The Gun Show Loophole

C

cdoc42

New member
I did a brief research on Gun Show purchases. One source was https://usafacts.org/articles/heres-where-guns-used-

It was a bit confusing:

“Roughly 42,000, or 3%, of the 1.5 million crime guns traced by the ATF between 2017 to 2021 were obtained at gun shows. However, because this percentage counts guns sold by FFL holders, not those sold by unlicensed individuals, it is an underestimate.”

But a few paragraphs later, this statement was made:

“From 2017 to 2021, 70% of crime guns traced by the ATF were obtained from a dealer, which is defined by law as anyone in the business of selling or repairing firearms. Dealers can be retail businesses or wholesale suppliers.
Twenty-three percent of crime guns were acquired from a pawnbroker. A pawnbroker offers a quick loan in exchange for a valuable such as jewelry or a gun. If the borrower can't repay on time, the pawnbroker keeps the item. As a result, pawn shops often have guns for sale at lower prices.
Six percent of crime guns were bought from a gun manufacturer.
Those sources total 99%; from that, I assume the 3% traced to gun shows is part of the 70% sold by dealers.

So if there are NO records of guns sold by unlicensed owners at gun shows, it is impossible to make the claim that the “loophole” must be closed – unless it is a guess that it must be the 1% missing from the total.

So why is closing the loophole such an important Government goal?
 
The article is sort of messed up.

First sort of stupid thing:

It claims that 70% of traced "crime guns" are bought from dealers and then another 23% are bought from pawnbrokers. The fact is that pawnbrokers who sell firearms in their shops are also considered dealers and must have FFLs.

So that means 93% of "crime guns" that are traced are bought from dealers. Another 6% are traced directly to a manufacturer sale.

Second stupid thing:
The reason the guns can be traced is that records exist to trace them. Those records generally only exist up through the first time they are sold by a dealer. After that point, records of sales get really hard to find. So it makes sense that guns that they can successfully trace are going to be traced to a dealer sale. Saying traceable guns are nearly always traceable to dealers is like saying the same thing twice. It's the fact that they are traceable that means that they are traceable to a dealer.

Third stupid thing:
They've already said that traceable guns nearly all trace back to dealers. That means that of course traceable guns that trace back to gun show sales nearly all trace back to dealers too--and their initial comments and graph about gun show sales are all about guns that traced back to dealer sales at gunshows. Then they throw in a comment that both dealers and unlicensed persons can sell at gun shows--that's true but it's a non sequitur because they've already admitted that very few traceable guns trace back to unlicensed sales. And the graph and other comments are only about dealer sales. So they just threw that in there to make it sound like it meant something and that unlicensed sales at gunshows are resulting in a lot of traceable "crime guns" but clearly it doesn't.


Ok, all that said, there are two huge issues here that the article completely ignores.

1. The BATF can only trace about 75-80% of the guns that are sent them to be traced. So the whole article is ignoring the fact that something like 20-25% of the guns they get can't be traced.

2. The BATF can only trace up to the first time a gun was purchased from a dealer. After that, it's nearly impossible to trace. So if Bill buys a gun from a dealer and then Bob buys it from him in a legal transaction and then it's stolen from Bob 10 years later, the ATF traces the gun to Bill and declares success. Does that mean that the manner in which Bill bought the gun (from a dealer in a shop, direct from a manufacturer, from a pawnbroker, or from a dealer at a gunshow) is relevant to how the gun ended up being used in a crime? No--it's totally irrelevant.

It is, of course, possible that Bill bought the gun and then used it in a crime, in that case it would be relevant--but a lot of "crime guns" become crime guns by being stolen. The article doesn't talk about that because the BATF can only trace to the original purchaser.

I think that the information probably came from this report by the BATF.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/r...i-crime-guns-recovered-and-traced-us/download

It correctly points out that: "National data, however, are not available on unregulated firearm transfers at gun shows." Which means, of course, that they can't trace guns back to those purchases and so none of the information in the report is reporting on unregulated firearm transfers at gun shows.

"Unregulated" means two things. They are private sales. They are legal as long as the buyer/seller follow federal law. Neither of those two things has anything to do with where the transfer takes place. In a car, at a gunshow, in a house, wherever.
 
cdoc42 said:
So why is closing the loophole such an important Government goal?
Click to expand...
I could answer, but if I did I would have to issue myself an infraction ...

John KSa is correct -- the real question is where the other 1 percent of traceable firearms were traced to, if NOT to a dealer or a manufacturer.

