Previous Post
Next Post

Initial waiver screen on (courtesy

Mayors Against Illegal Guns Press Release:


An Estimated 25,000 Guns Annually May be Transferred Illegally to Individuals with Criminal Records on One Website – – Alone 

Full Report Available at

The bipartisan Mayors Against Illegal Guns coalition today announced the results of the first-ever national investigation into individual buyers with criminal records seeking to illegally acquire guns via online gun sales. The report concludes that thousands of people already barred by existing Federal law from purchasing guns are flocking to the Internet to evade background checks and acquire guns illegally, with no questions asked. The investigation – which examined online gun listings posted between February and May 2013 on the popular website – found that this single website could transfer more than 25,000 guns to individuals with criminal records just this year . . .

Because the investigation focused specifically on people who pro-actively posted to advertising their desire to purchase firearms, it only scratched the surface of the internet’s vast illegal gun market. There are no Federal background check requirements to prevent such online sales, and the findings reveal that those who would normally be deterred by background checks at dealers are taking advantage of the digital private sale loophole. In fact, individuals seeking to purchase guns on are also nearly four times more likely to have criminal records than buyers at licensed dealers that require background checks. Mayors Against Illegal Guns Co-Chair and New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg announced the findings in a press conference at City Hall. The full report – “Felon Seeks Firearm, No Strings Attached” – is available at

“Today, we announced the first-ever national investigation into illegal online gun buyers, and the results are startling,” said Mayor Bloomberg. “In the digital age, convicted felons, domestic abusers, and other dangerous people who are legally barred from buying guns can do so online with little more than a phone number or email address. As our investigation shows, thousands of criminals and other prohibited purchasers are doing just that. It’s time for Washington to take immediate and critical steps – and get serious about this issue.”

“Loopholes in our federal gun laws have taken a devastating toll on communities and neighborhoods across America,” said Mayors Against Illegal Guns Co-Chair and Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino. “Yet in April, a minority of U.S. senators blocked the common-sense legislation that would have closed these deadly loopholes by extending background checks to cover private sales in commercial settings – including online. It’s time for our leaders in Washington to put public safety first and pass sensible gun laws that will help save lives.”

With thousands of websites that offer firearms for sale, the Internet marketplace for guns is vast and growing. Over the last 20 months, the number of gun ads listed by private sellers on has expanded almost sevenfold, from 12,000 in December 2011 to 83,000 active ads in August 2013.[1] Current federal law only requires licensed firearms dealers – not private sellers – to conduct background checks, making this unregulated, online private market for guns particularly appealing to criminals and other prohibited purchasers.

Without conducting a background check, private sellers have no way of knowing whether they are selling guns to individuals who are legally barred from buying them. In 2011, a first-of-its-kind investigation by the City of New York found that 62 percent of private sellers agreed to sell guns to investigators who said they probably could not pass a background check.[2] The 2011 investigation highlighted just how easy it is for prohibited purchasers to buy guns, but since then there has been no measure of how many criminals are exploiting this loophole. The “Felon Seeks Firearm, No Strings Attached” report provides the first snapshot of this problem and how it’s compromising public safety.

The Investigation 

The vast majority of ads on sites like are posted by sellers, but would-be buyers can also post ads that describe the guns they seek, known as “want-to-buy” ads. To learn more about would-be gun buyers online, Mayors Against Illegal Guns reviewed a unique data set: the identifying information voluntarily provided by would-be gun buyers in want-to-buy ads that were publicly available on Investigators “scraped” – a software technique for extracting online data – 13,298 want-to-buy ads for firearms posted on from February 11, 2013 to May 10, 2013, and examined them for identifying information. Unique phone numbers or email addresses were found in 1,430 of the ads. Using reverse lookup phone data, 607 of those identifiers could be linked to an individual living in the state where the ad was placed.

Investigators then conducted criminal record checks on each individual by searching court records in the areas where the person was known to have maintained a current or past address. Any felony convictions, domestic violence misdemeanors, bench warrants, or orders of protection that could be linked to the individual were subjected to a legal analysis to determine if they were prohibited from possessing guns under federal law. To ensure that matches between would-be gun buyers and criminal records were valid, investigators called the phone number posted in each ad to confirm the subscriber had placed the ad, and that their name and date of birth matched the criminal record.


