Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/19/2017 7:27:10 PM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 9/3/2010 9:25:58 PM EDT
couldn't find the story on any other news sites. can anyone confirm? i know some people automatically approach any alex jones story with skepticism. this is what got the austin gun show shut down. now the seller is prosecuted?

In a trial before Federal Judge Sam Sparks, government lawyers conceded Texas resident Paul Copeland did not know his buyer was an illegal alien, but the jury they should convict him anyway because he “had reasonable cause to believe” he was selling to an illegal alien because the two men and a boy who were present at his table at the time of the sale: 1) were Hispanic, 2) spoke Spanish, and 3) wore cowboy clothing. And the jury did as asked. Assistant U.S. Attorney Jennifer Freel acted as lead prosecutor in the case.

http://www.infowars.com/feds-convict-texan-for-selling-a-gun-to-illegal-alien-with-texas-drivers-license/

Link Posted: 9/3/2010 9:51:00 PM EDT
There was a post in GD. I tried looking for the court records of the supposed Judge in the case but came up empty.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=1086341&page=4

Guys, is there a link to the case or case number on this one?

Just searched the Texas Western District for all of Sam Spark's cases and there are none with "Gun" or "Copeland" in them for 2000-2010 that are relevant. There was another case heard on 7/20/2010...

Court Doc Search Linky


JAMES STRONG vs. ARTHROCARE CORPORATION
Date Court Case No. Judge
07/20/2010 Texas Western District 1:08-CV-00574 Sam Sparks

Description
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART [166] Motion to Dismiss ; GRANTING [168] Motion to Dismiss ; GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART [169] Motion to Dismiss ; GRANTING [170] Motion to Dismiss ; GRANTING [171] Motion to Dismiss ; GRANTING IN P


only one with "Copeland" in the tile:


NATASHA COPELAND vs. CITY OF KILLEEN
Date Court Case No. Judge
07/08/2010 Texas Western District 1:10-CV-00338 Sam Sparks

Description
ORDER GRANTING [4] Motion to Transfer Case. Case Transferred to TXWD - Waco Division. Signed by Judge Sam Sparks. (jk, )



only one with "gun":



Celestine v. United States
Date Court Case No. Judge
06/18/2001 Texas Western District N/A Sam Sparks

Description
Order granting motion to suppress. Gun found in trunk of defendant's car, searched when car was impounded following full custodial arrest for civil offense of drinking one beer in parking lot of 7-Eleven. HELD –– full custodial arrest of defendant for fine-only, civil offese with no breach of the peace violated Fourth Amendment. Also HELD –– arrest constituted an "extreme practice."
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 12:20:06 AM EDT
KLBJ had the story on the other day. Paul Copeland got 6 months in a Fed workcamp.Now this may have been some last minute plea bargain on the sentence. The thing that gets me is Copeland asked for a driver's license and was shown one.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 2:02:12 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 4:50:34 AM EDT

Gun dealer sentenced to 6-months for selling weapons to a undocumented immigrant.
Newsroom
8/31/2010


One of the gun dealers of Austin's Gun Show is sentenced to 6-months at a federal work camp for selling a weapon to an undocumented immigrant. Independent firearms dealer-Paul Copeland says for years he has commonly sold handguns and antique weapons with no problems and prior to his arrest the illegal immigrant showed him what appeared to be a valid Texas driver’s license. In January 2009, the ATF along with the Austin police department set up a sting operation targeting independent firearms dealers that were selling weapons to illegal immigrants, both inside the show and outside the Austin’s Gun Show’s parking lot. Shortly after the series of arrests, the regularly scheduled weapons-event was asked to move from the North Austin location. Investigators with the Austin police department believed many of the guns sold to the undocumented immigrants at the show were headed back across the Texas-Mexico border. “I guess you need ask them <Latinos> for their documentation too; if the police aren’t going to profile why should the common citizen have to” says Copeland. He says none of the undocumented immigrants that were asked to testify against him were arrested by federal agents. Austin's Federal Judge Sam Sparks sentenced Copeland to spend the next 6-months at a federal work camp followed by 2-years of probation.


Link Posted: 9/4/2010 6:01:52 AM EDT
Finally the libtards acknowldge an illegal alien should be assumed he/she is an illegal alien by they way they look and act, such that a man is convicted and sentenced to a six month work camp for not making that assumption, but a cop
can't stop and question an illegal based on that same assumption. This is Supreme Court material.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 7:27:28 AM EDT
I was under the impression that illegal immigrants were able to easily obtain a TX DL, but I might have been associating "people who can't speak a lick of English" with "illegal immigrant."

But a quick google search showed that they need to be a citizen, have a green card, employment authorization card, or a passport with visa.

So they're not busting the undocumented immigrant for forgery? Assuming he had a fake ID. Or does any of the following after citizen preclude them from owning a firearm?

I guess we all have to be more vigilant when doing FTF sales with guys who can cough up TX IDs...no more selling to spanish-speaking Hispanic-looking cowboys.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 7:31:26 AM EDT
Que el prosecutor-O???


Thankfully we now have the ruling from the court, anyone speaking spanish is an illegal alien.

Deny them any right and you are right, allow them a right and you are wrong.



Who is the prosecutor????
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 9:39:06 AM EDT
Originally Posted By aps_quang:
I was under the impression that illegal immigrants were able to easily obtain a TX DL, but I might have been associating "people who can't speak a lick of English" with "illegal immigrant."

But a quick google search showed that they need to be a citizen, have a green card, employment authorization card, or a passport with visa.

So they're not busting the undocumented immigrant for forgery? Assuming he had a fake ID. Or does any of the following after citizen preclude them from owning a firearm?

I guess we all have to be more vigilant when doing FTF sales with guys who can cough up TX IDs...no more selling to spanish-speaking Hispanic-looking cowboys.


One of the requirements to gaining citizenship is learning English. When filling out a 'yellow form' it will ask are you a U.S. Citizen?
I used to go to that Saxon Gun Show in N. Austin and was shocked to see all the families of illegal aliens crowding the isles, looking and handling the guns and seeing them come out jabbering across the parking lot with their new guns.

Only LE is expected to overlook the obvious.

