|
Regrettably, some Senators and lobbyists believe, perhaps as strongly as
the National Association of Arms Shows (NAAS) believes otherwise, that by imposing additional burdensome federal regulations on gun show promoters,
dealers, and non-dealer participants, we will reduce the number of criminals
able to obtain firearms. This, by extension, would reduce the rate of gun violence and firearms misuse in our country. Their conclusion is based on one
integral, though faulty, premise: that criminals often purchase firearms at
gun shows. Based upon objective, highly reliable empirical data, this is not
true.
According to a November 2001 report published by the U.S. Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics, only 0.7 percent of guns used in
crimes were obtained at gun shows. This 0.7 percent includes dealer sales,
which are subject to the same background checks as dealer sales from dealer’s
respective stores. In addition, many criminals use a “straw man” to purchase
firearms for them -- someone with a clean background who purchases a gun, and
then transfers the gun to the criminal. These “straw man” purchases occur
with much more frequency at dealers’ licensed premises (gun stores) than they
do at gun shows.
In a previous study, researchers found that the percentage of guns purchased by criminals at gun shows was not statistically significant enough
to delineate shows as a separate category in their report. A study of young
offenders in Michigan, which was presented at an American Society of Criminology meeting, found that three percent of the offenders obtained their
most recent handgun at a gun show. Many of those purchases were made by a “straw man.” According to another study,
published in 1997 by the National Institute of Justice, the research and development agency of the Department
of Justice and the only federal agency solely dedicated to researching crime
control and justice issues, only 2 percent of guns used by criminals came from gun shows. To be sure, criminals purchase guns in violation of the law,
hardly stifled by additional Government regulation of an already heavily regulated marketplace. Additional gun laws therefore do not deter criminals
from obtaining firearms.
Moreover, anti gun activist rhetoric would have the public believe that firearms transactions at gun shows are somehow treated differently than sales
that take place outside gun shows, such that federal law is not as stringent
at gun shows. This, too, is just plain wrong. Dealers, who make up the vast
majority of those selling firearms at gun shows, are required to conduct the
same exact federal background checks as they are when they sell a firearm at
their store. Indeed, under federal law, the physical location of the sale, as
between the dealer’s store front operation and gun show, does not affect its
legal status.
Sales by non-dealers, who are occasional sellers or collectors, are also treated the same under federal law at gun shows as they are outside gun
shows. There is no difference. For example, if a non-dealer wishes to dispose
of his or her weapon at a garage sale or via a classified advertisement, the
same exact federal statutes and regulations apply as if a non-dealer wished
to dispose of the same firearm at a gun show. These occasional or one-time
sellers have the right to alienate their property, and if this alienation takes place at a gun show the same rules apply as if disposed of anywhere
else.
Furthermore, if someone claiming to be an occasional seller or collector is actually operating a firearms business without a federal firearms license,
he is guilty of a federal felony. Indeed, every separate gun sale constitutes
a separate federal felony.
The McCain-Lieberman bill would require prior federal approval of gun shows, as well as licensing and registration of every show; every gun show
vendor would have to be federally registered, even if they weren’t selling
firearms at all; every gun show attendee would have to register with the federal government, whether or not they purchase anything at the show; and it
contains a requirement that each private citizen who wishes to transfer his
firearm to another private citizen must run a federal background check on the
transferee; and the list goes on.
Similarly, Senator Reed’s proposed legislation would require all gun show sales, including those by hobbyists, traders, and those who come to gun shows
to sell just one firearm or to sell from their personal collection, to run a
formal background check on the transferee. We at NAAS are strongly opposed to
the further regulation of private sales and strongly urge you not to vote for
a law prohibiting citizens from alienating their personal property to another
citizen.
Anti gun rights activists continue to vociferously argue for the closing of the gun show loophole. They hope that the public and Congress will take
their catchy, now cliché phrase at face value, without investigating at all
whether such a “loophole” exists, even to the slightest degree. The truth
is, there is no truth to their argument. Unfortunately, their smoke and mirrors may quickly lead to the closing of loopholes that do not exist, thus
further hurting the firearms trade that has already lost two-thirds of its
licensed dealers due mainly to incredibly onerous regulations promulgated by
the last Administration and baseless lawsuits brought against licensed manufacturers dealing and distributing firearms. It has become clear that
adding more and more statutes and regulations to the books does not deter criminals or create a safer America. Better enforcement of the existing laws,
however, does.
|