Basically they're saying that "We can trace 99 percent of the guns we can trace." That's a bit like saying "99 percent of Fords were made by Ford."
 
it is impossible to make the claim that the “loophole” must be closed
Click to expand...

First, you have to understand that the "loophole" they want closed is the buying and selling of private property between individuals obeying the law.

ALL the rest is simply BS made up to support what they want. ALL the studies, and their conclusions advocating gun control are frankly, crap. Or "smoke and mirrors" if you prefer.

of course your research was confusing, since you are looking at lies, and not well organized ones, at that.

I am not saying the actual facts are not actual facts, but the facts presented and the way they are presented are intentionally done to create a distortion of the truth.

Points to consider (and not all of them)

First, all gun traces can only trace to the last legal sale where records were required to be kept. As JohnKSa pointed out.

Next point, ALL guns come from manufactures. SOMEBODY makes them. And the law covers that. Licenses are required, fees paid, and regulations obeyed and if the maker is not doing that its already a CRIME, and has been for much, much longer than we have been alive.

Even so called "ghost guns" are already covered under long existing law.

So. since nearly all gun come from a licensed manufacturer (where records are required and kept, ) nearly all guns will "trace back" to the manufacturer.

And, since nearly all guns are distributed and originally sold through licensed dealers (who are also legally required to keep records) since 1968, they trace back to the dealer who originally sold them. SO stating how the guns they trace, track back to a dealer or manufacturer is like saying the earth orbits the sun. Its simply the way the world is and means nothing more than that. But the people doing the "studies" and spouting those statistics WANT us to think it does.

Next point, "crime guns". what is that, exactly? We assume it means a gun that was used in a crime, but in reality, it is more than just that, it is also guns recovered at a crime scene, and guns in the hands of prohibited persons which were never used in any crime, other than the illegal possession by a prohibited person.

These all get traced (or attempted to be traced) and that distorts the number because we are led to believe they are tracing guns used in actual crimes of violence, (shootings, or robberies where no one was shot, or shot at, etc.) when the reality is they are tracing a lot more than just those.

Ever see any studies or statistics about how a gun trace led back to the criminal who broke the law with a gun?? I don't recall any.

The only way a trace leads back to the criminal is if the legal purchaser committed used the gun in a crime. This does happen. And, when it does, the press makes a huge deal of how the "criminal got the gun legally".

What they always seem to fail to point out is that, when the gun was legally purchased the buyer WAS NOT a criminal. IF they were not criminals (convicted and prohibited from possession of firearms) then they are law abiding citizens at the time of purchase, with the same rights as all law abiding citizens.

another point to consider, actual prohibited persons who are illegally possessing a gun are not required by law to register it. They are committing a crime just by having it, so requiring them to register it (so it would trace back to them) is a violation of their 5th amendment rights.
When caught they can be charged with illegal possession, but not with failure to register it. Without some kind of paper trail the gun will NEVER trace back to the unlawful owner, and the law prohibits that, it being a violation of the criminals civil rights.

There's a lot more to it, of course, but the entire thing is a can of worms, intentionally tied in complex knots in a sauce of lies and distortions.

Do not think it happened by accident. It didn't.
 
When I was going to gun shows 30 years ago virtually every table was an FFL where you had to fill out a 4473 to make a purchase. There might be 1 or 2 small tables where an individual was selling a dozen or so guns from a private collection. And there were always about a dozen guys standing by the entrance with a couple of guns they were selling.

Over the last few years well over 1/2 of the tables are now private sales where you pay cash and walk away with what you want with no 4473 or background check.

I don't have a problem with someone making an occasional private sale. I've done so many times. But many of these people are now running an illegal business selling guns. Let's just say that the potential for people who should not have a gun being able to do so is a lot better than in the past.
 
When I was going to gun shows 30 years ago virtually every table was an FFL where you had to fill out a 4473 to make a purchase. There might be 1 or 2 small tables where an individual was selling a dozen or so guns from a private collection. And there were always about a dozen guys standing by the entrance with a couple of guns they were selling.

Over the last few years well over 1/2 of the tables are now private sales where you pay cash and walk away with what you want with no 4473 or background check.
Click to expand...

In the other corner of the country the situation was almost exactly the opposite. While there were always a few FFL dealers the majority of the tables were not licensed dealers but mostly hobbyists who bought, sold and traded with other people at the show, those who had tables and those who came in after paying the price of admission.

That pretty much came to an end in the late 20teens when the state passed a law requiring all firearm tranfers to go through a background check, which meant that a private seller and a private buyer still had to go through an FFL dealer. The last few shows I went to had one (or more) FFL dealers set up tables to do nothing but run the checks for the non-ffl holders at the show.

