“Lax” Gun Laws in Alabama to Blame for Grey Market Gun Trafficking in Chicago and Michigan

[DJBrad]

ATF: Criminals exploiting Alabama gun laws

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms says Alabama is an easy target for criminals to get a gun. For years, we've told you about the stolen gun problems in Mobile, including last year's police campaign telling legal gun owners to lock up their weapons. The ATF says there is a strong second...

mynbc15.com

Are the storage laws “lax” in Alabama?

Being a MA resident I am biased with certain optics in this matter. I believe the loaded or unloaded gun should be in direct control of your person. Storage laws in MA are well over the top but you have to exercise prudence.

My Dad had a shotgun in his closet for years and as a young lad I would go so far as to gaze and fondle it. I knew the danger and never pulled on the trigger. The real world experience was with my grandad in Round Hill, Virginia shooting cans and such through the holiday visits. In my suburban home we never exercised our 2A rights. Now, I do that very regularly and vehemently aim to support that right as well as breed other 2A lovers.

I think leaving loaded or unloaded guns around unsecured in a vehicle or anywhere else is simply unwise in this current day and age. The thing is, we all want to have the immediate access to personal and global protection so it’s a hard choice to make. You wouldn't leave your wallet in your car over night on the street intentionally would you? We’ve had break ins in my neighborhood and cars are soft targets. What’s the balance between “shall not be infringed” and safe practice? I don’t think there is an easy answer.

 

[Deleted member 67409]

Articles like these aren't actually about issues like how to properly store guns. Here's where they come from:

*City A is in State A, which is a heavily-Democrat state with stringent gun laws designed to keep people disarmed
*City A is in dire economic straights and is in a typical Rust Belt state
*City A has an urban blight and crime issue
*City A's politicians have been campaigning for continued civilian disarmament since the 1920s but have consistently failed to curtail urban crime
*City A's politicians are constantly seeking re-election to continue their kleptocratic hold on power
*City A's politicians need a political slogan, mantra, etc. to shift blame elsewhere
*State B is a predominantly rural state with lax gun laws
*State B has lower crime than State A but has its fair share of B&Es by junkies in remote places and is economically tied to State A
*State B is relatively unknown or seen as quaint by residents of State A
*State A's politicians blame State B's gun laws for State A's problems to shift blame and create plausible deniability and to continue campaigning for civilian disarmament despite having no success because anti-2A groups like the Brady Campaign or Michael Bloomberg are donating to them

 

[Drix]

Its Alabama's fault now? I thought it was indiana.

 

[exo]

We have heard this story before. It was bullshit then, and it’s bullshit now.

 

[DJBrad]

Articles like these aren't actually about issues like how to properly store guns. Here's where they come from:

*City A is in State A, which is a heavily-Democrat state with stringent gun laws designed to keep people disarmed
*City A is in dire economic straights and is in a typical Rust Belt state
*City A has an urban blight and crime issue
*City A's politicians have been campaigning for continued civilian disarmament since the 1920s but have consistently failed to curtail urban crime
*City A's politicians are constantly seeking re-election to continue their kleptocratic hold on power
*City A's politicians need a political slogan, mantra, etc. to shift blame elsewhere
*State B is a predominantly rural state with lax gun laws
*State B has lower crime than State B but has its fair share of B&Es by junkies in remote places and is economically tied to State A
*State B is relatively unknown or seen as quaint by residents of State A
*State A's politicians blame State B's gun laws for State A's problems to shift blame and create plausible deniability and to continue campaigning for civilian disarmament despite having no success because anti-2A groups like the Brady Campaign or Michael Bloomberg are donating to them

I appreciate the candor and agree on the futile exercise of said article to curtail gun rights. Mainly, I’m looking closely at this issue within State A’s perspective after digesting the article. Consider State B to be every State. Or, better yet consider State B to be a bad actor.

 

[DJBrad]

Its Alabama's fault now? I thought it was indiana.

