8 gun shop owners in Michigan, five of them here in West Michigan are being charged with felonies for selling guns to a felon.  What the LEO's did was go undercover and buy the gun and then give it to the felon.  Of course they had footage of the felon putting the gun into his vehicle.  The gun shop owners didn't break the law! Our Governor Jennifer Granholm then said we need more gun control to keep shop owners from "illegally" selling to criminals!

Semper Fi

Smalls

sounds like entrapment. But if this version of events is true they didn't sell to felons. If anything the cops should be arrested for giving a gun to a felon

This is called a "straw purchase". It's also called entrapment in this case. I agree with sharky, if the guns were given to felons the cops SHOULD have some serious explaining to do. Bet they won't have to though...

They had the felon on tape saying to the shop owner "Yeah I'm on 18 months probation for a B&E".  But they also had the LEO on tape saying "I'm buying the gun.  I'm buying it."

Yeah they did mention something about a straw purchase. How can they charge them with felonies if they followed the law?

Semper Fi

Smalls

That would mean that the LEO's lied on the friendly yellow form and are now felons under _Federal_ law IIRC.

You have to remember that our loving Attorney General is a hard-core anti. She's also making a run for Governor, and needs the grandstanding.  As far as entrapment, that's never applied to LEOs who get the goods on us dangerous right wing extremist gun owners.  Yeah, yeah, I know, all the LEOs who are going to chime in here about them not being above the law; sure, that's the theory.  You know better and so do the rest of us.

I think what its going to come down to is the questions on the "Happy Yellow" form...you know the one about are you purchasing this gun for yourself or for someone else if it is for some one else and not a gift we cant sell you this gun question...did the shop owner read the form and double check the answer?

We had the same thing happen here in Jacksonville.  One store got closed down completely and three others were fined.  This seems to be a new tactic for LEO's.  The way they did it here was to have the wife of the felon buy they gun (she was legally able to, no arrests or anything like that), then she gave it to her husband.  What really pisses me off is that he was a big time convicted felon that they let off for helping them.  He's back on the streets now.  Don't you feel better knowing he can commit more felonies while that evil gun store got closed down?

If they can't ban guns, they just close down all the gun stores, either way accomplishes the same objective. You LEO's must be real proud of the actions of your fellow scum, er officers I mean, who are "just doing their job".

Smalls,

Approximately where in west michigan are you from?  I'm a lakeshore resident who works in grand rapids.  Glad to see someone from my neck of the woods here.

wannabe

I know dealers typically record their dealings with the ATF, should they start recording purchases that have an extra person standing around?  If I was a dealer, I'd be one paranoid person.

Kharn

I would boot these two right out the door!

Hypothetically speaking:

I am a store owner, two people come in. One is buying a gun, fills out the 4473, everything is in order. While I am doing the instant check the 2nd guy is blathering on about something (in hindsight, I realize it was his criminal record) but I am busy processing a sale, getting a credit card approval, filling out government forms. I have a business to run, and I am trying to get the buyer to splurge on the "high markup" cleaning kit and fur-lined case.

Have I not just met the laws requirements? Don't I have the security of knowing that once this buyer takes possession then he is legally responsible for its use or mis-use? When does a liquor store owner get busted when an adult buys beer and then gives it to a child? The person making the purchase is the one breaking the law!

I am sure a dealer can make judgement calls on who they sell too, but since when do we hold them responsible for actual criminal actions of others? Those cops are the ones who committed felonies.

Madkiwi

There's more than one, wannabe...the three of us (you, smalls and I) aren't very far apart. smalls is just in the process of tearing his short blond hair out trying to figure out who I am.

Do you have a link to a story?

Names of the shop or shop owners?

I'm up here in TC.

Cool!  I'm hoping to break in my new ar soon.  just waiting to receive my upper, and I'll be hitting NORGC to play.  [sniper]

wannabe

Okay.....just skimmed through the posts....so I might have gotten some details wrong.


Now, if I recall, in my area, a few gun shops have put up their posters about 'straw purchases'.  My buddy allowed me to look at the stuff they sent on that.  Looks like some group and the fed got together to make an education pack to help dealers 'identify straw purchase deals'.  

Now if this tape shows the two in the store, one saying he/she is a con and the other saying I'm buying the gun.  I think the dealer should have denied the sale...... because rigth then and there it is a straw purchase.  If I was a customer standing there and heard this.....shoot, I'd be able to tell it was a straw purchase.

