• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

It's always the other guys (states) fault

Joined
Mar 4, 2006
Messages
18,157
Likes
9,234
Feedback: 1 / 0 / 0
Again with the "we have no real solution to the crime problem in our backyard, so let's point the finger at someone else".... [angry]


-----------------------------------------------------------------

"Gun dealers attracted by Maine laws Out-of-state weapons found at Boston crimes

Wednesday, July 26, 2006 - Bangor Daily News

BANGOR - The Brady Gang came to Maine in the fall of 1937 for the same reasons 21st century criminals venture north of Boston - fall foliage, seafood and guns.

Not much appears to have changed since the FBI gunned down Public Enemy No. 1 Al Brady and his cohorts on Oct. 12, 1937, on Central Street in Bangor

Easy access by Interstate 95 and the state's gun laws have lured illegal gun dealers from eastern Massachusetts to rural Maine to buy guns for resale in Boston, a law enforcement official in the Hub said last year.

Two cases pending in federal courts in Boston and Bangor show that over the past four years more than 40 guns have been purchased legally in Maine for illegal resale in Massachusetts. About one-third of them have been recovered from crime scenes and traced to their previous owners in Maine.

The issue drew media attention outside the Bay State in March when Boston officials and the nonprofit group Stop Handgun Violence unveiled a big billboard on the Massachusetts Turnpike that criticized gun laws in other states. The billboard, which since has been removed, singled out Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont and Georgia as states, along with 29 others, that allow private owners to sell guns without criminal background checks of potential buyers.

"The proximity of New England states with less restrictive [gun laws] makes firearms more accessible to people here in Massachusetts," Sgt. Thomas Sexton, a Boston Police Department spokesman, told The Boston Globe last year.

Sexton's comments angered Thomas Colantuono, the U.S. attorney for New Hampshire, who in December said the accusation that lax gun control laws in northern New England were partly responsible for a rise in gun crimes in Boston was "an urban myth."

Maine's U.S. Attorney Paula Silsby said Tuesday that guns have been traced to Maine from crime scenes in Boston, but she did not call for stricter gun laws. Her office consistently is in the top three U.S. Attorney's Offices in the nation for the number of gun cases it prosecutes.

Whether the number of guns flowing from northern New England to Massachusetts is a trickle or a flood seems to depend on where the official is sitting.

Less than 10 percent of guns used in Boston crimes come from Maine, according to records from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives obtained earlier this year by Boston Magazine. The publication reported in March that in 2005, Maine and New Hampshire each accounted for about 7 percent of the total number of illegal guns recovered in Massachusetts, making the states the top two sources for Massachusetts-bound illegal guns.

Colantuono of New Hampshire disputed that figure last year. He said statistics showed that Georgia was the top source of out-of-state guns in Massachusetts.

Regardless of the guns' source, Boston police reported in November that there are more guns on their city streets now than at any time in the previous six years.

That reverses the trend of the 1990s when many of the illegal guns recovered in Boston were traced to Southern states in the I-95 corridor such as Georgia, according to the magazine.

Federal law requires a five-day waiting period in every state for anyone seeking to buy a handgun from a federally licensed dealer to allow for a criminal background check. Potential buyers also must fill out an application form that asks, among other things, whether they are purchasing the gun on behalf of another person, which is illegal. Lying on the form is a federal crime.

In Massachusetts, in addition to passing the background check, a resident who wants a handgun must buy a state-issued permit for $100.

Such permits are not required in New Hampshire, Vermont or Maine. People buying handguns in those states must show identification that proves they are state residents when purchasing firearms. They can skip the background check and the required waiting period when they buy guns at a show or from an individual.

Two cases

Michael Fowler, 36, of Lynn, Mass., admitted earlier this year to using a fake Maine driver's license when he purchased at least 18 guns in Maine and six in New Hampshire. Fowler, who used the name Michael Smith for the purchases in Maine, bought the guns from residents who had advertised in 2002 and 2003 in Uncle Henry's Weekly Swap or Sell It Guide.

The sellers did not commit any crime, Silsby said Monday.

After he purchased the guns, Fowler took them to his home in Lynn, a northern suburb of Boston, where he obliterated the serial numbers, then sold them. Many of the guns were found at crime scenes by law enforcement officials in the Boston area. Police were able to recover the serial numbers and trace the guns to previous owners, according to court documents.

