Crack Down on ‘Bad Apple’ Gun Dealers – It’s a Trap!

These gun grabbers and their media enablers really annoy me sometimes. OK, a lot of the time. Most of the time. Fine. Always. Take the editorial Crack down on ‘bad apple’ gun dealers over at cnn.com (complete with a photo gallery of spree killings). You’d think that Chicken Noodle News’ online editorial team would make mention of the fact that one the article’s co-authors, Dan Gross, is the president of the Brady Campaign and Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Or that the other author, Ruben Gallego [above] is an Arizona Dem U.S. Rep who proclaimed . . .

I know as a US Marine who is trained in close quarters combat that having untrained individuals carrying guns can make the work of law enforcement officers more difficult.

And not knowing the anti-gun bias of the writers of a CNN Op-Ed makes the work of discerning their bias more difficult. But bias there is, aplenty. [Note: since this article appeared on TTAG, CNN has added a bio of both authors and a disclaimer.]

For many Americans, the profound sadness of mass killings this summer in these cities is compounded by the frustrating sense that these events are being met with nothing more than hand-wringing and empty rhetoric.

This kind of bloodshed has become an accepted fact of American life, facilitated by an irresponsible corporate gun lobby and too many politicians, particularly Republican leadership in Congress that refuses to do the will of the American people. Yet, despite the polarizing politics that define this issue, there is still much that can be done to address the scourge of gun violence in America.

Number one on Gallego and Gross’ list: background checks for every gun sale, including private sales. Never mind that federal background checks on all gun sales would add delay and expense to what is supposed to be an un-infringed right to keep and bear arms. Never mind that “universal background checks” would put America [further] on the road to gun registration -> confiscation -> very bad things. The important thing: Americans support it! Like they supported slavery.

Anyway, “gun safety” proposal number two . . .

While Congress should certainly take action to close critical gaps in our gun laws and expand Brady background checks to all gun sales, gun dealers should not wait on Congress to take the steps necessary to prevent dangerous people from obtaining weapons.

The Brady Campaign has devised a smart, simple Gun Dealer Code of Conduct that can dramatically reduce gun injuries and deaths now. Among its key provisions is a requirement that dealers not sell any gun without a completed background check — a policy that Walmart, the nation’s largest seller of firearms, voluntarily implemented in 2002, with success. Broad adoption of the Brady Code of Conduct would prevent dangerous people from getting guns and thus reduce gun crimes, injuries and deaths across the board.

Similarly, there’s no reason for the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to wait to aggressively pursue America’s top suppliers of crime guns.

Indeed, this relatively small group of “bad apple” gun dealers is responsible for supplying almost the entire illegal market. In light of these troubling statistics, DOJ and ATF can and must do more to hold accountable gun dealers that put the public and our communities at risk.

That is why we recently wrote to Attorney General Loretta Lynch urging her to lead a national effort to identify, reform, shut down, and — where appropriate — prosecute “bad apple” gun dealers.

DOJ and ATF’s efforts should include focused, annual inspections of dealers supplying crime guns and public disclosure of information related to the supply of crime guns. Armed with robust data, communities across the country will be better equipped to name and shame the “bad apple” dealers whose business practices put our families at risk — a tactic we have already employed on a limited basis in Phoenix and other major cities.

Are you picking-up what they’re putting down? If not, keep one very important fact in mind: none of these “bad apple” gun dealers are breaking the law. They’re all selling a legal product legally. If they are breaking the law – for example, knowingly selling firearms to straw purchasers (buyers who are buying for prohibited persons) – they can and should be prosecuted. But they’re not. Because they’re not.

Gallego and The Brady Campaign’s true intention: shut down gun dealers. If they force “bad apple” gun dealers in high crime neighborhoods – who supply firearms to potential victims in these locales – to stop selling guns, a certain percentage of “crime guns” will then come from another dealer. The Brady Bunch will shift to attacking that dealer. And so on.

If you doubt this “camel’s nose in the tent” strategy, check out the aforementioned Gun Dealer Code of Conduct. What does “Limit purchases of handguns to one per 30 days per civilian, non-law enforcement customer” and “Immediately notify local and federal authorities of any multiple handgun purchases that occur within any ninety day period” have to do with best practices for gun dealers? Them’s gun control laws, folks.

Even as we fight to expand Brady background checks to all gun sales, including those online and at gun shows, we must insist that gun dealers in our communities adopt best business practices, and the Obama administration must commit to cracking down on those who can’t — or won’t — act responsibly.

“Act responsibly” is Gallego’s and Gross’ way of saying “kick gun dealers’ collective ass – regardless of the law of the land.” Which, I might point out, includes the United States Constitution. The fact that the antis’ ignore our country’s founding document is the most annoying aspect of their anti-gun jihad. But, like gun dealers in high-crime neighborhoods, the Constitution and its supporters aren’t going away anytime soon. Thank God.

comments

  1. avatar Jacob says:

    That’s a great idea! Let’s blame gun dealers for our failures!