Link Posted: 9/4/2010 10:22:05 AM EDT
I am an attorney and have a login for PACER, the Federal District Court document system.

There is indeed a case involving a Paul Edward Copeland. The cause number is: 1:10-cr-00136-SS

The charge was: "18:922(d) and 924(a)(2), SELLING FIREARMS TO ADDICTS, FELONS, FUGITIVES - Disposing of firearm to an illegal alien."

It was a jury verdict.

So based on this, the article seems legitimate.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 10:33:31 AM EDT

Originally Posted By boywonder777:
couldn't find the story on any other news sites. can anyone confirm? i know some people automatically approach any alex jones story with skepticism. this is what got the austin gun show shut down. now the seller is prosecuted?

In a trial before Federal Judge Sam Sparks, government lawyers conceded Texas resident Paul Copeland did not know his buyer was an illegal alien, but the jury they should convict him anyway because he "had reasonable cause to believe” he was selling to an illegal alien because the two men and a boy who were present at his table at the time of the sale: 1) were Hispanic, 2) spoke Spanish, and 3) wore cowboy clothing. And the jury did as asked. Assistant U.S. Attorney Jennifer Freel acted as lead prosecutor in the case.

http://www.infowars.com/feds-convict-texan-for-selling-a-gun-to-illegal-alien-with-texas-drivers-license/


So.. is profiling good or bad or when-it-is-our-favor?
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 10:43:34 AM EDT
Originally Posted By wackjum:
I am an attorney and have a login for PACER, the Federal District Court document system.

There is indeed a case involving a Paul Edward Copeland. The cause number is: 1:10-cr-00136-SS

The charge was: "18:922(d) and 924(a)(2), SELLING FIREARMS TO ADDICTS, FELONS, FUGITIVES - Disposing of firearm to an illegal alien."

It was a jury verdict.

So based on this, the article seems legitimate.

So...does this become a precedent that it is legal to discriminate based on a profile?

Was Mr. Copeland an FFL or unlicensed seller? Not sure how "Independent firearms dealer" fits in.

Lee

Link Posted: 9/4/2010 11:11:30 AM EDT
Originally Posted By boywonder777:
couldn't find the story on any other news sites. can anyone confirm? i know some people automatically approach any alex jones story with skepticism. this is what got the austin gun show shut down. now the seller is prosecuted?

In a trial before Federal Judge Sam Sparks, government lawyers conceded Texas resident Paul Copeland did not know his buyer was an illegal alien, but the jury they should convict him anyway because he “had reasonable cause to believe” he was selling to an illegal alien because the two men and a boy who were present at his table at the time of the sale: 1) were Hispanic, 2) spoke Spanish, and 3) wore cowboy clothing. And the jury did as asked. Assistant U.S. Attorney Jennifer Freel acted as lead prosecutor in the case.

http://www.infowars.com/feds-convict-texan-for-selling-a-gun-to-illegal-alien-with-texas-drivers-license/



Ok now hold the phone. The feds are all over AZ over their immigration law because of concerns with "racial profiling" but they'll try and nail this guy because he didn't "racially profile" customers and didn't recognize them as illegal but still having a TXDL.

Wow, just #$%#@ wow.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 11:49:08 AM EDT
sounds like the ATF. rules can change to fit the case.

this is just sad since most of us texans assume a private sale can be just a handshake and exchange of cash. some will want to see a txdl or chl, others will want a bill of sale. i wouldn't have done anything different than this seller when selling a gun to an individual. he didn't do anything illegal except not profile the guy more. so i guess if you're wearing cowboy clothing, have a tan, and are ordering some expensive gun show "nachos" i can't sell to you. or a "breakfast burrito" in that case since you just spoke spanish. your txdl isn't good enough either.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 12:06:18 PM EDT
Based on the information thus far, this entire situation, complete bullshit!!! Someone or a group of someones need to send this to every one of our reps & raise some unholy hell about this! Just one of the MANY examples of waaaaaaaaay too much government!
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 1:19:29 PM EDT
This is exactly why I've stopped shipping long guns p2p. This sucks.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 5:51:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/8/2010 2:49:43 PM EDT by Srben]
Originally Posted By Catman2:
Finally the libtards acknowldge an illegal alien should be assumed he/she is an illegal alien by they way they look and act, such that a man is convicted and sentenced to a six month work camp for not making that assumption, but a cop can't stop and question an illegal based on that same assumption. This is Supreme Court material.


go on...
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 5:59:25 PM EDT
Originally Posted By wackjum:
I am an attorney and have a login for PACER, the Federal District Court document system.

There is indeed a case involving a Paul Edward Copeland. The cause number is: 1:10-cr-00136-SS

The charge was: "18:922(d) and 924(a)(2), SELLING FIREARMS TO ADDICTS, FELONS, FUGITIVES - Disposing of firearm to an illegal alien."

It was a jury verdict.

So based on this, the article seems legitimate.


Who was Copeland's attorney? Because I'd like to make sure that I never, ever use them.

Is there any way to read the transcript of the arguments? I'd be willing to wander down to a courthouse and request them if someone can tell me how.
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 6:32:44 PM EDT
I'm confused. Do we or don't we profile?

So, if a guy wants to buy a firearm from me (I'm NOT a dealer), I should automatically assume he is not allowed to purchase because he "might" be illegal, drug addict, crazy, felon.... Most folks on this forum could likely fall in one of those categories if we are to assume based on first impressions. Better start taking my allergy medicine or somebody might think I'm doing drugs.

And I constantly get in trouble for calling folks MEXICAN due to their dress, speech, teeth, license plates, and bumper stickers. To be PC, now I just have to say "Non Specific Foreign National from South of the Border."

Where does TSRA stand on this?
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 7:26:11 PM EDT
Originally Posted By BigRedDog:
Que el prosecutor-O???


Thankfully we now have the ruling from the court, anyone speaking spanish is an illegal alien.

Deny them any right and you are right, allow them a right and you are wrong.



Who is the prosecutor????


Damned if ya do, damned if ya don't.

