Daily Memo: Law Enforcement:

Inside look to stir critics of gun shows — and laws

Tuesday, Sept. 22, 2009 | 2 a.m.

View the report "Inside Gun Shows: What goes on When Everybody Thinks Nobody's Watching"

In search of the source of America's gun obsession (4-18-2009)
Galvanizing the gun vote (10-27-2009)
Nevada ACLU supports an individual's right to bear arms (7-11-2008)
Count on these Nevadans to defend gun owners' rights (7-6-2008)
Editorial: Gun show loophole needs fixing now (6-24-2002)
Author of anthrax book barred from gun show (11-28-2001)
Reno police say more Californians coming to Nevada to buy guns (12-20-1999)

Readers of the recently released report “Inside Gun Shows: What Goes on When Everybody Thinks Nobody’s Looking” will likely fall into two main camps:

Those who read the report with disgust, and those who read the report with disgust.

The first camp will argue that the author, Garen J. Wintemute, director of the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California, Davis, is an activist trying to advance a gun control agenda. Their outrage will be proportionate to the level of firearms regulation they’re willing to accept; the less gun control they want, the angrier they’ll get reading Wintemute’s lengthy account of activities researchers documented while attending 78 gun shows in 19 states, including Nevada.

The second camp, meanwhile, will be aghast by covert photos Wintemute’s researchers took of everyday gun show fare: rows of semi-automatic firearms lined up for sale, dirt cheap guns, merchandise with neo-Nazi, neo-confederacy, or just pro-violence messages.

Their shock will turn to outrage when they read about people who were observed attempting straw gun purchases, about private and unlicensed firearms sellers who woo buyers with the promise of no paperwork or background checks, about the “buzz” assault weapons generate at gun shows.

There’s no question that Wintemute’s study, released this month with more questions raised than answered, is calling for much closer scrutiny of gun shows, which are their own unique microcosms. The very people who are most critical of American firearms laws would probably sooner get their teeth drilled than set foot inside a gun show — a turn-cheek disdain that may only make it easier for disreputable sellers or buyers to operate in the shadow of scorn.

Of course, it could also be argued that anybody who believes laws are never broken at gun shows, and that people who shouldn’t walk away with guns never do, should welcome outsiders carrying notebooks and cameras with open arms — fine-tooth combs can’t catch lice if there aren’t any.

Wintemute’s researchers didn’t confirm any straw gun purchases in Las Vegas. In fact, they didn’t confirm anything illegal at Las Vegas gun shows.

They did, however, see things that would give plenty of people pause — like a guy walking through a Vegas show with what appeared to be an Uzi, telling onlookers he had nine more for sale.

A private seller, hawking items from his own collection, he could, if inclined, quietly sell those Uzis to anyone.

Researchers watched a Vegas gun show salesman hype a pistol with rounds designed to pierce body armor, calling the firearm a “cop killer.”

There’s nothing illegal about that, but nothing commendable about it either.

Likewise, at another Las Vegas gun show, Wintemute’s researchers observed members of the White People’s Party, which has ties to the neo-Nazi National Alliance, run a “noisy recruiting station” outside the entrance.

Perfectly legal, but perhaps unsettling, considering National Alliance founder William Pierce has called gun shows a “natural recruiting environment.”

Also in Vegas: A woman whose T-shirt read: “Some people are alive simply because it’s illegal to kill them.”

Hilarious joke, or creepy foreshadowing?

In Reno, researchers observed a private firearms seller tell a man eyeing his guns, “as long as you’re OK with the law and have a Nevada driver’s license, we’re fine” — only to sell him the firearm without asking to see the license, insisting on payment in cash.

These stories, and others in the report, are going to be hotly debated by people on sides of the gun control fence. For now, it seems, the only thing both groups have in common is outrage.

Discussion: 19 comments so far…

By lisa80268

9/22/09 at 2:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

AHHHHHHHHHHH---- This is crazy! I have no power to personally stop this--somebody please step in!!! Who could possibly be on the side of less regulation than the people who profit from selling the guns!!! Just terrible--terrible!
By america1

9/22/09 at 3:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

lisa how would you like people to try and make what you just wrote illegal,think about it
By mschaffer

9/22/09 at 6:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

Well america1,
A mob with guns is so much cannon fodder in the face of an organized force and useless at protecting citizens constitutional rights. In fact, they are more likely to permanently infringe on those rights if they don't like the exercise of, in particular, 1st amendment speech rights by a particular citizen. The person with a gun has already spoken and confirmed they are stupid in believing having a weapon makes anyone safer.
In addition, there are many reasons to legislate restrictions on rights. Do we want people openly carrying assault rifles on the streets? How would the police know a persons intentions with regard to the public? There is no way a policeman can know if someone is a supposed "good guy" versus a "black hat". Even the best of us lose control and get angry and the tragic results when easy access to guns is added are in the papers daily.
In regard to speech rights, from slander to defamation of character and yelling fire in a crowded theater there are also good reasons why it is not an absolute right. People lie and should be held accountable for those lies when they harm others.
By gmag39

9/22/09 at 7:28 a.m.

Suggest removal

Unregulated sales of weapons designed to kill law enforcement officers.
Unregulated sales of weapons designed to inflict maximum numbers of casualties.
All in an atmosphere that could best be described as a Carny Convention.
Can you just imagine the GLEE of these folks as they drive away with their new treasures, just itchin' to git locked & loaded.
Whoa.
By Sincity83

9/22/09 at 7:59 a.m.