It's another story if the con came in and looked around, bud didn't say anything.  Then, about thirty min later, his buddy comes in to buy the weopon.  If the dealer did not see the two together, then he/she would assume that it's two seperate customers.

I'm sorry to say, but the dealer made a fubar.  Especially if the FFL holder received the packet w/ the posters and info on straw purchases.  I saw that packet.  I saw the 'questions' that the FFL/rep should be asking.  If I recall, one of them was, "Is this for you?"  "Is this going to be a gift?"  The FFL made a bad call...... busness must have been slow or something.  Or figured that, oh this one little time won't hurt..... it ended up hurting big time.

Maybe that's why I don't remember seeing any gun stores when I used to live in Detroit and Southfield. [:\]

Here's the link I found so far.

[url]http://www.wzzm13.com/newsdefault.asp?cmd=view&articleid=1932[/url]

Semper Fi

Smalls

"Police found the stores in an undercover sting. The sting used a felon and an undercover state police officer. The owner would suggest the other person, who was not a felon, should fill out the paperwork and the felon should keep the gun."

If in fact they were both standing there and the FFL suggested as stated above.  I think they disserve to be busted.  I don't think anybody wants guns to be knowingly sold to felons.  

So if these gun store owners knew, as suggested in the article, that the buyer was a "straw" buyer, don't you agree they should not have sold it?  Of course this is only based on info from our liberal media.  I would like to see the actual store discussion before making a final judgement.

It would be nice if we could actually trust the media for factual reporting. But we can't.

Good thing the gun store owners on the East side of the state are more ethical.  [pyro]

BTW I grew up in GR.  (just so the flaming doesn't get too intense)

"The local stores are Barnes Hardware in Muskegon, Kent Arms Incorporated in Wyoming, Northwest shooters in Twin Lake, Pro Guns in Muskegon and Steve's Gun and Archery in Plainfield Township."

I kind of find it hard to believe these guys would have cavalierly sold to felons without a well thought out entrapment theme.  I hope we get the actual info.

Also, it would be interesting to know what guns they purchased.  Even then, as was noted above the person buying the gun perjured themselves by signing the yellow form.  So unless they have a good smoking gun tape of the FFL saying the exact wrong thing, those busts are tainted.

On the news they showed a video clip of the felon saying to the undercover officer that he was on probation for B&E and that his friend (the LEO) was buying the firearm, not him.  I don't know which store this was said at.  This reminds me of a sting when undercover LEOs purchased fake IDs. Some with names like Mickie Mouse.  Of course on the fed instant check they came up clean and sold them the firearms.  I think this happened in Cali.  Not sure.

Semper Fi

Smalls

It just goes to show that [b]anyone[/b] can [b]break[/b] the [b]law[/b] and buy a firearm [b]ILLEGALY[/b].  I wonder if LEOs give [b]REAL[/b] criminals ideas?!? Hmmm

Semper Fi

Smalls

Impossible - this never happened in California.

CA has no NICS check - all info goes to CA DOJ and they have 10 days to check you out.  If they don't find a record of you living in the state, the purchase is denied.

It probably happened in Michigan.  [:P]

Entrapment is causing someone to do something they would not ordinarily do.

If you offer them an opportunity to do something that they would REGULARLY do it isn't entrapment.

I see, if an FFL sells a gun to a person KNOWING that he is not the real buyer of the gun, but a felon is, the defense is to say well in order to do that THEY had to lie on the form, 4473. I think the 4473 may also have questions for the FFL related to "straw" purchases.

I'm not sure what is going on here, and I don't think that link gives enough info to make a real good decision, and we know the media is well informed in "gun" type reporting. So it would be tought to say what is what.

MG_ME, Kharn, and Madkiwi: sounds like this kind of "sting" wouldn't work on you'se guys.

Blaze415: I don't think that the felon was "let off" or got to keep any weaponry. It may have allowed him some type of deal to "ease" his probation, or he may have got payed to do a "job" for a few hours. Or perhaps it was a scruffy looking cop who "claimed" to be a felon and had some false ID that would cause him to fail a background check.

I have lots of questions about his. But if gun shops are willing to "slide" around weapons laws they shouldn't be in business. If they got put in a goofy situation and were really doing what is reasonable under the laws they shouldn't get charged with anything.

What if the reason these shops came under scrutiny was information gathered from arrests indicating where felons were able to get guns?