    1. avatar FedUp says:

      But not all the gun dealers, just the really big gun dealers!

      And when we get rid of Wal-Mart and Gander Mountain, then we can attack all the shady little ‘kitchen table’ dealers that popped up since the Clinton administration purged them in the 1990s.

      And, I know it’ll be hard, but when we get rid of all the big dealers for selling too many guns, and all the little dealers for being too little, I’m sure we’ll think of a way to scapegoat the remaining dealers.

      1. avatar Jacob says:

        These gun-control wackos think That keeping an open mind about gun ownership, is an exit wound.

  2. avatar GuyFromV says:

    “5% of gun dealers supply nearly 90% of all the crime guns that police recover on our streets.”

    Instant classic.

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      Fewer than that percentage of cities are responsible for the same 90%, I’d imagine. Same as always, this shtick is about denying urban blacks acces to firearms and other civil rights.

    2. avatar Ing says:

      5% of America’s cities supply 90% of its violent crime. Let’s bust them up. No one travels in or out without passing a federal background check.

  3. avatar LarryinTX says:

    “The Brady Campaign has devised a smart, simple Gun Dealer Code of Conduct \”

    The Brady campaign has never done a single thing either “smart”, or “simple”, unless you consider converting a national tragedy into personal wealth by becoming professional victims.

    1. avatar Rich K. says:

      The only good thing about the Brady Bunch is that both of their main spokespeople – Sarah and Jimmy – are taking a dirt-nap…

      1. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

        I hope worms have more discriminating palates. . . . .

  4. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

    Pro-gun groups should blanket the internet with the clear failure of CNN to live up to an notion of journalistic integrity. . . . MSNBC got ripped enough for their bias and lost so much ad revenue, they just wiped a lot of their liberal boot-lickers out in one fell swoop. It can happen at CNN as well….. (I pray)

  5. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

    ‘And not knowing the anti-gun bias of the writers of a CNN Op-Ed…’

    You’d think that the bias would be assumed coming from CNN. Who hasn’t figured out that CNN is a left wing agenda driven network by now?

    1. avatar Another Robert says:

      Really–CNN is the outfit that used full-auto rifles to “demonstrate” what would supposedly be available if the Clinton “[semi-auto] Assault Weapons” ban were to be allowed to expire. It was so flagrantly unethical that when Wayne La Pierre called them out on it, they actually did a re-do with the appropriate semi-auto rifles, leading to the exact opposite of the conclusion they had reached in the first report. The CNN producer, of course, claimed he was duped by the sheriff’s deputies who did the demonstration for the first report , and the sheriff who arranged the demonstration (need i say he was a Democrat?) claimed it was all just a big mistake. Anybody who doesn’t know that CNN is a hopelessly liberal shill is either in denial or is not paying attention..

      1. avatar Richard in WA says:

        I would love to see those clips – CNN going from “OMG BULLETZ SPRAYING EVERYWHERE!!” to “Hey look, a novice can hit a target repeatedly at 100 yards”

        1. avatar Another Robert says:

          I’m afraid it was more like going from “Wow, that previously-banned rifle just destroyed those cinder blocks” to “oh, there really isn’t any difference between this semi-auto .223 with the shoulder thing that goes up and this other semi-auto .223 that doesn’t have one, is there?” Not that they haven’t in the meantime returned to the “assault weapons” bandwagon.

  6. avatar jp says:

    Wait a minute. …. so they want the DOJ and the BATFE to go after…… Themselves?????? That would be awesome.

  7. avatar TX Gungal says:

    “Limit purchases of handguns to one per 30 days per civilian, non-law enforcement customer.” from Brady web site. Stupid and unconstitutional.

    1. avatar Nick says:

      First and foremost, what self respecting businessman is going to turn away a loyal customer (especially if he/she knows that they have a clean record)? Why would they? Secondly, If that person can pass a NICS check, then they’d just go to a different shop, and probably never come back to the one they were turned away from. This is just a recipe to hurt dealers.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        “This is just a recipe to hurt dealers.”

        Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding, ding, ding!!! We have a winner!

    2. avatar TravisP says:

      I never got the idea that you don’t need 50 guns!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why would a gun grabber even care how many guns I have? I only have the two hands

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        More to the point, a serial killer or a spree killer doesn’t need 50 firearms to kill their victims. In fact they don’t even need one firearm to kill their victims. They can easily kill dozens of people with nothing more than full-size pickup truck or a 1 gallon can of gasoline, a match, and some chain to lock doors.

    3. avatar John L. says:

      California already has this restriction in place. See how much help it’s been there?