The Results 

The investigation found that:

  • Of the 607 identified would-be gun buyers, 1 in 30 had committed crimes that prohibited them from possessing a firearm.[3] To put that in perspective, if 1 in 30 people on a Boeing 747 were on a terrorist watch list, the plane would have 22 suspected terrorists on it.[4]
  • Armslist will host 790,000 unique firearm ads this year, which means an estimated 25,000 guns could be transferred to individuals with criminal records on one website alone – just a corner of a sprawling online market place for firearms. On an average day, more than 2,000 new gun ads are posted on
  • Many of the prohibited buyers identified in the investigation had lengthy criminal histories that included recent violent crimes. Their histories include charges of aggravated assault with a firearm, illegal gun possession, domestic violence harassment, and robbery with a dangerous weapon.
  • The share of criminals purchasing guns on is nearly four times higher than the share attempting to purchase guns at licensed dealers. In 2012, licensed dealers conducted 8,725,425 federal background checks and 76,260 of these potential sales – 0.87 percent – were blocked because the check revealed a history of crime or domestic violence.[5] This is compared to 3.3 percent of would-be buyers on Armslist who were prohibited purchasers because of their criminal history.



Based on the investigation’s findings, the report recommends that Congress take action to close the deadly loophole that allows criminals to buy guns online without a background check. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives (ATF) and the websites hosting these gun marketplaces must do their part too.

  • Congress should pass legislation to require a background check for every commercial gun sale, including those facilitated by websites. The existing background check system is efficient and effective, but limited because private sales remain exempt from this common-sense requirement. Bipartisan legislation under consideration by both chambers of Congress would enact this sensible reform.
  • ATF should improve enforcement of existing laws. ATF should use all of the tools at its disposal to prevent illegal online gun sales, including by conducting undercover investigations of websites that sell guns, documenting when guns recovered from crimes were originally sold online, and offering online tutorials to train sellers and buyers about the laws governing online sales.
  • Websites should adopt tougher protocols to deter crime. Online actors should meet the same public safety standards they are required to satisfy in the bricks-and-mortar marketplace. Websites that host gun ads can do so by demanding transparency from their sellers and buyers, flagging suspicious behavior, and taking reasonable steps to ensure they are not facilitating illegal gun sales to criminals.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. In state, due diligence on the the part of the seller….

    Out of state, receiving FFL dealer is required for a legal transfer anyway….


    • Bloomer is a functional illiterate and seems to be unable to comprehend what he reads and this aspect. It is also overlooked that this are still sales between individuals and not an online company selling guns. Those that do, as we know, have to ship the item to an ffl near the buyer for the transfer, NICS etc.

      Furthermore, how does this dumbass know there are 25,000 or more illegally transferred if he has no record of NICS?

      • He arrives at that figure by counting every “for sale” ad and every “want” ad as a completed illegal sale. Bloomberg math–the same math that ads terrorists to his “victim” list.

        • Using Bloomberg Math, I came up with a 1 out of 3 Mayors in the MAIG can not pass the current NICS background check system.

      • “Bloomer is a functional illiterate and seems to be unable to comprehend what he reads…”
        He just ignores certain inconvenient things. Like facts.

      • Not illiterate at all. His denial of reality isn’t lack of knowledge, information, or understanding. His denial is a chosen, determined, and strategic laying aside of pertinent facts…which is far worse.

  2. So, since the lawsuits against them failed, we will lie about them until every low-information voter hates them. And it ill likely work, since Cougars Demand Everything showed us how well it works with Starbucks.

    • “…Of the 607 identified would-be gun buyers”

      No number on how many guns were actually sold.

      Proof positive that 93.4% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

      What next? A survey reporting the number of prisoners in jail who want to get out as a damnation of the prison system?

      • A mathematician once told me:
        A statistician always begins by saying “I always work with reality. This is how I define reality…”

  3. “Over the last 20 months, the number of gun ads listed by private sellers on has expanded almost sevenfold, from 12,000 in December 2011 to 83,000 active ads in August 2013.[1]”

    Well, yeah. They’re trying to sell the AR they bought for $3k now that the credit card bill is due and the world hasn’t ended.

    • Hey man, that just means that some of them will start trying to sell for a good price when they need Christmas money, and pass the saving on to us.

      Good things come to those who wait. Gotta Love Capitalism.

    • Several founding members are either in prison or have been in prison including the former Mayor of Detroit. The former mayor of Birmingham was also busted. That is why they are “former” mayors.

    • Maigots go to Craigslist for hookers or they get a reference from Elliot Spitzer. The mayoral aids provide the blow.