That's fucked up. I agree with an above poster, Supreme Court material

Link Posted: 9/4/2010 7:34:26 PM EDT
Get your termonology correct, he sold a gun to an undocumented Democrat.
As a future Dem what was he thinking ?
Link Posted: 9/4/2010 8:30:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/4/2010 8:35:23 PM EDT by Catman2]
Originally Posted By Srben:
Originally Posted By Catman2:
Finally the libtards acknowldge an illegal alien should be assumed he/she is an illegal alien by they way they look and act, such that a man is convicted and sentenced to a six month work camp for not making that assumption, but a cop can't stop and question an illegal based on that same assumption. This is Supreme Court material.


http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o264/grizzlyboycroc/28wkl15.gif

go on...


wtf do you mean 'go on'...thats it

eta- when they say they're going to send him to some work camp, like in Siberia?

Link Posted: 9/4/2010 9:10:16 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Catman2: ... when they say they're going to send him to some work camp, like in Siberia?



Link Posted: 9/5/2010 5:04:50 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/5/2010 5:08:39 AM EDT by Catman2]
This is double standard bullshit. Case in point. Last Thanksgiving Day when I had relatives from out of town, some who travelled long distances and were looking forward to the peaceful quite of my back deck and view, one reason my house was chosen.
A neighbor was having an addition put on his vacation house and for three weeks there had been non stop banging, sawing, plank throwing, yelling, yelping and that incessant music from a Mexican radio station blaring until dark. Thanksgiving Day, which is an American holiday and when most people are in their homes with family, seemed to be no different. I went over there and none of the workers could speak English and when I found the efe' and asked him how much longer they were going to work he said till dark. I told him in broken Spanish this was a holiday and they needed to knock it off and he said they needed to work. I tried calling the owner who was out of town enjoying Thanksgiving with his relatives but he didn't answer. So, I called the local PD to report a noise nuisance and the exchange went like this:

Sherrif's office.

Yes, I need to reoprt a noise nuisance.

OK, whats the location?

Blah, blah Road

OK, and what are they doing?

They're working on a house next door and playing loud music during a national holiday and we can't hear each other on our own back deck.

Well thats not right, there is a noise ordinance. Who is the company?

I don't know, it's a bunch of illegal aliens.

Sir, how do you know they're illegal aliens?

Because they can't speak a lick of English plus I grew up in Texas and I know what an illegal alien looks and sounds like.

(Long silence)Sir, just because they can't speak English and look a certain way doesn't make them an illegal alien. That is racial profiling which itself is against the law.

I didn't call to debate if I know what an illegal is. Can you do something about the this noise?

Sir, it's not against the law to work on your house on a holiday.

Well, can you just send a unit to just drive up because I'm sure when they see it they'll run off Click ...Hello?

Link Posted: 9/5/2010 5:32:49 AM EDT
This guy would not be in jail if Mexico could take care of itself. Feds must have used this guy as an example because he was effectively operating as a dealer without a license. Since they couldn't get thos charges to stick, they opted to go after who he was selling to. This is wrong on so many levels yet I don't see the outcry in MSM.
Link Posted: 9/5/2010 7:08:38 AM EDT
Originally Posted By wackjum:
I am an attorney and have a login for PACER, the Federal District Court document system.

There is indeed a case involving a Paul Edward Copeland. The cause number is: 1:10-cr-00136-SS

The charge was: "18:922(d) and 924(a)(2), SELLING FIREARMS TO ADDICTS, FELONS, FUGITIVES - Disposing of firearm to an illegal alien."

It was a jury verdict.

So based on this, the article seems legitimate.


Thanks for the confirmation. That's what I couldn't find. You would think there would be a lot larger news presence for a story like this...
Link Posted: 9/5/2010 2:02:45 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Lmccrock:

So...does this become a precedent that it is legal to discriminate based on a profile?

Lee


At the trial level, these cases are fact specific and the facts are currently unknown. If it goes to the 5th Circuit for appeal then potentially precedent could be set. But the precedent would not be regarding discrimination. There is no cause of action for discrimination by a private citizen. As a private citizen, you can choose to sell or not to sell to another person for whatever criteria you want, including race. Things change if you have a business of "public accommodation" but I don't know if a gun store falls under this definition. It doesn't matter because I don't think Mr. Copeland was an FFL. If he was, he would have been required to call in the sale. In Texas, an FFL can bypass the Federal background check only with a CHL, not with a TXDL.


Originally Posted By pliftkl:
Is there any way to read the transcript of the arguments? I'd be willing to wander down to a courthouse and request them if someone can tell me how.


You can order the transcript, although the procedure for each Court is different and I have never dealt with the Western Dist of Texas. Generally you would have to contact the Court Reporter that was on the case and order from them.



Originally Posted By JmPnTX:
Thanks for the confirmation. That's what I couldn't find. You would think there would be a lot larger news presence for a story like this...


I also have the indictment in PDF format if you are curious, although it won't really tell you much more information than what has already been provided. Not sure how I can post it though.
Link Posted: 9/5/2010 2:55:26 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/5/2010 2:58:56 PM EDT by RenegadeX]

Originally Posted By aps_quang:
I was under the impression that illegal immigrants were able to easily obtain a TX DL, but I might have been associating "people who can't speak a lick of English" with "illegal immigrant."

But a quick google search showed that they need to be a citizen, have a green card, employment authorization card, or a passport with visa.


The US Citizen only policy only changed in the last legislature or so. Prior to the change, they just walked in and got one no-questions asked like anyone else.
Link Posted: 9/5/2010 8:51:15 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/5/2010 8:53:04 PM EDT by Catman2]
Originally Posted By RenegadeX:

Originally Posted By aps_quang:
I was under the impression that illegal immigrants were able to easily obtain a TX DL, but I might have been associating "people who can't speak a lick of English" with "illegal immigrant."

But a quick google search showed that they need to be a citizen, have a green card, employment authorization card, or a passport with visa.


The US Citizen only policy only changed in the last legislature or so. Prior to the change, they just walked in and got one no-questions asked like anyone else.


That is because the policy has been misused and abused by Mexico and other countries to the south in the last twenty years.

Link Posted: 9/6/2010 8:31:17 AM EDT
Well this is great. Can't sell a gun to anyone who is from mexico or looks like it.

Maybe we should include the hispanic looking leos?