    4. avatar Reef Blastbody says:

      Basically, they want to “name and shame” FFLs into voluntarily enacting the travesties that have been foisted on California.

      Yeah, that’ll go over like a lead balloon here in Texas.

    5. avatar Mark N. says:

      It’s the law in California. No, we don’t know why–except liberals.

  8. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    Weren’t these the same people who encouraged grief stricken parents to file a merritt less lawsuit aginst ammo companies, and then left them holding the bag when the judge rightly ordered them to pay the attorneys fees of the other parties.

    These people have no place defining anyone’s conduct! Evil is the best label for the Brady bunch.

  9. avatar actionphysicalman says:

    Looks like the dude’s creds are on the article now.

    1. avatar Robert Farago says:

      Ha!

    2. avatar Another Robert says:

      Still can’t bring themselves to note that Gallego is a Dem–even tho the article itself takes a swipe at “primarily Republican leadership” for not jumping on the gun-grabbers’ bandwagon.

  10. avatar MarkPA says:

    I do not – for a minute – believe that FFLs could remain in business flouting the record-keeping and NICS check laws. That, however, doesn’t rule-out the possibility of a fly-by-night FFL.

    The ATF’s procedures for screening applicants for FFLicenses and auditing their records can’t be perfect. They probably work very well to keep all legitimate FFLs on their toes making sure their records are kept correctly. But, such procedures would never defeat a trafficker who goes into the LGS business intending to move a volume of guns in a few months and then disappear.

    What is the ATF going to do about such a character? If they can’t find him they can’t arrest and prosecute him. Is anyone aware of ATF strategies to preclude a trafficker from getting away with such a scheme?

    My point here is NOT to besmirch the reputation of the many thousands of FFLs who are complying with records and NICS checks. These guys are, after all, responsible and desirous of keeping their licenses. Rather, my point is to inquire as to whether a trafficker can successfully pursue a scheme of fronting his business with a fly-by-night FFL. If so, then the entire proposition of regulating FFLs to keep guns out-of-the-hands of prohibited-persons is a futile farce.

    FFLs are – by definition – licensed to deal in guns. Nothing whatsoever stands in the way of a trafficker using an FFL to front his “supply-chain-management” – nothing apart from getting caught in his next audit which should be predictably many months in the future. If the trafficker flees out the back door when the ATF auditor announces his arrival then what?

  11. avatar Accur81 says:

    Hey anti gunners, I’m a gun rights advocate and I absolutely, positively do not accept mass shootings. Neither does anyone in the NRA, or the “evil / irresponsible gun lobby.” I always carry a handgun to defend against violent attack. If the next mass shooter wannabe starts up near me, he’ll immediately encounter a skilled shooter returning fire. On duty or off.

    While you anti-gunners are pushing more ineffective laws and trampling civil rights, responsible gun owners are actually able to put a stop to shooters, looters, and violent attacks. All of your hiding under desks, locking doors and otherwise acting like cowards won’t stop the next movie theatre or school shooter. In fact, those nutjobs are completely undeterred by your “Gun Free Zones.”

    Further, I hearby challenge any anti gunner who wants to blame the gun lobby / gun manufacturers / the “evil NRA” to find a single page from their literature that promotes mass shooting. I certainly haven’t seen any.

  12. avatar Ralph says:

    Stick a paper copy of that Gun Dealer Code of Conduct into your bug-out bag. It will take up a lot less room than the roll you usually carry.

  13. avatar Joe R. says:

    This is what civil war looks like as it slides off the drawing board, call ’em on it at every turn. Buy ammo.

    Why is CNN attempting to overthrow our Constitution? It is because they are going to enslave and kill you and yours. They’d say that’s not their purpose, but what would they say if it was.

  14. avatar FedUp says:

    First we got rid of the ‘kitchen table’ FFLs with the help of Bill Clinton, they were just too small and sneaky to be allowed to survive.

    Now we’re going to go after all the big retailers because they sell too many guns.

    Then maybe we’ll take another stab at the little guys who came back over the last 20 years.

    Finally, we’ll have to come up with something new to scapegoat everybody who’s left.

    Then, utopia, no legal gun markets! All gun transactions will be illegal, and the world will once again be a safe place for criminals!

  15. avatar ThomasR says:

    Tyranny/evil never sleeps. Be a defender of freedom. Go out and buy another gun. And more than one in a month.

  16. avatar Roymond says:

    Police guns get stolen and used in crime. If they’d propose shutting down the police departments such guns come from, they’d at least get points for consistency.

  17. avatar Dan H. says:

    Very easy market correction — don’t do business at any dealer who adopts the code. It is obviously a trojan horse, but one the dealers are as free to open the gates for as we are free to keep and bear arms. That said, no dealer that wants my money is going to be telling me that if I get a bonus check and want to pick up a second pistol, that I can’t for 30 days.