  4. “Websites that host gun ads can do so by demanding transparency from their sellers and buyers, flagging suspicious behavior, and taking reasonable steps to ensure they are not facilitating illegal gun sales to criminals.”

    One could argue that they do this already.

    At any rate, Some criminals are interested in buying guns? I’m simply shocked. But it doesn’t say anything about actual transfers. They simply assume everyone who is interested buys a gun. I’m pretty sure this doesn’t happen.

    Put that aside. The main issue that MAIG doesn’t mention is that all x-fers that go across state lines must go through an FFL, and all x-fers withing a state have to obey state law (e.g., handguns need to go through an FFL in PA, even if it stays in state). So, the Feds already regulate all sales across state lines. The rest should be up to the States.

    Preaching to the choir here.

  5. Every gun I have purchased or sold online, I had to deal with an FFL. They should stop worrying about the good guys and go after the bad guys.

  6. I’ve posted on ArmsList, and when I did, I specified that I would need to see a valid MN ID, with valid Permit to Purchase a Pistol or Permit to Carry as well as signing a bill of sale. I had 3 people call that wanted to see if I’d make an exception. I of course said no: “If I still have the pistol after you get your MN Permit to Purchase filed and returned, you can buy it” … There are always legal buyers out there!

  7. Gotta love all the “could have”. Yeah, and people “could” get drunk or “could” take drugs tonight and get in their cars or trucks and drive under the influence, so we should just take away all their vehicles to stop them from injuring or God forbid, killing people. If we can just save one child, we should do it. I mean, it’s for the children, they can’t possibly say no, can they?

  8. Three line summary:

    MAG (Mayors Against Guns) notices that there is evidence of criminals’ desire to commit crimes online.

    MAG ignores the fact that these crimes do not end up being committed.

    MAG makes a false argument that more restriction is needed based on the interest in these crimes, not on the frequency.


    • So “the system” apparently works. It’s not a top-down government regulatory system, it is a distributed ground-up “emergent system” of sellers demonstrably exercising due diligence, all by themselves.

      • If they would open the NICS to anyone, without charge, I would be willing to use it. I don’t want to sell a gun to anyone who shouldn’t have it. They don’t want to because that would defeat their aim of making the act of buying a gun as time consuming, difficult and expensive as they can manage.

  9. So he found 20 people out of 600 who might be a prohibited person, or share a name with a prohibited person. Doesn’t seem too accurate to me. Also, anyone know whether it is legal to run “secret” background checks? Did he use city resources again like he did for his website?

    • Those numbers wouldn’t really suprise me. Every news outlet keeps parroting the “background-check free online sales” meme and most people I’ve talked to who weren’t fellow gun nuts seemed to believe it, so it would stand to reason that criminals would buy that story to. Hence some trying to utilize a loophole that they’ve been told over and over exists. Of course they make no mention and provide no evidence of any actual illegal purchases being made, which suggests to me that the illegal online sales they’re so worked up about don’t actually happen on Armslist. Otherwise I figure they’d be blaring those numbers from thier tourbus instead of just talking about inquiries.

  10. If it were true that many illegal sales were being facilitated through a single site, wouldn’t it make a lot more sense to use that as a platform to begin investigations than to simply make it illegal and move such trade further underground?

    I’ve bought a couple guns off armslist, it was an FFL dealer each time.

  11. This should be titled “how to lie with statistics by nanny mike”. So 20.2 people out of over 600 (still a tiny sample size) may have had sketchy backgrounds. I’m willing to bet a similar % of his own group (maig) has been charged with felonies. This proves absolutely nothing.

  12. of course the only reason a person buying a gun would ever say “i probably couldn’t pass a background check” is that they are an investigator, in which case they probably can pass a background check.

  13. “The ‘Felon Seeks Firearm, No Strings Attached’ report provides the first snapshot of this problem and how it’s compromising public safety.”

    No, NO, NO! Whether or not an ex-convict can purchase firearms is NOT compromising public safety. Our criminal justice system is compromising public safety because it releases convicts that cannot be trusted to own firearms!!!!

  14. “The investigation reached these conclusions by analyzing a unique data set: the contact information prospective gun buyers voluntarily provided in ‘want-to-buy’ ads they placed on Armslist in search of gun sellers. We examined 13,000 listings posted between February and May 2013, matched contact information to criminal records, and found that at least 1 in 30 would-be gun-buyers had felony or domestic abuse records that barred them from purchasing or possessing guns. And this does not include those prohibited due to serious mental illness, drug abuse, immigration status or other non-criminal prohibiting criteria, which accounted for 25 percent of the sales blocked by a federal NICS check in 2012.”