I definitely don’t believe blame is to be thrown at Indiana or Alabama. I’m crystallizing this issue down to what you or I would do if we had left a loaded or unloaded gun in our vehicle and how we would ruminate over that outcome if it was stolen. How would we react?

 

[Deleted member 67409]

I appreciate the candor and agree on the futile exercise of said article to curtail gun rights. Mainly, I’m looking closely at this issue within State A’s perspective after digesting the article. Consider State B to be every State. Or, better yet consider State B to be a bad actor.

The "other states" aren't bad actors, they're strawmen. New York gun control advocates blame Vermont. Mass gun controllers blame NH. New Jersey controllers blame PA. So on and so forth.

Hell, I think RI pols have blamed Mass as being a source for guns.

I definitely don’t believe blame is to be thrown at Indiana or Alabama. I’m crystallizing this issue down to what you or I would do if we had left a loaded or unloaded gun in our vehicle and how we would ruminate over that outcome if it was stolen. How would we react?

Who's "we", Indian?

 

[DJBrad]

We have heard this story before. It was bullshit then, and it’s bullshit now.

I would venture to guess there are not a few bad actors who buy many guns and sell several that wind up somewhere else. I think the numbers are fairly low in opposition to Agent Marcus. I’m with you in this fight. I just consider what laws are necessary or unnecessary if there has to be any at all. What happens when we have no laws?

 

[DJBrad]

The "other states" aren't bad actors, they're strawmen. New York gun control advocates blame Vermont. Mass gun controllers blame NH. New Jersey controllers blame PA. So on and so forth.

Hell, I think RI pols have blamed Mass as being a source for guns.



Who's "we", Indian?

Ok. How would “you” react?

Not sure what the Indian moniker is for.

 

[exo]

I would venture to guess there are not a few bad actors who buy many guns and sell several that wind up somewhere else. I think the numbers are fairly low in opposition to Agent Marcus. I’m with you in this fight. I just consider what laws are necessary or unnecessary if there has to be any at all. What happens when we have no laws?

You’re thinking about this as though the opposition was bargaining fairly and honestly with us. They aren’t, and so I refuse to listen to any arguments in favor of more gun control laws. Look at what’s happening in VA, NY, VT, elsewhere - the old “we’re not coming for your guns” has been exposed for what it has always been: a lie.

 

[Deleted member 67409]

I would venture to guess there are not a few bad actors who buy many guns and sell several that wind up somewhere else. I think the numbers are fairly low in opposition to Agent Marcus. I’m with you in this fight. I just consider what laws are necessary or unnecessary if there has to be any at all. What happens when we have no laws?

You realize that New England states generally lacked any gun control before the 1900s-1930s, right? Besides the odd Rhode Island state civil war or race riot, New England was a pretty quiet place then. Probably the safest area of the US (still is in many regards).

Having minimal legislation that the average person can comprehend, like say having basic common law felonies rather than a litany of malum prohibitum statutes, is not a bad thing.

Ok. How would “you” react?

Not sure what the Indian moniker is for.

I wouldn't react at all. How someone stores their gun in another state a thousand miles away has an extremely minimal effect on my daily life.

The Indian moniker is for you because you sound like Elizabeth Warren - a person living in Mass Bible-thumping for more laws that we quite frankly don't want or need.

 

[oldguy68]

I said this to a worker yesterday.
Put me in a room full of murderers and I'd be concerned for my life.
Put me in a room full of guns and I'll be thinking of which ones I want to buy next.

It ain't the guns in Chicago that I would be concerned about.
It's the people that use them for evil that would concern me.

 

[DJBrad]

You realize that New England states generally lacked any gun control before the 1900s-1930s, right? Besides the odd Rhode Island state civil war or race riot, New England was a pretty quiet place then. Probably the safest area of the US (still is in many regards).

Having minimal legislation that the average person can comprehend, like say having basic common law felonies rather than a litany of malum prohibitum statutes, is not a bad thing.



I wouldn't react at all. How someone stores their gun in another state a thousand miles away has an extremely minimal effect on my daily life.

The Indian moniker is for you because you sound like Elizabeth Warren - a person living in Mass Bible-thumping for more laws that we quite frankly don't want or need.