    Another elephant in the room here is that if this kind of measure, the “don’t sell without completed check”, we’ll just see the Feds sitting on checks and not answering them. Basically a backdoor way to trample both 2A and 5A/14A due process rights all at once.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      Under current law, a dealer may release a gun if he doesn’t hear back from the Feds in three days.

  18. avatar Another Robert says:

    I have just as much confidence in that “5% of gun dealers” figure as i do in that “40% of gun sales are unchecked” figure and that “bazillion gazillion school shootings since Newtown” figure. These guys lie about everything.

  19. avatar Bob Watson says:

    The big story here is, this is all Little Danny Boy can come up with, another big lie that seems plausible at first glance. His attempt to enlist federally licensed gun dealers in his campaign to destroy the right to keep and bear arms is almost cute in it’s simple mindedness.

    As for the former marine, now US congressman, who learned during his service that an armed populace is damned inconvenient to an occupying military force? Well, he might want to think about that lesson, as it applies to a free country, a little more.

    1. avatar Another Robert says:

      I’m really not seeing how being a former Marine makes one an expert on general law-enforcement policies. Or even a particularly competent observer of same.

      1. avatar Joe R. says:

        If they don’t support the Constitution, the have absolutely no standing to perform any law-enforcement.

  20. avatar Smith says:

    Wouldn’t it make more sense to pressure the NICS to do background checks faster, rather than pressure FFL’s to deny people guns for the NICS’ failure to do the check fast enough?

  21. avatar Binder says:

    The current “back ground check” uses a loophole in the Commerce Clause (, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3). I know a lot of you (and actually you can include me in that one too) think it is a lot of B.S. and that the 2nd Amendment overrides. And to tell the truth, compared to so of the other laws justified by the Commerce Clause (,Safe Schools Act you really need to read that one sometime WTF!!!!,) it is not the worst. At least there is “commerce” across state lines involved. But how you justify a “universal” background check without stretching that Commerce Clause even more, I don’t know. Perhaps they will pull the tax stamp trick the used for the NFA.
    The upside is that if they did pass something, it would provide a opportunity to challenge the whole background check possess. But given the the fact the the safe schools act stood (after they added the commerce clause fixes), I don’t have much faith it would be struck down.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      Under current law, the government can control commerce in firearms, hence licensing of gun dealers, which is deemed to not interfere with keeping and bearing.

  22. avatar gsnyder says:

    It is the continuing repetition which attempts to convince the masses criminals obtain firearms from legal dealers and or by legal means. They prey on people who are ignorant of the already in place background check systems, FFL dealers, online transfer sale systems, age limits, and fiduciary responsibility not to not move forward with a sale.
    In general they develop and promote so many lies it leads to public confusion and an inability to understand fact from fiction. The hope is people will become frustrated an turn against the 2A.

  23. avatar Sixpack70 says:

    I bought 3 handguns in one month! What do they want to do to me? Have the police visit my house so they can see each pistol sitting in my safe? They probably think that is OK behavior by the government, because guns!

  24. avatar thewiz says:

    have atf and doj go after bad apple dealers? Pretty sure they would love to. it would get rid of their competition

  25. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    Similarly, there’s no reason for the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to wait to aggressively pursue America’s top suppliers of crime guns.
    Well, our Dear Leader will take the advice of Kimmy and pass Executive Orders fixing the Gun Show loophole so people cannot buy guns directly online at internet sites.

  26. avatar Chris T from KY says:

    Anti civil rights groups will come up with creative ways to deny people their rights. They have always said “it’s for your own good”.

  27. avatar Joe R. says:

    Easy answer and bottom line will forever be that, we don’t get to chuck the Constitution except as prescribed. Your ok with chucking this little bit, I’ll chuck the rest. what absolutely predates that, though, will be the expiration of Mr. Gallego’s authority to hold himself out as a legislator of anything for anyone. CNN has already shat itself and no longer claims 1A privilege.

    JUST ONE MORE POS FROM THE EVIL BLUE LIBERAL HOUSE OF (D) BAG. You’re all from satan’s left nut or something? What’s in your water.

  28. avatar Joe R. says:

    I called my Senators and asked for some push back on Gallegos, and other recent 2A infringement.

    BTW.
    FUAZ
    When they come for your dusty a_ _ , I’ll be cheering them on.

  29. avatar Handy says:

    We cannot sit on the sidelines while our communities are terrorized because of loopholes that allow gun dealers discretion to sell a gun after 3 business days if a background check is not yet complete.

  30. DOJ and ATF s efforts should include focused, annual inspections of dealers supplying crime guns and public disclosure of information related to the supply of crime guns. Armed with robust data, communities across the country will be better equipped to name and shame the bad apple dealers whose business practices put our families at risk a tactic we have already employed on a limited basis in Phoenix and other major cities.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email