The shows in my area went away with the Covid panicdemic, and have not returned. Likely never will.
 
I guess gun show rules vary state to state.
I live in Colorado,and that is my gun show experience.

A) FFL sales do business as usual, 4473 and NIC check for all firearm sales.
There is NO GUNSHOW LOOPHOLE for FFL dealers

B) Private Sales. The Gunshow has a table or tables setup to fill out 4473 forms and perform Nics checks . The show requires this for ALL private sales.
I recall selling a P-14 Enfield barreled action as a private sale. It required the full 4473/Nics process. NO GUNSHOW LOOPHOLE for private sales.

C) Law Enforcement covered entry and exits. It was expected BATF plainclothes were circulating in the crowd.Parking Lots were patrolled for any informal cash face to face sales in the parking lot. Any sales on the premises
required transfer. NO GUNSHOW LOOPHOLE for uncontrolled sales.

D) The provided stats? Lets say I obtain a weapon from a brother in law or a friend or someone in my criminal gang or my local dealer in pharmacuticals. We will call it the "Underground loophole" There is no 4473 or NICS check. We may not even exchange names. Cash get the gun and we go our ways.
Later,the gun buyer gets busted robbing a liquor store.

During the police interrogation, he is asked "Where did you get the gun?"

Our criminal does not want this thread of questioning to lead to his brother in law,or his friend,or ratting on gangster.

He wants the thread of questioning to drop dead. One answer he can give is "I got it at a gun show"

Then for all subsequent questions he can answer like he is being grilled by Congress :

"I don't know. Just a guy. I gave him cash"

The answer works. Its hard to dispute. It gets recorded as a "Gunshow loophole sale"

But thats a lie. Gunshow has nothing to do with it. Still,those with an anti-gunshow agenda will exploit it.

I challenge these people to walk into a gunshow looking to sell a gun. Try to make the sale. See how that goes for you.
 
I have a problem with the use of the term "crime gun" as I think the ATF is using that term for any gun submitted for tracing. For example, I can't find the ATF saying how many of the guns it traced were "crime guns" and how many were not. I'm pretty sure that the ATF is using the term "crime gun" for every gun it traced, whether or not it was used in a crime.

The ATF does say that a very small number of the guns they trace are expedited traces because they were linked to a serious crime. The ATF also put this disclaimer:

ATF Firearms Trace Data Disclaimer
Firearm traces are designed to assist law enforcement authorities in conducting investigations by tracking the sale and possession of specific firearms. Law enforcement agencies may request firearms traces for any investigative reason, and those reasons are not necessarily reported to the federal government. Not all firearms used in crime are traced and not all firearms traced are used in crime.

Firearms selected for tracing are not chosen for purposes of determining which types, makes or models of firearms are used for illicit purposes. The firearms selected do not constitute a random sample and should not be considered representative of the larger universe of all firearms used by criminals, or any subset of that universe. Firearms are normally traced to the first retail seller, and sources reported for firearms traced do not necessarily represent the sources or methods by which firearms in general are acquired for use in crime.


This tells me that using ATF data to guess how many criminals get their guns from gun shows isn't going to give a meaningful result. While not perfect, using the DoJ data on how people in prison got their guns is a lot better than trying to use ATF trace data to determine how criminals are getting guns.



Edit to add: The ATF says the following which leads me to believe that a large portion of so called "crime gun" may not be involved in any crime at all:

Law enforcement agencies submitted a total of 1,922,5771
crime guns to ATF for tracing between 2017 and 2021. During this period, most of the trace requests made by LEAs were routine priority submissions
(99%; 1,895,421 of 1,922,577), while a very small share of trace requests were urgent priority submissions (1%; 27,156 of 1,922,577). An urgent trace is deemed necessary when the criminal violations are significant, and circumstances warrant or require that the firearm be traced without undue
delay. Examples of this include mass shootings, homicides, bank robberies, and other immediate threats to officer and public safety.
 
Last edited:
Really aughta close the stolen gun loophole.

I've not seen it directly myself however I have read it reported in newspapers that gangs will break into cars with the intention of locating firearms.

The "gun show loophole" really is only an uncreative reframing of private citizens selling personal property without excessive government interference. The problem IS NOT that people buy and sell guns.
The problem IS that people buy and sell guns.