    Wow, if it was as easy as the above how come the ATF isn’t knocking on the doors of those 433 people that are trying to illegally purchase guns? Assuredly MAIG reported them and assuredly MAIGs source for the “criminal records” could not be wrong. Are they saying they are aware of the commission of a federal crime and failed to report it?

  15. This so stupid from them retard it for lack better word. Just for fact they fail say have go through same thing have to go through if buy gun from gun dealer. But than again facts never been some thing stood in there way of hate all of us gun owners and are right have guns. But make up this stuff just goes beyond silly in wacky.

  16. All this “investigation” tells me is that Eric Holder and the ATF are going about arming the Mexican drug cartels the wrong way . . . .

  17. At the end of the day, how is Armslist any different than ads thumb-tacked to bulletin boards at the local range or gun club? I guess Craigslist is next on the hit list, since a few gun ads slip in there also.

    • Not likely. “Craigs List” is the height of leftist community organizin. Note the commie pinko “Peace” sign masthead. Created and run by left wing, gun hating wackos.

  18. Congress should pass legislation to require a background check for every commercial gun sale, including those facilitated by websites.

    The only problem is… Congress has no authority over intrastate commerce. State governments will have to deal with this issue IF the people of said state decide to do so.

  19. Are goverment just gave guns mexcian drug cartels with out back round check in
    Operation Fast And Furious have been use way more crimes. Than brazenly told world well know where they are when get back when used buy criminals. Oh well Obama closed case invoked executive privilege close seal ever thing took place with no one from other getting upset about that.

  20. Here is a new idea, how about Congress gives normal people the tools they need to vet buyers without illegally attempting to regulate intrastate commerce.

    If the system had the same safeguards as the NICS, and was built properly to prevent sharing too much information, I wouldn’t mind using it.

    • This. If we could vet potential buyers, then we’d all feel better about private transfers.

      Of course giving citizens rights to solve simple problems doesn’t fit the narrative.

      • I said nothing about it being required, which would be “illegally attempting to regulate intrastate commerce.”

        Simply that if such a system was available, many would use it. I know I would.

        • There was a bill that proposed this idea around the same time the background check bill was being debated ( Although it was MUCH more palatable than the disaster that was Manchin-Toomey, it died a quiet death, presumably at the hands of liberals. This is more proof (in my mind at least) that we’re right. Gun control has nothing to do with public safety or common sense, and gun-grabbers do not want to “compromise”, they want to “confiscate”.

  21. Funny how “FFL” is never mentioned.

    Another great example of people trying to levy change on a process they don’t understand – and have obviously never used. That’s what bugs me the most.

    Hopefully somebody (NRA – ARE YOUOUT THERE?) challenges this mis- and dis- information because the public will eat this up.

  22. Noone in the “hood” sells guns on a website. My first few guns were bought that way. From co-workers and through word of mouth. No legislation can touch that. That form of sale would still be legal if the Manchin-Toomey bill passed, and nothing would change except a loss of our rights.

  23. The link at rolls over to, which is:
    OrgName: NTT America, Inc.
    OrgId: NTTAM-1
    Address: 8300 E Maplewood Ave.
    Address: Suite 400
    City: Greenwood Village
    StateProv: CO
    PostalCode: 80111
    Country: US
    RegDate: 2005-12-08
    Updated: 2011-10-18
    ReferralServer: rwhois://

    OrgAbuseHandle: NAAC-ARIN
    OrgAbuseName: NTT America Abuse Contact
    OrgAbusePhone: +1-877-688-6625
    OrgAbuseEmail: [email protected]

    And, via

    Registrar URL:
    Updated Date: 2013-02-27 19:15:32
    Creation Date: 2010-12-09 22:47:00
    Registrar Expiration Date: 2014-12-09 22:47:00
    Registrar:, LLC
    Registrant Name: Registration Private
    Registrant Organization: Domains By Proxy, LLC
    Registrant Street:
    Registrant Street: 14747 N Northsight Blvd Suite 111, PMB 309
    Registrant City: Scottsdale
    Registrant State/Province: Arizona
    Registrant Postal Code: 85260
    Registrant Country: United States

    • I use Domains by Proxy myself. It is a lawfirm that maintains your registration and shields the public from knowing who is the actual registrar of a website. I think I pay $6 per year for the service.

  24. Thanks to TTAG, they are getting about twice the distribution on their make-believe “study” than they would have gotten without it.