I take umbrage with that attack from you. Am I in support of more gun laws? Absolutely not. Btw, I am a Trump voter. Search my posts. We are nation of laws. You are a student of law. It’s a much different world than the early 1900’s. Waaaaay different. Simple question: If you lived in Alabama and had a loaded gun stolen from your vehicle what would you do? You wouldn’t care? It’s now another state’s problem? I would say there is a vastly different condition of society vs the pastoral days of the 1900’s. Let’s be cordial here.

 

[DJBrad]

I said this to a worker yesterday.
Put me in a room full of murderers and I'd be worried for my life.
Put me in a room full of guns and I'll be thinking of which ones I want to buy next.

It ain't the guns in Chicago that I would be concerned about.
It's the people that use them for evil that would concern me.

Exactly. It’s the people. Which is why the argument of the Anti’s is so futile. A gun is a tool. It has no persona. It has no feelz. It is inanimate. Non-organic. What’s funny is that the Anti’s think no more guns will solve the issue of evil people. Nope. Still though, I’m curious as to the views on storage in a vehicle wrt the presence of a criminal misfit who steals it. Let’s say we go back to zero storage laws across every State. Would this exacerbate more crime or inhibit it? I’m playing devil’s advocate here.

Calling me a Warren or anything else though is beyond laughable. I’m merely starting conversation. I personally would not leave my gun in my vehicle unattended because I don't trust the general public.

 

[oldguy68]

Any law on possessing or storing a firearm is against every American citizen's rights.
We don't tell the military or police how to store their weapons do we?
The govt. can't tell us how to store ours.
When was the last time a drug dealer or gang member was charged with improper storage?
So why do they threaten us with jail or loosing our license if they don't charge the most dangerous ones that break our laws?

I personally believe in safe storage for my home.
But it's my choice and I will not infringe on someone else's right to do as they please with their firearms.

As far as a firearm in a car. It's a tool. I put all the blame on the thief.
Steal a firearm from someone, death sentence or life in prison.
Easy peasy..

Personally, I leave nothing of value in my vehicles. But wouldn't blame others for doing so.
Thieves are everywhere, why make it easy for them?

If you are sent to prison, then all our country's rights apply once you are set free!
We live in a free country, with freedom comes the danger of keeping it!

 

[DJBrad]

You’re thinking about this as though the opposition was bargaining fairly and honestly with us. They aren’t, and so I refuse to listen to any arguments in favor of more gun control laws. Look at what’s happening in VA, NY, VT, elsewhere - the old “we’re not coming for your guns” has been exposed for what it has always been: a lie.

No I’m not. They do not bargain fairly nor honestly but here we have gun laws already on the books. I agree that gun laws are a simple gateway to confiscation. I’ve written posts about this. Do you follow any kind of storage law at all?

 

[DJBrad]

Any law on possessing or storing a firearm is against every American citizen's rights.
We don't tell the military or police how to store their weapons do we?
The govt. can't tell us how to store ours.
When was the last time a drug dealer or gang member was charged with improper storage?
So why do they threaten us with jail or loosing our license if they don't charge the most dangerous ones that break our laws?

I personally believe in safe storage for my home.
But it's my choice and I will not infringe on someone else's right to do as they please with their firearms.

As far as a firearm in a car. It's a tool. I put all the blame on the thief.
Steal a firearm from someone, death sentence or life in prison.
Easy peasy..

Personally I leave nothing of value in my vehicles. But wouldn't blame others for doing so.
Thieves are everywhere, why make it easy for them?

If you are not in prison then all our countries rights are yours once you are freed from prison!
We live in a free country, with freedom come the danger of keeping it!

I’ll agree with the freedom of will and the price that freedom brings. It’s an interesting concept you hold in that you don’t blame others. I don’t blame either if someone loses a gun to a perp but I think it folly to do so and may actually bring egregious harm. I guess that also is the price to pay for freedom.