I see the same thing applied to unreasonably restrictive concealed handgun permit applications. The process for New York City Washington DC or the state of Maryland all have the same barriers applied to the processes. They all cost too much, take too long, require multiple copies of the same paper and until bruen basically were all may issue. As in you may be issued the permit if you donate funds to the sheriff's re-election campaign, if they like you, if you meet certain financial or racial performance metrics etc.

Imagine the uproar today if you had to fill out paperwork, be judged- to do a background check to vote, to buy a car on craigslist, to speak your mind in the cafe without government interference.

Sent from my moto g power (2022) using Tapatalk
 
In their trace disclaimer, even the ATF admits that their data is BS, and not to be used to support any conclusions other than "this is what we traced".

Consider this, it seems like everything traced is reported as a "crime gun". This includes all the trace requests from Law Enforcement across the country, which happen every time they find a gun and do not have a valid "chain of custody" paper trail available to them.

Just as an example, say the cops in Baton Rouge are doing an investigation of something, and someone involved has a gun, of "unknown" origin. The trace request goes to the ATF, and they do a trace, discovering the gun was last tracked as sold in Kansas City 45 years ago, to a fellow who has been dead for the past 15 years. And, that's all they have, BUT it goes into the statistics as a "successful" trace of a "Crime Gun" in 2023. :rolleyes:

Next point, just how much faith and trust does one put into surveys of criminals in prison, regarding the honesty and accuracy of their responses about where they got the guns they used?

For me, about zero. People think, "well they're already in prison, what reason would they have to lie??"

TO which, I respond, "they're already in prison, what reason would they have to tell the truth??"

I know LOTS of people who are not in prison, and will intentionally lie to any kind of survey or poll taker, just to screw with the results, because they can.

The one underlying flaw in nearly all surveys, polls, and studies is that they rely on the honesty of respondents to their questions. And even those who toss out a certain percentage of replies to "account for dishonesty" chose an arbitrary percentage, which makes the attempt to compensate for dishonesty essentially meaningless.
 
Guns are extremely easy to obtain these days. A significant number of people buy or are given a gun, load it with cheap ammo and then place it either in the glove box, center console or under the driver's seat of their vehicle. You might think that they would lock their vehicle afterwards but many do not. Roving gangs of car thieves then take the guns and trade them for drugs.

It takes less than a minute to pull up on a driveway, open the car door, remove the gun and then be gone. Oftentimes the (former) gun owner won't report it stolen out of embarrassment or they have no idea what the serial number is and can't report it stolen. I wish people weren't so dumb, but many people are. People who are criminals most often obtain their guns this way. It's a lot cheaper than paying fair market value at a gun show.
 
The "Gun Show Loophole" is yet another example of how features that are a negotiated part of legislation become "loopholes" as soon as the ink is dry.

During Congressional negotiations about the Gun Control Act of 1968 gun control advocates wanted to require ALL firearms transactions to be handled by a licensed dealer. In order to get the bill passed, they compromised to allow the individual states to decide if transactions within that state had to go through a dealer. The Democrats have campaigned against private intrastate transactions ever since, calling it the "Gun Show Loophole", even though it has nothing to do with gun shows and isn't a loophole.

And they wonder why gun owners are reluctant to compromise.
 
And they wonder why gun owners are reluctant to compromise.
Click to expand...

In over 50 years of keeping an eye on these things, the only "compromise" I've ever seen from the gun control people is the agreement to DELAY some of their demands temporarily, if gun owners give up something today.

They do not bargain in good faith, they demand something of ours, give NOTHING but empty promises in return and call it compromise. And when we refuse they do their best to shame us for failing to "compromise".

Guns are extremely easy to obtain these days.
Click to expand...

Only if you include stealing them. :mad:
 
Consider this, it seems like everything traced is reported as a "crime gun". This includes all the trace requests from Law Enforcement across the country, which happen every time they find a gun and do not have a valid "chain of custody" paper trail available to them.
Click to expand...

I spoke with a friend of mine a little while ago, and he made me aware of something that skews the "crime gun trace" statistics even more.

Since 2019 or so, every firearm used firearm sold or traded to an FFL or placed with one on consignment or for internet sale, or pawned, is placed on a 10 day hold, while the dealer (gun shop or pawn shop) notified the police and they run a trace on the gun through the ATF, to determine if the gun is stolen. This applies to ALL the FFL holders in the state.

Think about that, for a moment, every used gun sold to a gunshop, traded to a gun shop, given to a gun shop for sale on consignment or on the internet, and every gun pawned is required to be traced by state law. And its the ATF that does the trace, per request of state LEOs.

This has been the law in my state for at least the past 4 years. Somehow, I don't think my state is the ONLY state where this is done.