    PLEASE, TTAG, don’t run the story of the two CCW holders in Michigan that decided to kill one another in a road rage incident last night.


    • You seem to be referring to the road rage murder victim who though unable to prevent his murder was able to shoot and kill his attacker. Trial avoided and another self-control challenged individual who will never attack someone else, sad that it cost an innocent life.

  25. Does Blooming idiot really believe that hardened criminal felons get their guns from Armslist? Does he?
    I’ve been to Armslist, but I haven’t seen many felon-priced guns there. Most still cost what they would if sold retail, many, a good deal more, depending on the type of gun. Felons mostly get guns on the cheap that have been stolen and have no traceable serial numbers. Selling or possessing a gun without serial numbers is a crime. That’s not what I see going on with Armslist. Blooming idiot just hates guns….in the hands of private citizens. This is all a liberal smokescreen to ban all guns.

  26. 90% of my firearms come from ads I’ve found on armslist. About half of them I never had to show any ID or permit, or do a bill of sale. Of the dozen or so I’ve sold I’ve never asked for any ID or permit, I would ask for ID if any of the individuals I might sell to looked too young or had out of state plates but this has never been the case.
    In WI there is no state “permit to purchase” required and one can open carry without any type of permit, where as over here in MN now one must have a state permit to purchase and one cannot open carry without a conceal carry permit. BUT, under both state and federal laws as a private non-ffl individual I do not have to ask for any permit, or ID or run a background on a private sale, therefore I do not. It’s not my business. In WI you’d see a gun ad every now and then where the seller would want to see a carry permit to do the transaction but it was rare, here in MN almost every ad requests you to show a permit to purchase, even though there is no law saying the seller has to ask for one or that a buyer has to show one. When I sell I specifically in BOLD CAPITALIZED text state “I ONLY NEED TO SEE STATE ID TO VERIFY RESIDENCY AND AGE.” Not once, ever, has my ad attracted a criminal. Every person I ended up selling to was a avid shooter and every time they brought some of the guns they already own. Every time I end up talking with them for a good hour sometimes, and I have made possible lifelong friendly connections with some of the people I have sold to. One guy I sold a .338 was the person who set me up and taught me to reload, I shoot with him at least a dozen times a year. MOST of the people who use armslist are good people. There is very little criminal element going on there. I imagine there is more scams on gun parts and people mailing out money never to see their part than there are actual criminals looking for guns to use in a crime.
    It’s all up to the individual under whatever state laws exist and this is the way it should be and stay. I don’t like the fact MN forces me to obtain a carry permit to open carry but it’s the law, I don’t like that MN has a separate requirement of a state purchase permit on top of the federal check to obtain a firearm from a ffl but it’s the law. I do like the fact that both federal and most states have laws saying a private non-ffl individual can sell a firearm to whomever they want as long as they are a resident of the same state.
    Private sales are wonderful, it’s even more wonderful when a seller doesn’t force me to do a bill of sale because I then have a firearm that is not registered in my name at all. This really is the main goal of background checks and the push for them on all firearm sales, criminals obtaining weapons through the private sale market is secondary to the government, they want full gun registration period. They want to know who has what and how many, and where to go to take them away if that day arrives.

    VIVA Armslist!

  27. Here’s the worst part about this crap. Has no one considered that because Bloomberg and his cronies keep telling people felons can buy guns online, felons are now trying to buy guns online? It’s like the Streisand effect. I’d be willing to bet that they are in fact creating a problem where there wasn’t one.

    • They’re creating a problem only if the media bullhorn keeps broadcasting the BS to the low information voters that make up that demographic.

  28. The methodology for finding out which want-ads were place by criminals is laughable. And…

    “607 of those identifiers COULD be linked to an individual living in the state where the ad was placed.”

    That’s NSA logic right there. 3 degrees of separation is all it takes to link any two people in the U.S. And notice this is an attempt to undermine the “FFL for out of State” aurgument.

  29. It’s just a matter of time before this “loophole” will be closed no matter what we do. In my state, county and city, we already have defacto transfer thru licensed dealer only at gun shows. The promoter and venue has signs posted everywhere and they have plain closed police as well as the ATF there making arrests based on the venue not permitting the transfer between individuals. It’s not a federal, state or local law but a venue “ordinance”. Not sure it would stand up in court with the right attorney but folks have been busted for it. I have no idea of the final outcome of such arrests.