A federal grand jury in Bangor indicted Fowler on gun charges in January 2004. His case was transferred last year to Boston where it was combined with pending charges in Massachusetts where he sold the guns he purchased in Maine.

Silsby said that was one way her office was cooperating with prosecutors in Boston.

People who are prohibited from purchasing firearms legally sometimes enlist Maine residents to buy guns for them.

Stephen Donald Brown, 54, of Pittsfield last week admitted that between November 2002 and March 2004 he bought about 30 guns, primarily in Penobscot and Oxford counties, for a black male he knew onlyas Jay.

Three days after Brown waived indictment and pleaded guilty July 17 in U.S. District Court in Bangor, he died of an undisclosed illness. The charges of making false statements in acquisition of a firearm are expected to be dismissed because of his death.

Brown told ATF agents that he met the man for whom he purchased the guns through the sister of Jay's wife, who lives in Pittsfield, according to court documents. ATF agents stated in an affidavit filed in federal court in Bangor that Brown identified a photograph of Michael Marsh, also known as Michael Turner, of Fall River, Mass., as the man he knew as Jay.

Between April 2003 and January 2006, seven handguns and boxes from three additional handguns that Brown admitted selling to Jay were recovered from crime scenes in Boston, according to court documents.

Brown, who was scheduled to be sentenced this fall, faced up to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000 on each count.

Marsh has not been charged in federal court in Maine or Massachusetts.

Fowler is scheduled to be sentenced on Aug. 9 in U.S. District Court in Boston. He pleaded guilty in May to four counts - dealing in firearms without a license, being a felon in possession of a firearm, making an unregistered firearm, and the misuse of a Social Security number. In exchange for his guilty plea agreement, prosecutors agreed to drop four other charges including transportation of a firearm into a state of residence.

The U.S. attorney for Massachusetts, Michael Sullivan, and national gun control activists have called on Congress to enact stricter and more uniform federal laws to help stem the illegal flow from states with less-restrictive gun laws, such as Maine, to states with stricter gun control laws, such as Massachusetts.

Silsby said Tuesday that Maine is opting for a program to educate gun sellers that will be unveiled this fall."



http://www.bangornews.com/news/templates/?a=137856
 
I bet 10% of the drunk-driving deaths in Mass. come from legally-bought liquor from New Hampshire, too. Don't hear much about that.

Fully 90% of the A-holes on Maine roads in July and August come from Mass. Let's hold a news conference.
 
Federal law requires a five-day waiting period in every state for anyone seeking to buy a handgun from a federally licensed dealer to allow for a criminal background check. Potential buyers also must fill out an application form that asks, among other things, whether they are purchasing the gun on behalf of another person, which is illegal. Lying on the form is a federal crime.

In Massachusetts, in addition to passing the background check, a resident who wants a handgun must buy a state-issued permit for $100.

Such permits are not required in New Hampshire, Vermont or Maine. People buying handguns in those states must show identification that proves they are state residents when purchasing firearms. They can skip the background check and the required waiting period when they buy guns at a show or from an individual.


Let's play "Spot The Inaccuracies".
 
Well I'd really like to hear some other views from people on this board... but anyone in MA that acquires a gun illegally like these guys (and removes the s/ns) should suffer some serious consequences IMHO. Brown and Fowler were definitely guilty as hell for many things.. not just MA laws. I'd like to know how Brown got his guns.
 
mAss Backwards said:
Federal law requires a five-day waiting period in every state for anyone seeking to buy a handgun from a federally licensed dealer to allow for a criminal background check. Potential buyers also must fill out an application form that asks, among other things, whether they are purchasing the gun on behalf of another person, which is illegal. Lying on the form is a federal crime.

In Massachusetts, in addition to passing the background check, a resident who wants a handgun must buy a state-issued permit for $100.

Such permits are not required in New Hampshire, Vermont or Maine. People buying handguns in those states must show identification that proves they are state residents when purchasing firearms. They can skip the background check and the required waiting period when they buy guns at a show or from an individual.


Let's play "Spot The Inaccuracies".

I think the first line is one that has me puzzled. Not sure about NH/VT/Maine gun shows...
 
Lugnut said:
I think the first line is one that has me puzzled. Not sure about NH/VT/Maine gun shows...