Def should never sell to an atf agent.
Link Posted: 9/6/2010 12:34:19 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Lmccrock:
Originally Posted By wackjum:
I am an attorney and have a login for PACER, the Federal District Court document system.

There is indeed a case involving a Paul Edward Copeland. The cause number is: 1:10-cr-00136-SS

The charge was: "18:922(d) and 924(a)(2), SELLING FIREARMS TO ADDICTS, FELONS, FUGITIVES - Disposing of firearm to an illegal alien."

It was a jury verdict.

So based on this, the article seems legitimate.

So...does this become a precedent that it is legal to discriminate based on a profile?

Was Mr. Copeland an FFL or unlicensed seller? Not sure how "Independent firearms dealer" fits in.

Lee



Lee, he was an individual, not an FFL. The show promoter was backed into a corner through his stupidity, and agreed that all gun sales had to go through an FFL at that show. Copeland, like all other vendors, was told this verbally and in writing before the show opened. In spite of this, he chose to sell guns direct to the customers. He may or may not have been set up, but he violated the agreement between the promoter, the hall and the Austin PD. Copeland had counsel, and went through the court system. It is a shame, but he made his own bed.
Link Posted: 9/6/2010 4:00:20 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/6/2010 4:15:02 PM EDT
Originally Posted By papaac:
Originally Posted By Lmccrock:
Originally Posted By wackjum:
I am an attorney and have a login for PACER, the Federal District Court document system.

There is indeed a case involving a Paul Edward Copeland. The cause number is: 1:10-cr-00136-SS

The charge was: "18:922(d) and 924(a)(2), SELLING FIREARMS TO ADDICTS, FELONS, FUGITIVES - Disposing of firearm to an illegal alien."

It was a jury verdict.

So based on this, the article seems legitimate.

So...does this become a precedent that it is legal to discriminate based on a profile?

Was Mr. Copeland an FFL or unlicensed seller? Not sure how "Independent firearms dealer" fits in.

Lee



Lee, he was an individual, not an FFL. The show promoter was backed into a corner through his stupidity, and agreed that all gun sales had to go through an FFL at that show. Copeland, like all other vendors, was told this verbally and in writing before the show opened. In spite of this, he chose to sell guns direct to the customers. He may or may not have been set up, but he violated the agreement between the promoter, the hall and the Austin PD. Copeland had counsel, and went through the court system. It is a shame, but he made his own bed.


He may have violated an agreement that he signed, but he was not charged with breaking that agreement.

I find it almost unfathomable that he could lose this case, unless at some point there was a conversation that went like:

Buyer: "I'm not sure I'm allowed to buy from you. Are you sure it's ok?"
Seller: "Do you have a Texas driver's license?"
Buyer: "Yes"
Seller: "You're good to go"

If the prosecution's case was purely about his failure to racially profile his customers, then the defense attorney did a horrible job.


Link Posted: 9/6/2010 4:32:46 PM EDT
Originally Posted By aps_quang:
I was under the impression that illegal immigrants were able to easily obtain a TX DL, but I might have been associating "people who can't speak a lick of English" with "illegal immigrant."

But a quick google search showed that they need to be a citizen, have a green card, employment authorization card, or a passport with visa.

So they're not busting the undocumented immigrant for forgery? Assuming he had a fake ID. Or does any of the following after citizen preclude them from owning a firearm?

I guess we all have to be more vigilant when doing FTF sales with guys who can cough up TX IDs...no more selling to spanish-speaking Hispanic-looking cowboys.


YOu can easily get a TX ID that look exactly like a drivers license it does say id only but perhaps he just didnt see it or it was fake which is also easily attainable.. Either way its b.s he did all he could with in the letter of the law and still got hosed.
Link Posted: 9/7/2010 7:49:58 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/7/2010 7:50:25 AM EDT by sj586]
A jury heard hours or days worth of testimony from witnesses and had evidence before convicting the defendant, but people here are convinced he is innocent based on a one paragraph news story written by someone that wasn't under oath.
Link Posted: 9/7/2010 8:14:34 AM EDT
Originally Posted By sj586:
A jury heard hours or days worth of testimony from witnesses and had evidence before convicting the defendant, but people here are convinced he is innocent based on a one paragraph news story written by someone that wasn't under oath.


Agreed. Could somebody summarize the transcripts and post? We need to know the facts so we don't duplicate.
Link Posted: 9/7/2010 9:50:54 AM EDT
I was at the San Antonio gun show over the weekend. There are several tables I used to frequent back when going to the gun show was a monthly event so I made some inquiries.
Everyone I asked seemed to feel that Copeland brought it on himself. He had received several warnings and had been advised to get an FFL if he wanted to continue buying and selling guns. I am not saying he was right or wrong. I just didn't get a feeling there was a lot of sympathy for the man. One vendor called him a nut case. The day after police questioned him he showed up at the gun show with a loaded 45 tucked in his pants. This is all hearsay. I didn't witness any of the events. It does look like there is two sides to the story though. Also it doesn't look like he will be getting out on bail while they file a motion for a re-trial.

Still. Best to watch yourself if you do a face to face transfer and you don't know the person.
I can't speak for anyone but myself. I don't have the type of deep pockets it would take to hire the type of lawyer to get me off.

Anyone have a link to a picture of Paul Copeland ?
I am pretty sure I know who he was and if it is the guy I am thinking about I have bought several fire arms from him in years past.
Just curious. Would clear some things up in my head if it was him.
Link Posted: 9/7/2010 4:46:27 PM EDT
Still, he was selling to a guy that (according to reports) had a valid TX DL......

There just HAS to be more to this story. Cause if it was just about selling to a guy that was illegal, but had what looked like a valid DL... then it is abunch of crap.

Now if the DL looked like it was written in crayon... Maybe a case.
Link Posted: 9/7/2010 8:33:34 PM EDT
Originally Posted By aolspartsman:
I was at the San Antonio gun show over the weekend. There are several tables I used to frequent back when going to the gun show was a monthly event so I made some inquiries.
Everyone I asked seemed to feel that Copeland brought it on himself. He had received several warnings and had been advised to get an FFL if he wanted to continue buying and selling guns. I am not saying he was right or wrong. I just didn't get a feeling there was a lot of sympathy for the man. One vendor called him a nut case. The day after police questioned him he showed up at the gun show with a loaded 45 tucked in his pants. This is all hearsay. I didn't witness any of the events. It does look like there is two sides to the story though. Also it doesn't look like he will be getting out on bail while they file a motion for a re-trial.