  30. Leaving aside all the other crap in that steaming pile…

    A “minority of Senators” blocked their anti-gun legislation in April? I recall there being a vote…and in the Senate, as everywhere else (except Bloomberg’s kingdom), the majority wins.

    • The vote in April was 54 for 46 against. 60 were needed to pass in this case, therefore the minority DID block the bill from passing.

      • Other aspects of gun controlled got hammered though with a majority voted. The reason this particular one was close was due to ass-clowns like Juan McCain voting with Manchin-Toomey. But remember, there wasn’t a single vote, there were several.

  31. “May be” ,”could be”,” it is supposed” ,we think” ” supposedly ” “It would be assumed” ,”I would assume” “the possibility of”, based on the possibility of the assumption of the likeliness that ”
    Ok so you come up with some more Liberal battle cry’s,These guys live for these statements,Never any facts unless you count their phony polls of 500-1000 liberals polled which now represents the rest of the country.
    Let’s have a contest to see how many of these assumption based Frases we can spot in the liberal press and especially MAIG.

  32. I suspect Mayor Bloomy’s investigators violated state and federal law, including privacy restrictions such as HIPAA, when they used their super secret databases to screen people and potentialy, they may have committed actionable 4th amendment violations by obtaining such information without a warrant as a private actor and not as a state government. . . . .

  33. An estimated 85% of statistics may be made up on the spot, but don’t let that stop you from using them to create needless panic.

  34. Here’s the thing (sorry if someone already posted; didn’t have time to read all the comments)…

    If I had a background check mechanism available to me that would protect the privacy of me and any potential buyers, I’d run background checks on anyone I privately sold guns to, regardless of whatever laws were in place. I.E., my identity isn’t known, and no record kept of the person being checked. I’d run one every time just to cover my ass.

    Excepting friends and family members, of course.

    As it is, I am left to guess.

    The thing is, I believe the anti-gunners were presented an alternate bill similar to this when they were pushing for “expanded” background checks, and they rejected it because it didn’t go through a dealer. The same dealers they say are corrupt and refuse to perform background checks.

    That’s because the purpose isn’t background checks. It’s creating a paper (or digital) trail of who owns what guns.

  35. If that 747 was sitting on the tarmac in Yemen on its way to Afganistan, I can believe there might be 22 terrorist on board but not on every 747 in service world wide.
    Ya see what they did there was to distil the numbers down and the give the impression that 1 out of 30 gun sales are to felons or that all sales meet their criteria.
    NO. Only under the distilling conditions and steps that they described.
    Not much alcohol in the grape but a whole lot in the brandy.

  36. “To ensure that matches between would-be gun buyers and criminal records were valid, investigators called the phone number posted in each ad to confirm the subscriber had placed the ad, and that their name and date of birth matched the criminal record.”

    Yea, right, sure. So they want us to believe that they called all 607 suspected “criminals” and all 607 of them answered the phone and verified their name, date of birth and ad placement to a complete stranger. How stupid do you have to be to believe that?

    P.S. Whats with the monthly format changes on this website? Just when you get used to the new look it becomes the old look. It’s like trying to find some widget in the local Home Improvement Center only to find that they changed everything around yet again. Consistency may be the hobgoblin of little minds but it sure makes life a lot less complicated.

  37. Start sarcasm

    You guys are making a big deal over nothing, all they want to do is make a couple more laws to protect the children. What’s harm could come of that?

    End sarcasm

  38. So out of 13298 want adds they found 20 people (1 in 30 of the 600) that would be prohibited from buying firearms. That’s .15%… with a “point” at the front… To say those people were successful in purchasing is a stretch. Just because someone in Michigan advertises a sale at the same time someone in Michigan is looking for a sale doesn’t mean the sale will complete. i.e. your advertising a $10K big bore specialty rifle and I’m looking for $200 plinker or visa versa. This also assumes that every Michigan purchaser get’s first crack at what a fellow Michigander lists. In my case, both of my purchases were from out of state through my local FFL so I took those potential purchases out of the “pool” for their respective states.
    This is crap science…

  39. All this proves is that perhaps maybe there could be small percentage of criminals looking for guns on the internet. It doesn’t demonstrate in the least any sort of actual transaction taking place. At best this is a hypothetical scenario. At worst its a flat out lie dressed up to look like facts to the ill informed and gullible.

  40. This “investigation” seems very suspect. What person would confirm their name and date of birth to some stranger who called them on the telephone? MAIG and Bloomberg make up lies all the time. This just seems to be one more factually devoid attempt at reducing the civil rights of Americans.

Comments are closed.