 

[Deleted member 67409]

I take umbrage with that attack from you. Am I in support of more gun laws? Absolutely not. Btw, I am a Trump voter. Search my posts. We are nation of laws. You are a student of law. It’s a much different world than the early 1900’s. Waaaaay different. Simple question: If you lived in Alabama and had a loaded gun stolen from your vehicle what would you do? You wouldn’t care? It’s now another state’s problem? I would say there is a vastly different condition of society vs the pastoral days of the 1900’s. Let’s be cordial here.

I'm glad you took umbrage. I'm not interested in being cordial with gun control supporters.

As a law student, I will say to anyone, either in person or online, that this country isn't a nation of laws. "Rule of law" is utter nonsense. You want to play with hypotheticals? Let me throw one at you. Ever been arrested? Ever been prosecuted? Ever hang out in District Court for a morning or two? Because I have and I can safely say that for the average person, "rule of law" is a joke. Most people cop out to a plea bargain. 90+% of people plea out.

"Rule of law" went away because of politicization of criminal prosecution. For most people, you get an offer from the prosecutor, maybe haggle, and then everyone reaches a "resolution." The average citizen's version of law is two lawyers in a side room haggling over charges and depositions. No trial, no hearing, quick and dirty.

You're quick to point out that society's changed in 100 years, yet you're blindly ignorant of how criminal justice has devolved since John Adams's time.

I have lived in Alabama. And I noted how most people kept their cars unlocked. Know what I did? Minded my own business and left other people alone. Their lives are their choices. I wouldn't have a gun stolen out of my car because that's not how I handle guns. But someone else may have a different life circumstance and they might need to have a gun in their vehicle on a regular basis. Who am I to judge?

Oh, and your "I'm a Trump voter!" line means nothing. I voted for Trump too, and will again, but I'm not going to go around wearing it like a badge to show off to other gun owners.

Exactly. It’s the people. Which is why the argument of the Anti’s is so futile. A gun is a tool. It has no persona. It has no feelz. It is inanimate. Non-organic. What’s funny is that the Anti’s think no more guns will solve the issue of evil people. Nope. Still though, I’m curious as to the views on storage in a vehicle wrt the presence of a criminal misfit who steals it. Let’s say we go back to zero storage laws across every State. Would this exacerbate more crime or inhibit it? I’m playing devil’s advocate here.

Calling me a Warren or anything else though is beyond laughable. I’m merely starting conversation. I personally would not leave my gun in my vehicle unattended because I don't trust the general public.

No, you're not. You're attempting to stir up shit.

 

[DJBrad]

I'm glad you took umbrage. I'm not interested in being cordial with gun control supporters.

As a law student, I will say to anyone, either in person or online, that this country isn't a nation of laws. "Rule of law" is utter nonsense. You want to play with hypotheticals? Let me throw one at you. Ever been arrested? Nope. Ever been prosecuted? Pretty sure I have not been. Ever hang out in District Court for a morning or two?Again, no. Because I have and I can safely say that for the average person, "rule of law" is a joke. Most people cop out to a plea bargain. 90+% of people plea out. So why are you doing a job you don’t like?

"Rule of law" went away because of politicization of criminal prosecution. For most people, you get an offer from the prosecutor, maybe haggle, and then everyone reaches a "resolution." The average citizen's version of law is two lawyers in a side room haggling over charges and depositions. No trial, no hearing, quick and dirty. I agree on this.

You're quick to point out that society's changed in 100 years, yet you're blindly ignorant of how criminal justice has devolved since John Adams's time. So lets go back to eye for an eye then.

I have lived in Alabama. And I noted how most people kept their cars unlocked. Know what I did? Minded my own business and left other people alone. Their lives are their choices. I wouldn't have a gun stolen out of my car because that's not how I handle guns. But someone else may have a different life circumstance and they might need to have a gun in their vehicle on a regular basis. Who am I to judge? Ok, live and let live, I get it.

Oh, and your "I'm a Trump voter!" line means nothing. I voted for Trump too, and will again, but I'm not going to go around wearing it like a badge to show off to other gun owners. Ad Hominum. Do you really think I wear that as badge? Lol



No, you're not. You're attempting to stir up shit.