All licsenced FFL dealers MUST perform a NICS check on all buyers regardless of where the sale takes place (gun shop, gun show, living room, etc.) per federal law. There is no "gun show loophole". No 5-day wait here.

Sales between private individuals is a different thing. I can sell my firearms to any other Maine resident, as long as I don't knowingly sell them to a felon, perv., retard, minor, etc..
 
If they bought weapons illegally, that's a strwaw purchase, and it violates federal law and they should be prosecuted.

There are plenty of laws on the books to deal with all of this already. It's a matter of catching the criminals and making sure they go to jail. The problem is a dealer can't know that one person will buy a gun legally and resell it to "a black male he knew only as Jay" It's especially tough since it looks like the guy didn't buy them all from one dealer.

If criminals want to break the law, they're going to find a way to do it!

Re: inaccuracies - it would be good if reporters did their job. On gun AND other stories they report on.
 
Thor67 said:
Re: inaccuracies - it would be good if reporters did their job. On gun AND other stories they report on.
I wrote them a little note about that, though I doubt they'll post it.
Submission: Hello-

Regarding the quote "Federal law requires a five-day waiting period in every state for anyone seeking to buy a handgun from a federally licensed dealer to allow for a criminal background check. Potential buyers also must fill out an application form that asks, among other things, whether they are
purchasing the gun on behalf of another person, which is illegal. Lying on the form is a federal crime.

In Massachusetts, in addition to passing the background check, a resident who wants a handgun must buy a state-issued permit for $100."

The above information is inaccurate. I feel it is important for the media to accurately portray information, especially when it comes to Second Ammendment rights.

In MA you can not "buy" a permit. You must take a course that is approved by not only the NRA but by the Massachusetts State Police. There are so many layers of red tape in Boston and her suburbs, that it is virtually impossible to acquire an unrestricted license. The process takes months to complete.
Once you have jumped through whatever hoops the local Chief of Police has set in place, depending on which license you were approved for, you may buy a gun. There is no
wait.
As long as you have your License To Carry, and provide it to the firearms dealer, you can walk out the door a few minutes later. There is an "FA-10" form that needs to be filled out with both your and the sellers information. This takes minutes, not days.

In the future, a little bit of fact finding may be beneficial.
 
Last edited:
So these scumballs did something that was a violation of multiple federal and state laws. How can we stop that sort of thing from happening again? Well, we could pass some laws making it illegal do do what they just did. Yeah, that's the solution. While we're at it, why don't we stop rape, murder, robbery and drug dealing by making those things illegal as well?

Ken
 
"The charges of making false statements in acquisition of a firearm are expected to be dismissed because of his death."

Ya think so??? Seems like a no brainer to me..
 
highlander said:
Siameserat you forgot one thing in yor letter FFLs must call FBI for instsnt check
THEN you can leave with your firearm
I was saying from the buyer's perspective beside filling out an FA-10 you just pay and you walk out the door with a gun. You should write them a letter, too. [wink]
 
The part that is so frustrating is that the officials and law enforcement people are not pursuing those that are caught with illegal guns to the full extent of the laws that were broken. Any gun that come from ME, NH or Vt. must have, if purchsed from a dealer, passed the NIC's Check. Private sales sure could not supply the number of handguns that are being reported without it leading back to an individual.

Such guns that are being used in Mass. could bring lots of charges to individuals if the government did its job. They are too lazy or too bent on blaming others for their own failure to correct this problem.
 
Lugnut said:
Well I'd really like to hear some other views from people on this board... but anyone in MA that acquires a gun illegally like these guys (and removes the s/ns) should suffer some serious consequences IMHO. Brown and Fowler were definitely guilty as hell for many things.. not just MA laws. I'd like to know how Brown got his guns.

It said right in the article that one of the guys used a forged DL.