Still. Best to watch yourself if you do a face to face transfer and you don't know the person.
I can't speak for anyone but myself. I don't have the type of deep pockets it would take to hire the type of lawyer to get me off.

Anyone have a link to a picture of Paul Copeland ?
I am pretty sure I know who he was and if it is the guy I am thinking about I have bought several fire arms from him in years past.
Just curious. Would clear some things up in my head if it was him.


Ok I do remember something about a dealer getting several warnings about dealing without a license. But then he should have been prosecuted for dealing without a license. That should be easy to get from Saxet as to how many times he paid for a table, etc...

It's just strange that the prosecution would go this route to get a prosecution.
Link Posted: 9/8/2010 8:12:16 AM EDT
Aside from the double standard of racial profiling vs. not profiling and ending up being shipped off to a work camp,
where I guess he's supposed to be re indoctrined what a good American should be, one should show some ethics
and discriminate who he is selling a gun to. Some sleazeballs will hawk a gun to anyone with money and I have seen my share of mentally ill scumbags on both sides of the counter.
If he can't speak English and you ignore the signs he's probably an illegal or a felonious gang banger and you sell to them you pay the consequences. Have some morals. The Feds are more than eager to put a gun dealer behind bars.
Link Posted: 9/8/2010 8:34:53 AM EDT
That's fine.

Unintended consequences are that I will NEVER sell a gun to anyone who is darker than me.... EVER.

So now I am a racist, right?
Link Posted: 9/8/2010 10:04:08 AM EDT
Originally Posted By AJSully421:
That's fine.

Unintended consequences are that I will NEVER sell a gun to anyone who is darker than me.... EVER.

So now I am a racist, right?


Depends. How dark is your skin?
Link Posted: 9/8/2010 2:53:50 PM EDT
Just had this sent to me. Thought you all may find it interesting.

FEDS CONVICT TEXAN FOR SELLING A GUN TO ILLEGAL ALIEN WITH TEXAS DRIVERS LICENSE

In Federal District Court on July 20, 2010, the ATF won a conviction from an Austin jury that defies logic and reason. In a trial before Federal Judge Sam Sparks, government lawyers conceded Texas resident Paul Copeland did not know his buyer was an illegal alien, but the jury they should convict him anyway because he "had reasonable cause to believe" he was selling to an illegal alien because the two men and a boy who were present at his table at the time of the sale: 1) were Hispanic, 2) spoke Spanish, and 3) wore cowboy clothing. And the jury did as asked. Assistant U.S. Attorney Jennifer Freel acted as lead prosecutor in the case.
The firearm transaction at issue occurred on January 16, 2010, at a gun show at the North Austin Events Center, at 10601 N. Lamar Blvd., in Austin, Texas. Undercover ATF agents followed Mr. Huerta, his son, and another Hispanic male, Hipolito Aviles, around the "Texas Gun show" that day, and claimed to observe Huertas transaction. Austin P.D. used Copelands case as the reason to close down the gun show, leading to a protest by Austin residents in front of APD headquarters on January 25.
Mr. Copeland is a 56 year old Cedar Creek resident and Vietnam veteran who liked to buy, sell, and trade firearms as a hobby. On January 16, however, he had the misfortune to sell a handgun to Leonel Huerta Sr., who spoke both English and Spanish. Huerta Sr. negotiated his purchase from Copeland in English, showing Copeland his Texas Drivers License. At Copelands trial Huerta admitted on the witness stand, that he is in the country illegally, (Huerta Sr. had previously admitted this fact to Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) Special Agent Leo Buentello). ATF Agent Shawn Kang claimed he saw Huerta later hand off the gun to Aviles. Despite these admissions, Huerta Sr. was never arrested, charged, or deported. Instead, his presence at the gun show was used to entrap an American citizen into an unwitting violation of a federal gun control law. Huerta Sr., who is a resident of the City of Austin, appeared as a witness at the trial, admitted he was in the country illegally before federal prosecutors and a federal judge, yet he was allowed to leave the courtroom under his own power. To date Huerta Sr. has not been prosecuted for his purchase, possession, or disposition of the handgun he bought from Copeland, while Copeland is now a convicted felon.
"Instead of busting the illegal alien for buying, they bust the citizen for selling," commented Paul Velte, attorney and founder of Peaceable Texans for Firearms Rights, a gun-owners' rights advocacy group from Austin. Velte asked, "who was in a better position to know the buyers immigration status, the buyer or the seller?" He also said, "What happened to Paul Copeland should enrage all Americans. The Federal Government is using illegal aliens to entrap citizens lawfully exercising their right to sell firearms. The illegal alien walks free, but the citizen gets convicted. The same government charged with controlling immigration is the one using illegal immigrants to attack its own citizens. Does this make any sense? It makes no sense unless the purpose is to discourage attendance at gun shows and frighten citizens from selling their firearms to other citizens."
Velte pointed out that "There is no way for a citizen to know who is here legally or not. In fact, under Austins sanctuary city policy, not even the police officer at the door of the gun show was allowed to ask a persons immigration status, yet the average Texan inside the show is expected to assume that a person standing before them with a Texas drivers license is in the country illegally just because they look Mexican and speak Spanish." Velte noted that the federal governments lawsuit against Arizona was based on that very type of conduct: Concluding someone could be here illegally based on their looks or their language. Velte said gun owners in his group are outraged, and they want to know:

1:Why is the illegal alien who purchased the gun, Leonel Huerta Sr., still living in Austin?
2:Why does he still have a Texas Drivers license?
3:Why is ATF using illegal aliens to set up and convict American citizens?
4:What has he been promised for his cooperation?
5:Why has he not been prosecuted? He committed three distinct crimes: he purchased a firearm knowing he was an illegal alien, he possessed the firearm, and he transferred the handgun to another illegal alien (Hippolito Aviles, who was convicted and given time served on June 30, 2010).
6:Why has Huerta Sr. not been deported?