So let’s just get rid of all the barriers then. No “rule of law”, no laws, no lawyers like yourself, no police, no authority. Is that better? You’re seriously over tired or just unable to read me.

 

[oldguy68]

I’ll agree with the freedom of will and the price that freedom brings. It’s an interesting concept you hold in that you don’t blame others. I don’t blame either if someone loses a gun to a perp but I think it folly to do so and may actually bring egregious harm. I guess that also is the price to pay for freedom.

I put the blame where it lay, the person doing what is against the law and wrong in my eyes.
I hate thieves, people that cause pain onto others and people that murder other people.
I hate people that hurt animals or hurt children and those that prey upon the weak or elderly.
I hate people that take advantage of others and those that hurt this nation for their own political gain!

If the world were full of people with my standards there would be no need for the police, no wars and one earth ruled under gods laws.

 

[DJBrad]

I put the blame where it lay, the person doing what is against the law and wrong in my eyes.
I hate thieves, people that cause pain onto others and people that murder other people.
I hate people that hurt animals or hurt children and those that prey upon the weak or elderly.
I hate people that take advantage of others and those that hurt this nation for their own political gain!

If the world were full of people with my standards there would be no need for the police, no wars and one earth ruled under gods laws.

Amen. That world is soon to come. I share your sentiments.

 

[Deleted member 67409]

So let’s just get rid of all the barriers then. No “rule of law”, no laws, no lawyers like yourself, no police, no authority. Is that better? You’re seriously over tired or just unable to read me.

(1) I'm not a lawyer.
(2) As I stated in post no. 11, having an easy-to-understand legal system is a good thing, rather than "malum prohibitum" laws like Mass's storage requirement.
(3) Because Mass has literally hundreds of pages of crimes to prosecute people with, prosecuting isn't really an art but more like a turkey shoot. DAs can prosecute anybody based on one set of facts - a police report. Seriously, I want to meet you and have you explain the justification for G.L. c. 87, s. 11, "Injury to trees of another person", which carries a possible six month imprisonment sentence.

https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2018/10/11/jud-master-crime-list-june-2018.pdf

(4) A fair amount of people I've met in the criminal defense world are in favor of decriminalizing quite a lot of crimes. So if you think decriminalizing a bunch of activites and "get[ting] rid of all the barriers" is a scary thought to lawyers, at least a portion of that community would be jumping for joy.
(5) The world would be a better place with fewer lawyers, police, and laws. I'm glad to explain the details in person because this is a far-reaching topic that transcends the realm of G.L. c. 140, s. 131L.

 

[amm5061]

(1) I'm not a lawyer.
(2) As I stated in post no. 11, having an easy-to-understand legal system is a good thing, rather than "malum prohibitum" laws like Mass's storage requirement.
(3) Because Mass has literally hundreds of pages of crimes to prosecute people with, prosecuting isn't really an art but more like a turkey shoot. DAs can prosecute anybody based on one set of facts - a police report. Seriously, I want to meet you and have you explain the justification for G.L. c. 87, s. 11, "Injury to trees of another person", which carries a possible six month imprisonment sentence.

https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2018/10/11/jud-master-crime-list-june-2018.pdf

(4) A fair amount of people I've met in the criminal defense world are in favor of decriminalizing quite a lot of crimes. So if you think decriminalizing a bunch of activites and "get[ting] rid of all the barriers" is a scary thought to lawyers, at least a portion of that community would be jumping for joy.
(5) The world would be a better place with fewer lawyers, police, and laws. I'm glad to explain the details in person because this is a far-reaching topic that transcends the realm of G.L. c. 140, s. 131L.

I certainly haven't always agreed with you, but you are spot on with everything here.