It's trivial for someone to circumvent the system, if they really wanted
to. That's why I think this whole notional of background checks, "registration"
and filling out forms with dumb questions on it is a load
of crap. I know some here will "partially agree" with stupidity like BG checks and the
like, but how can you do it with a straight face, when the system is such a miserable failure.
The NRA going around and trumpeting "We support enforcing existing gun laws" does
nothing if the existing gun laws are abject failures. All of these laws also
support the false notional that "guns are inherently bad" and that they deserve
some sort of special legal treatment far above and beyond something like an age
limitation on purchase. Booze, Cigarettes, and Motor Vehicles are all dangerous if
used improperly, and probably combined kill far more people than
guns do, and the regs on those are weak compared to the crap we have to
wade through to buy a gun. Yet nobody is clamoring for more controls
on those things. (Well, there are a bunch of "guh buh wuhs" you know,
those people that think the sky is falling everytimne something bad happens trying to raise the driving
age for kids, instead of doing something smart like increasing the training requirement, but I digress. )

Then we have an event like Katrina where thousands of guns got stolen
by looters and so on. All those laws did a real lot of good in that
case. I'm sure NICS made joe looter think twice about looting that pawn
shop, or looting someones house. [rolleyes]

The other thing that people readily forget- is that if we made all these
laws tighter, ala national registration, and a biometric security enabled
gun buyer ID card, etc, etc.... if it was clamped down really hard....
well, there would be a temporary reduction in "new" guns on the
street, until the market demands created some importation from the third
world. So the main result of such crap is more oppression for legal
gun buyers, and close to a net ZERO benefit to our population as a
whole. It could even be worse, considering that foreign guns would be
even less traceable than those sourced domestically.

Anyone ever see that video of the customs storage warehouse for all
the drugs they get coming over the border? The place was TEEMING, and
that was only a portion of what was brought in in the last 90 days before
the filming. If the "demand" is high enough guns will be smuggled in as
well. The only reason they dont do it right now, is that pound for pound,
the drugs are worth more money. If we can't even prevent drugs from
entering the country with any amount of regularity, then how do they
expect to prevent anything else from coming in?

-Mike
 
Gaffer said:
The part that is so frustrating is that the officials and law enforcement people are not pursuing those that are caught with illegal guns to the full extent of the laws that were broken. Any gun that come from ME, NH or Vt. must have, if purchsed from a dealer, passed the NIC's Check. Private sales sure could not supply the number of handguns that are being reported without it leading back to an individual.

So, passing NICS means that it's -always- linkable to a specific
individual? That's funny. If you read the article above, one of the buyers
used a fake DL. He was only found at the "distribution end" of his criminal
existence, not the buying end. If the seller of the gun was never
discovered (say the gun was found at a crime scene, with nobody
to tell police where he got it from) that means the trace in this
case would often lead to a fake person or someone with a stolen identity. Yes, much
of the time, a trace will lead straight back to an idiot, but I wouldnt be surprised if some
detectives voiced frustration with failures in gun tracing. It could be an awful lot of
work to trace even one gun, and yield no results. Additionally, tracing older guns may
often be an exercise in futility, because one of the people in the chian of
custody is dead, or any number of other
possibilities. Sometimes the trace is going to lead to a guy in a
jail cell, who's not going to remember who he sold what. Theres a lot of
dead-ending in a gun traces. I wouldn't be surprised if in some cases guns
are never traced, if a detective can exploit other leads first. I would think
as an investigator, one would want to produce the most results in the
least amount of time... not to mention finding a triggerman is a hell of a lot
more important than finding the dope that sold him the gun.

In short, the reason the guys that buy and sell illegally don't get prosecuted
as much as they should is because they're far lower on the food chain
than other criminals.

-Mike
 
The point that liberals seem to have such a hard time understanding is this...

Words on paper can be ignored. No law will 'prevent' a crime and still preserve any sense of freedom.

The key isn't in the laws, it is in the courts. The sad silent truth is that today, criminals rarely do any hard time.

And then you have the public who are scared to death to speak up. You know just as well as I do that the majority of the shootings in Boston had at least one person see it happen. Yet so many of the crimes go unsolved because the gangs rule the neighborhoods.

STOP THE REVOLVING DOOR.

The mayor would rather spend some $100,000 giving away Target cards instead of using those resources to actually fight crime. Imagine what $100,000 could buy in the way of hi-rez cameras overlooking the more 'active' neighborhoods.

Well, the Liberals have been in charge for almost 50 years now. Look at the paradise they have built. The sad part is that voters will go ahead and keep the status quo come November.

And the mass media lap dogs of that liberal agenda will keep pointing fingers at everyone but the people who are allowing these animals to rule the streets.
 
Chris, it's not the gangs' faults! It's the mom and dad that never loved them, the time their dad said no when they wanted to stay up late, the time they got made fun of in high school etc etc etc!

</liberal spin>
 
Back
Top Bottom