These are not crime guns, not in any way. These are just used guns, and the state requires a trace to check to see if they are stolen, before they are allowed to be sold. (and gives the police 10 days to do it in.)

Since every trace run by the ATF is reported in the press (at least) as a trace of a crime gun, this makes the number seem huge, when tens of thousands (and possibly hundreds of thousands every year) of traced guns have no involvement in any crime, and are in fact, traced only to ensure they are not stolen property and so are in compliance with the law.
 
ATF conversation

While browsing about in a local gun shop the other day, a fella came in, all cocky like, to announce he had just had an interview with 2 ATF agents. The story went something like this: note, this is all heresay.

ATF came to his home, he was at work, his wife/girlfriend gives them his cell number. ATF calls the guy at work, he agrees to meet in a parking lot on the way home. There were inquiries made by the agents concerning his frequency of multiple purchases of the same low cost handguns. They asked to search his residence and he did not grant permission. There was some bold talk by all parties, and the interview ended.

There were half a dozen fellows present during the telling of this tale, with comments by most. Apparently there is a trend in that area that involves individuals purchasing multiple Heritage SA's revolvers, Hi-Points and Taurus semi's, then taking them to community sale days and selling the guns first come first served slightly over their cost to whoever pays. No questions asked, and the seller leaves $50 +/- richer depending on how many he sold and at what price.
,
Big difference in my mind as opposed to selling a gun to a guy you've known for years, in your club, a relative, etc. Guys like this give us all a black eye.
 
Makes one wonder what kind of story that guy will tell in the gunshop, after the Feds show up in a week or a month, or three with a warrant, search his place and if the multiple guns he purchased aren't there, arrest him for dealing in firearms without a license.

Also am curious what the state laws are about selling firearms "no questions asked". Where I live, up until about a decade ago, a person could sell a gun they owned to anyone, no questions asked, BUT, if you did sell it to a prohibited person, you were liable and could be charged.

Now the law requires both the seller and the buyer and the gun to go to an FFL dealer (in person, during their business hours) to have a background check run.

Sounds like the bragger is breaking some laws, Fed, and perhaps state, obviously the Fed knows he is doing it, but at this time apparently doesn't have enough evidence to support charges or to be sure of a conviction.

Maybe the interview was meant to scare the guy into quitting what he was doing, so the Feds don't have to spend time on this "small time" guy. OR maybe it was intended to get the guy to do something the Fed could use as evidence, so they could make a case. I have no idea, but I do agree, idiots breaking gun laws for chump change does make gun owners look bad.
 
Where I live, up until about a decade ago, a person could sell a gun they owned to anyone, no questions asked, BUT, if you did sell it to a prohibited person, you were liable and could be charged.
Click to expand...
Don't know about state laws, but under federal law, you have to know, or have reasonable cause to believe, that the person is prohibited for a violation to occur.

Simply selling to a prohibited person is not a violation under federal law unless you knew they were prohibited or had a reasonable cause to believe they were.
There were inquiries made by the agents concerning his frequency of multiple purchases of the same low cost handguns.
Click to expand...
If they want him, they will get him unless he immediately stops doing it or gets really cagey about how he makes his sales. And if he was smart enough to be that cagey, he wouldn't be under investigation.

They already have proof of his buying habits--now they just have to catch him flipping his purchases enough times that he will plead guilty when faced with the evidence or a jury won't believe whatever story his lawyer comes up with to try to explain how he's not dealing without a license.
 
but under federal law, you have to know, or have reasonable cause to believe, that the person is prohibited for a violation to occur.
Click to expand...

Yes. and, back in the day, state law basically mirrored fed law in this regard.

My point was that the old system relied on the individual judgement of the seller, instead of a state mandated "you must do this" order.

The whole point of "have reasonable cause to believe" was to allow the use of that judgement.

A total "no questions asked" sale isn't using ANY judgement. beyond you give me cash, I give you goodies....:rolleyes:

Proof of legal age and residence are simple and easy, and are, I believe the legal requirements. I would consider any buyer who refused to show me some kind of ID showing me age and address to be a "no sale".

Likewise, if someone selling a gun refused to do that, again, no sale. MY judgement, not a law requiring use of the Fed database and paying for the privilege.
 
44 AMP said:
...Sounds like the bragger is breaking some laws, Fed, and perhaps state, obviously the Fed knows he is doing it, but at this time apparently doesn't have enough evidence to support charges or to be sure of a conviction. ...
Click to expand...
Sounds like Buddy McBraggart needs to be aware of the bolded part ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top