, philanthropist and political activist Kenneth Cole brings his often sturdy billboard viewpoints to the panel.

    Who??s In: Color-blind designer Anthony Ryan Auld wows again with an ethereal gown depending on the brushstrokes of his student muse. Heidi Klum is so in enjoy with his frock, Stylelist just about forgot she was desperate to ??auf him last week.

    Who??s Out: Joshu a Christensen gets mauled by Kors for his ??Victorian cocktail dress in Las Vegas?? wolf-inspired dress and is sent residence –again. Stylelist understands it was an clear decision to do away with Christensen, who already had been eliminated in episode two and was provided a second shot on the runway after Cecelia Motwani quit the competitors. Nevertheless, we have been gunning for Green??s glued-on valium gown to motivate the judges to bid him adieu.

    Photo courtesy of Lifetime.

  2. dcnj says:

    ugh… O! if everyone followed the law!

    they just don’t get it…

  3. OldmanRick says:

    Passing a law that has as many holes in it as a sieve is ridiculous. Just enforce existing law.