Judge Sparks sentenced Copeland on August 27 to six months confinement and 24 months of probation, and called Copeland "a liar" for not admitting guilt. ATF confiscated Copelands entire gun collection and initiated forfeiture proceedings. Copeland was also fired from his job due to the indictment, and he would have lost his home to foreclosure, if not for his family stepping in to pay his mortgage while he serves his sentence.
Link Posted: 9/8/2010 5:48:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/8/2010 8:04:29 PM EDT by Catman2]
Originally Posted By Tortus:
Just had this sent to me. Thought you all may find it interesting.

FEDS CONVICT TEXAN FOR SELLING A GUN TO ILLEGAL ALIEN WITH TEXAS DRIVERS LICENSE

In Federal District Court on July 20, 2010, the ATF won a conviction from an Austin jury that defies logic and reason. In a trial before Federal Judge Sam Sparks, government lawyers conceded Texas resident Paul Copeland did not know his buyer was an illegal alien, but the jury they should convict him anyway because he "had reasonable cause to believe" he was selling to an illegal alien because the two men and a boy who were present at his table at the time of the sale: 1) were Hispanic, 2) spoke Spanish, and 3) wore cowboy clothing. And the jury did as asked. Assistant U.S. Attorney Jennifer Freel acted as lead prosecutor in the case.
The firearm transaction at issue occurred on January 16, 2010, at a gun show at the North Austin Events Center, at 10601 N. Lamar Blvd., in Austin, Texas. Undercover ATF agents followed Mr. Huerta, his son, and another Hispanic male, Hipolito Aviles, around the "Texas Gun show" that day, and claimed to observe Huertas transaction. Austin P.D. used Copelands case as the reason to close down the gun show, leading to a protest by Austin residents in front of APD headquarters on January 25.
Mr. Copeland is a 56 year old Cedar Creek resident and Vietnam veteran who liked to buy, sell, and trade firearms as a hobby. On January 16, however, he had the misfortune to sell a handgun to Leonel Huerta Sr., who spoke both English and Spanish. Huerta Sr. negotiated his purchase from Copeland in English, showing Copeland his Texas Drivers License. At Copelands trial Huerta admitted on the witness stand, that he is in the country illegally, (Huerta Sr. had previously admitted this fact to Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) Special Agent Leo Buentello). ATF Agent Shawn Kang claimed he saw Huerta later hand off the gun to Aviles. Despite these admissions, Huerta Sr. was never arrested, charged, or deported. Instead, his presence at the gun show was used to entrap an American citizen into an unwitting violation of a federal gun control law. Huerta Sr., who is a resident of the City of Austin, appeared as a witness at the trial, admitted he was in the country illegally before federal prosecutors and a federal judge, yet he was allowed to leave the courtroom under his own power. To date Huerta Sr. has not been prosecuted for his purchase, possession, or disposition of the handgun he bought from Copeland, while Copeland is now a convicted felon.
"Instead of busting the illegal alien for buying, they bust the citizen for selling," commented Paul Velte, attorney and founder of Peaceable Texans for Firearms Rights, a gun-owners' rights advocacy group from Austin. Velte asked, "who was in a better position to know the buyers immigration status, the buyer or the seller?" He also said, "What happened to Paul Copeland should enrage all Americans. The Federal Government is using illegal aliens to entrap citizens lawfully exercising their right to sell firearms. The illegal alien walks free, but the citizen gets convicted. The same government charged with controlling immigration is the one using illegal immigrants to attack its own citizens. Does this make any sense? It makes no sense unless the purpose is to discourage attendance at gun shows and frighten citizens from selling their firearms to other citizens."
Velte pointed out that "There is no way for a citizen to know who is here legally or not. In fact, under Austins sanctuary city policy, not even the police officer at the door of the gun show was allowed to ask a persons immigration status, yet the average Texan inside the show is expected to assume that a person standing before them with a Texas drivers license is in the country illegally just because they look Mexican and speak Spanish." Velte noted that the federal governments lawsuit against Arizona was based on that very type of conduct: Concluding someone could be here illegally based on their looks or their language. Velte said gun owners in his group are outraged, and they want to know:

1:Why is the illegal alien who purchased the gun, Leonel Huerta Sr., still living in Austin?
2:Why does he still have a Texas Drivers license?
3:Why is ATF using illegal aliens to set up and convict American citizens?
4:What has he been promised for his cooperation?
5:Why has he not been prosecuted? He committed three distinct crimes: he purchased a firearm knowing he was an illegal alien, he possessed the firearm, and he transferred the handgun to another illegal alien (Hippolito Aviles, who was convicted and given time served on June 30, 2010).
6:Why has Huerta Sr. not been deported?

Judge Sparks sentenced Copeland on August 27 to six months confinement and 24 months of probation, and called Copeland "a liar" for not admitting guilt. ATF confiscated Copelands entire gun collection and initiated forfeiture proceedings. Copeland was also fired from his job due to the indictment, and he would have lost his home to foreclosure, if not for his family stepping in to pay his mortgage while he serves his sentence.


This stinks like the time the known, convicted, drug running, illegal alien got shot in the ass by the Border Patrol which resulted in two agents being sent to prison for violating his civil rights. Meanwhile the illegal alien was granted immunity and citizenship for testifying against two U.S. Border Patrol Agents in a U.S. court.

Link Posted: 9/8/2010 7:33:35 PM EDT
Lets throw the tax paying American citizen in prison. He is the real problem. Not the illegal alien buying a firearm illegally and then illegally giving it to another illegal alien.
Oh yeah, let's give the real person that broke the law immunity for his testimony and let him continue to stay in the country illegally. If he violates any more laws then maybe we can throw a few more taxpayers in prison. Justify our court system.
Stinks on many levels. The future is here and it sucks. Reminds me of some of the stunts pulled by Janet Reno during the Clinton years. I have a feeling this was just a test case. Tip of the spear for what is planned.
Let's talk solutions
-How about a telephone # for a non-FFl to call before he sells a gun to someone so he can do a background check on a prospective buyer? This proves it is not only FFL 's that need the ability to perform a background check. How about a real solution to the problem?
-Where is our national registry of stolen guns so you can check if a gun you are about to buy is on a hot sheet ?
You can't accuse our government of common sense. Better to create criminals than solutions.
I am tired of the federal government deciding which laws it will enforce and which laws it will ignore.
I believe justice dictates that the buyer of the gun be put in jail; have a swift trial, and then be deported. He should never be allowed to return.
That is common sense talking, isn't it ?
I hope Copeland is able to file an appeal and wins it.
Link Posted: 9/9/2010 7:01:31 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Tortus:
Just had this sent to me. Thought you all may find it interesting.