 

[DJBrad]

(1) I'm not a lawyer.
(2) As I stated in post no. 11, having an easy-to-understand legal system is a good thing, rather than "malum prohibitum" laws like Mass's storage requirement.
(3) Because Mass has literally hundreds of pages of crimes to prosecute people with, prosecuting isn't really an art but more like a turkey shoot. DAs can prosecute anybody based on one set of facts - a police report. Seriously, I want to meet you and have you explain the justification for G.L. c. 87, s. 11, "Injury to trees of another person", which carries a possible six month imprisonment sentence.

https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2018/10/11/jud-master-crime-list-june-2018.pdf

(4) A fair amount of people I've met in the criminal defense world are in favor of decriminalizing quite a lot of crimes. So if you think decriminalizing a bunch of activites and "get[ting] rid of all the barriers" is a scary thought to lawyers, at least a portion of that community would be jumping for joy.
(5) The world would be a better place with fewer lawyers, police, and laws. I'm glad to explain the details in person because this is a far-reaching topic that transcends the realm of G.L. c. 140, s. 131L.

This should have been your first or second reply vs your ad hominem attack on me. Its counterproductive to your presentation to call me a “Warren Supporter”, “Indian”, “Mass-Bible thumper”, and “Badge wearer”. Do you see that?

 

[Deleted member 67409]

This should have been your first or second reply vs your ad hominem attack on me. Its counterproductive to your presentation to call me a “Warren Supporter”, “Indian”, “Mass-Bible thumper”, and “Badge wearer”. Do you see that?

It was my second reply. Read the order of post no. 11.

This thread is absolutely nonsensical. Mass is the only state in the country that criminalizes not keeping guns either locked or within direct personal control. I cannot fathom why anyone on a gun forum would support criminalizing leaving guns either unlocked or within arm's reach. G.L. c. 140, s. 131L has ruined the lives of hundreds if not thousands of gun owners and has engendered more fear into the minds of non-gun owners about "irresponsible gun owners."

There is literally no reason to support G.L. c. 140, s. 131L as a gun owner.

 

[Larry Gentile]

I don't believe in laws that limits any rights toward firearms. That said, if you improperly store your firearm and a child gets a hold of it, you should be prosecuted for child endangerment and for being a F'n idiot. I have a bedside gun safe and a large one downstairs. I also have a 16, 12 & 3 yr old. I remember when i was young and my dad had his guns stored in his closet that i used to check them out. Shit I used to take his shotgun shells and cut them open and do fun shit with the powder. I was like 14-15. I was lucky enough to be taught some sort of gun safety at a young age and I am teaching my 12yr old son the same.

Anyway case in point. There was a recent child that took his dads fully loaded semi-auto to school in his backpack. The dad WAS a licensed LTC holder. He is being prosecuted for child endangerment and improper storage. I don't have an issue with the child endangerment charge at all.

 

[DJBrad]

It was my second reply. Read the order of post no. 11.

This thread is absolutely nonsensical. Mass is the only state in the country that criminalizes not keeping guns either locked or within direct personal control. I cannot fathom why anyone on a gun forum would support criminalizing leaving guns either unlocked or within arm's reach. G.L. c. 140, s. 131L has ruined the lives of hundreds if not thousands of gun owners and has engendered more fear into the minds of non-gun owners about "irresponsible gun owners."

There is literally no reason to support G.L. c. 140, s. 131L as a gun owner.

My friend I do not support criminalizing anyone for storage laws. How do you feel about the Holyoke Grandpa? I have a feeling you dont have children.

 

[robjax]

boy, those dump towns always blame everyone else.

Way to push for federal laws.


Why don't you just put your criminals in prison.

 

[Deleted member 67409]

My friend I do not support criminalizing anyone for storage laws. How do you feel about the Holyoke Grandpa? I have a feeling you dont have children.

As a general rule, I don't weigh in with my personal thoughts on pending litigation in Mass or RI on public websites because I'm taking the Mass bar in July. Could potentially create conflicts of interest with future jobs. I'm not saying anything about that case publicly.

 

[wahsben]

Mass is the only state in the country that criminalizes not keeping guns either locked or within direct personal control

I'm not positive but I'm pretty sure CA. does too. I know that their safe storage laws denied someone their ability to fight against a person that ended up murdering their siblings: The Merced Pitchfork Murders - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com