Suggest removal

mschaffer
Yes sir, having a weapon, and being trained with that weapon, does makes anyone safer. And yes, it is already legal for people to openly carry "assault" rifles on the streets.
By mschaffer

9/22/09 at 9:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

Nice assertion Sincity83 but other than rhetoric from the NRA magazine what actual facts and statistical analysis support your flippant remark?
My point stands that no one should be stupid enough to openly carry an assault rifle on the streets and the police would be perfectly within their sphere of concern for citizen safety in stopping, questioning, and hopefully arresting any such stupid person.
By POWERPLAY

9/22/09 at 9:56 a.m.

Suggest removal

I will tell you now what i don't ever want to have happen and that is the only people with guns are the bad guys and the government (Thats a ruled state and that is something that is not needed at all) Also do any of you stupid gun control freaks realize that the states with the most restricted gun laws have higher crime rates then the ones that don't. And we do not need the governments permission for anything they work for us we tell them what we want it's not the other way around. And remember this if a law-abiding citizen wants to own an AR-15 or an AK-47 Its not the governments business to say anything about it.
By gmag39

9/22/09 at 10:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

POWERPLAY
It's a darn good thing literacy is not taken into account when one purchases their weapon of choice. You would most certainly be left defenseless.
By sweaty1

9/22/09 at 11:08 a.m.

Suggest removal

Why don't we just pass a new law that requires bad people to wear black hats all the time. That way we will all know who is bad and who is good.

(Removing tongue from cheek now.)
By ecm

9/22/09 at 11:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

We went to a gun show at Cashman Field and purchased a handgun. They sent us to a pawnshop down the street to pick up the weapon. At the pawnshop the paper work was completed, everything was fine and the weapon was released to us.
We've also purchased an antique shotgun; because it could not be fired we were allowed to take possession at the show. Notably, when we exited the facility they looked over the sales receipt and the gun.
By AngryReader

9/22/09 at 11:59 a.m.

Suggest removal

I think it would behoove the organizers of these gun shows to keep booth rentals restricted to actual gun dealers.

Neo-nazi and white supremacist garbage allowed in or around these gun shows is exactly what will get them regulated.
By Wallbanger

9/22/09 at 2:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

I used to naively believe in strict gun control laws...not anymore after studying the Constitution and the intent of our founding fathers on the 2nd Amendment. It was inserted into the Bill of Rights not for "hunters", but to defend against tyranny from others, including our government!! Who here can state that the Bush Administration has not gone after our rights with the un-Constitutional Patriot Act (illegal wiretaps, illegal surveillance, etc.), the Military Commissions Act (no more habeus corpas)!! And the Obama Administration continuing illegal renditions, complicit with CIA torture, escalating un-Constitutional undeclared wars, etc.!! I like how people are trapped in the "left/right paradigm" and think that anyonewho advocates following the U.S. Constitution is a potential domestic terrorist!! Be afraid...be very afraid, if you think obeying an Oath to the Constitution is a joke!!
By firebad

9/22/09 at 3 p.m.

Suggest removal

Let's pass a law requiring everyone to carry a gun. When crime comes to a halt the pro gun crowd can say I told you so.
By mschaffer

9/22/09 at 3:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

So Wallbanger,
Does this mean you think people adjudicated to be mentally incompetent or who have a history of violence should still be allowed to own weapons?
What about larger weapons such as tanks or artillery? Should we allow those things? Handgrenades? 50 caliber machine guns? Where would you draw the line?
By KillerB

9/22/09 at 5:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

Wallbanger -- what you said!

All the pro-control posters here seem to have overlooked the obvious, this was only commerce. The federal Second Amendment and Nevada's Article I, Sections 1 and 11 are written in plain language for a reason -- there's so little to argue with. Although both Constitutions preserve "keep and bear arms" as a liberty, Nevada enshrines defending life and property as "inalienable." That mean no one else's permission is required to exercise those liberties. And as the U.S. Supreme Court put it last year, these liberties are off the table for policy decisions.

Government at every level is so far off its leash it has become a predator hunting each of us down. Those of us who recognize that seem to be in too much of a minority here.
By castle

9/22/09 at 5:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

The example of the 21st ammendment should give some pause. If the Constitution has a provision that is not working (18th ammendment) then that can be changed without popular vote or state legislature (state convention). This can happen to the 2nd also if enough support is gained because people think the 2nd doesn't work anymore.
By Harley

9/22/09 at 5:47 p.m.

Suggest removal

Considering an admitted cocaine user is currently the commander-n-chef of the most powerful armed forces in the world, perhaps gun shows could assist in pre-qualifying potential presidential candidates of the future by distributing illicit drugs with their firearms as well?

You just can't make this stuff up.

: )
By TheJonezes

9/22/09 at 6:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Harley, I was looking through your old posts and couldn't find anything where you made fun of Bush for being a former coke user. I musta just missed it is all.

You just can't make this stuff up.
By KillerB

9/22/09 at 7:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

A good link to check out on this: http://www.examiner.com/x-4525-Seattle-G...

The embedded video includes an interview with Tom Heller by John Stossel. It's priceless.

The conclusion of the linked article: "There is one important thing to be learned from Wintemute's study: Even with the barest minimum of statistics, anti-gunners will reach conclusions based on a "matter of logic" and "an inference at this point" to continue their campaign of public disarmament."