FEDS CONVICT TEXAN FOR SELLING A GUN TO ILLEGAL ALIEN WITH TEXAS DRIVERS LICENSE

In Federal District Court on July 20, 2010, the ATF won a conviction from an Austin jury that defies logic and reason. In a trial before Federal Judge Sam Sparks, government lawyers conceded Texas resident Paul Copeland did not know his buyer was an illegal alien, but the jury they should convict him anyway because he "had reasonable cause to believe" he was selling to an illegal alien because the two men and a boy who were present at his table at the time of the sale: 1) were Hispanic, 2) spoke Spanish, and 3) wore cowboy clothing. And the jury did as asked. Assistant U.S. Attorney Jennifer Freel acted as lead prosecutor in the case.
The firearm transaction at issue occurred on January 16, 2010, at a gun show at the North Austin Events Center, at 10601 N. Lamar Blvd., in Austin, Texas. Undercover ATF agents followed Mr. Huerta, his son, and another Hispanic male, Hipolito Aviles, around the "Texas Gun show" that day, and claimed to observe Huertas transaction. Austin P.D. used Copelands case as the reason to close down the gun show, leading to a protest by Austin residents in front of APD headquarters on January 25.
Mr. Copeland is a 56 year old Cedar Creek resident and Vietnam veteran who liked to buy, sell, and trade firearms as a hobby. On January 16, however, he had the misfortune to sell a handgun to Leonel Huerta Sr., who spoke both English and Spanish. Huerta Sr. negotiated his purchase from Copeland in English, showing Copeland his Texas Drivers License. At Copelands trial Huerta admitted on the witness stand, that he is in the country illegally, (Huerta Sr. had previously admitted this fact to Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) Special Agent Leo Buentello). ATF Agent Shawn Kang claimed he saw Huerta later hand off the gun to Aviles. Despite these admissions, Huerta Sr. was never arrested, charged, or deported. Instead, his presence at the gun show was used to entrap an American citizen into an unwitting violation of a federal gun control law. Huerta Sr., who is a resident of the City of Austin, appeared as a witness at the trial, admitted he was in the country illegally before federal prosecutors and a federal judge, yet he was allowed to leave the courtroom under his own power. To date Huerta Sr. has not been prosecuted for his purchase, possession, or disposition of the handgun he bought from Copeland, while Copeland is now a convicted felon.
"Instead of busting the illegal alien for buying, they bust the citizen for selling," commented Paul Velte, attorney and founder of Peaceable Texans for Firearms Rights, a gun-owners' rights advocacy group from Austin. Velte asked, "who was in a better position to know the buyers immigration status, the buyer or the seller?" He also said, "What happened to Paul Copeland should enrage all Americans. The Federal Government is using illegal aliens to entrap citizens lawfully exercising their right to sell firearms. The illegal alien walks free, but the citizen gets convicted. The same government charged with controlling immigration is the one using illegal immigrants to attack its own citizens. Does this make any sense? It makes no sense unless the purpose is to discourage attendance at gun shows and frighten citizens from selling their firearms to other citizens."
Velte pointed out that "There is no way for a citizen to know who is here legally or not. In fact, under Austins sanctuary city policy, not even the police officer at the door of the gun show was allowed to ask a persons immigration status, yet the average Texan inside the show is expected to assume that a person standing before them with a Texas drivers license is in the country illegally just because they look Mexican and speak Spanish." Velte noted that the federal governments lawsuit against Arizona was based on that very type of conduct: Concluding someone could be here illegally based on their looks or their language. Velte said gun owners in his group are outraged, and they want to know:

1:Why is the illegal alien who purchased the gun, Leonel Huerta Sr., still living in Austin?
2:Why does he still have a Texas Drivers license?
3:Why is ATF using illegal aliens to set up and convict American citizens?
4:What has he been promised for his cooperation?
5:Why has he not been prosecuted? He committed three distinct crimes: he purchased a firearm knowing he was an illegal alien, he possessed the firearm, and he transferred the handgun to another illegal alien (Hippolito Aviles, who was convicted and given time served on June 30, 2010).
6:Why has Huerta Sr. not been deported?

Judge Sparks sentenced Copeland on August 27 to six months confinement and 24 months of probation, and called Copeland "a liar" for not admitting guilt. ATF confiscated Copelands entire gun collection and initiated forfeiture proceedings. Copeland was also fired from his job due to the indictment, and he would have lost his home to foreclosure, if not for his family stepping in to pay his mortgage while he serves his sentence.


Absolutly amazing the amount of fail in this case.
Link Posted: 9/9/2010 11:31:35 AM EDT
I found this comment which seems like a different take on things and may explain why Copeland was arrested/convicted. What it DOESN'T address is why Aviles and Huerta were NOT arrested, nor why Aviles was not also deported.

Here’s the Order from the United States Court for the Western District of Texas of Austin Division of Copeland’s Motion to Suppress: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBIQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.keepandshare.com%2Fdoc%2F2215788%2Fcopelandmotiontosuppres­soverruled-pdf-september-5-2010-1-15-pm-599k%3Fda%3Dy&rct=j&q=1%3A10-cr-00136-SS%20&ei=hz-FTIaDHI26sAProtj2Bw&usg=AFQjCNF4D82eezWdKiwRrKjTeESbX_Fn7Q&sig2=jVtmCGiqqFqXRL214cmlig&cad=rja
It turns out Huerta is here legally. He purchased the firearm for Mr. Aviles, who was here illegally, after Aviles negotiated with Mr. Copeland for the price of the gun and showed interest. When asked for ID Aviles refused to show any, so Huerta showed his license so that he could purchase it for Avila. He handed the gun to Avila after purchasing it. It says nothing about Huerta or Aviles being charged. That would be under a different case. The charge is that he knowingly sold a gun to Aviles through Huerta

The site where I found this:
http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2010/09/04/gun-dealer-gets-6-months-for-selling-to-illegal-w-valid-id/

the above is a comment posted near the bottom of the page.

I would sure like to know the true details.
Link Posted: 9/9/2010 12:26:12 PM EDT
Originally Posted By SmileyFtW:
I found this comment which seems like a different take on things and may explain why Copeland was arrested/convicted. What it DOESN'T address is why Aviles and Huerta were NOT arrested, nor why Aviles was not also deported.

Here’s the Order from the United States Court for the Western District of Texas of Austin Division of Copeland’s Motion to Suppress: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBIQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.keepandshare.com%2Fdoc%2F2215788%2Fcopelandmotiontosuppres­soverruled-pdf-september-5-2010-1-15-pm-599k%3Fda%3Dy&rct=j&q=1%3A10-cr-00136-SS%20&ei=hz-FTIaDHI26sAProtj2Bw&usg=AFQjCNF4D82eezWdKiwRrKjTeESbX_Fn7Q&sig2=jVtmCGiqqFqXRL214cmlig&cad=rja
It turns out Huerta is here legally. He purchased the firearm for Mr. Aviles, who was here illegally, after Aviles negotiated with Mr. Copeland for the price of the gun and showed interest. When asked for ID Aviles refused to show any, so Huerta showed his license so that he could purchase it for Avila. He handed the gun to Avila after purchasing it. It says nothing about Huerta or Aviles being charged. That would be under a different case. The charge is that he knowingly sold a gun to Aviles through Huerta

The site where I found this:
http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2010/09/04/gun-dealer-gets-6-months-for-selling-to-illegal-w-valid-id/

the above is a comment posted near the bottom of the page.

I would sure like to know the true details.


If what you are saying is true, then it does shed a bit of a different light on it. It would tend to imply that Copeland knew he was facilitating a "straw purchase" for Aviles by Mr. Huerta. Both Huerta and Aviles should be in jail and then (at least Aviles, and possibly Huerta unless he's a citizen) deported though.
Link Posted: 9/9/2010 12:28:29 PM EDT
Originally Posted By SmileyFtW:
I found this comment which seems like a different take on things and may explain why Copeland was arrested/convicted. What it DOESN'T address is why Aviles and Huerta were NOT arrested, nor why Aviles was not also deported.

Here’s the Order from the United States Court for the Western District of Texas of Austin Division of Copeland’s Motion to Suppress: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBIQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.keepandshare.com%2Fdoc%2F2215788%2Fcopelandmotiontosuppres­soverruled-pdf-september-5-2010-1-15-pm-599k%3Fda%3Dy&rct=j&q=1%3A10-cr-00136-SS%20&ei=hz-FTIaDHI26sAProtj2Bw&usg=AFQjCNF4D82eezWdKiwRrKjTeESbX_Fn7Q&sig2=jVtmCGiqqFqXRL214cmlig&cad=rja
It turns out Huerta is here legally. He purchased the firearm for Mr. Aviles, who was here illegally, after Aviles negotiated with Mr. Copeland for the price of the gun and showed interest. When asked for ID Aviles refused to show any, so Huerta showed his license so that he could purchase it for Avila. He handed the gun to Avila after purchasing it. It says nothing about Huerta or Aviles being charged. That would be under a different case. The charge is that he knowingly sold a gun to Aviles through Huerta

The site where I found this:
http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2010/09/04/gun-dealer-gets-6-months-for-selling-to-illegal-w-valid-id/

the above is a comment posted near the bottom of the page.

I would sure like to know the true details.


ok so that's a straw purchase. if that's true, they turned their eye on a straw purchase from the buyer perspective? if it did go down like that, then the seller is at fault since he knows the guy with the id was not the actual intended purchaser of the firearm and could not produce an id when asked. but still the charges they used to prosecute the seller were strange.
Link Posted: 9/9/2010 5:40:43 PM EDT
Originally Posted By pliftkl:
Originally Posted By papaac:
Originally Posted By Lmccrock:
Originally Posted By wackjum:
I am an attorney and have a login for PACER, the Federal District Court document system.

There is indeed a case involving a Paul Edward Copeland. The cause number is: 1:10-cr-00136-SS

The charge was: "18:922(d) and 924(a)(2), SELLING FIREARMS TO ADDICTS, FELONS, FUGITIVES - Disposing of firearm to an illegal alien."

It was a jury verdict.

So based on this, the article seems legitimate.

So...does this become a precedent that it is legal to discriminate based on a profile?

Was Mr. Copeland an FFL or unlicensed seller? Not sure how "Independent firearms dealer" fits in.

Lee



Lee, he was an individual, not an FFL. The show promoter was backed into a corner through his stupidity, and agreed that all gun sales had to go through an FFL at that show. Copeland, like all other vendors, was told this verbally and in writing before the show opened. In spite of this, he chose to sell guns direct to the customers. He may or may not have been set up, but he violated the agreement between the promoter, the hall and the Austin PD. Copeland had counsel, and went through the court system. It is a shame, but he made his own bed.


He may have violated an agreement that he signed, but he was not charged with breaking that agreement.

I find it almost unfathomable that he could lose this case, unless at some point there was a conversation that went like:

Buyer: "I'm not sure I'm allowed to buy from you. Are you sure it's ok?"
Seller: "Do you have a Texas driver's license?"
Buyer: "Yes"
Seller: "You're good to go"

If the prosecution's case was purely about his failure to racially profile his customers, then the defense attorney did a horrible job.




The man did a straw sale, plain and simple. The first guy tried to buy the gun a couple of times. The next time they came by his table, Copeland sold the gun to one of the original guy's friends, who handed it to the first guy.
Link Posted: 9/9/2010 7:17:20 PM EDT

Originally Posted By boywonder777:

ok so that's a straw purchase. if that's true, they turned their eye on a straw purchase from the buyer perspective? if it did go down like that, then the seller is at fault since he knows the guy with the id was not the actual intended purchaser of the firearm and could not produce an id when asked. but still the charges they used to prosecute the seller were strange.

There is no such thing as a straw purchase between private individuals, nor is there any requirement to show ID.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top