Just A Warning

This is a discussion on Just A Warning within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by Redneck Repairs However if you happened to sell to an atf UC , CI ( Under Cover , or Confidential Informant ) ...

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 99

Thread: Just A Warning

  1. #31
    VIP Member Array Kerbouchard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,894
    Quote Originally Posted by Redneck Repairs View Post
    However if you happened to sell to an atf UC , CI ( Under Cover , or Confidential Informant ) , as well as run across any other LE investigation ( Cali's team that goes to gunshows in NV ect.. comes to mind ) You could well find yourself in court .
    If an ATF guy is willing to buy a gun from me and it's the best deal I can get, I figure I'll go ahead and sell it to him. As long as he has a driver's license and can show me he's over 21. Other than that, I don't have a reasonable expectation that he has a felony or is in any other way prohibited from purchasing guns. If he's an ATF agent, than I can pretty much be sure he doesn't have a felony.

    I guess I am not seeing the illegal part. If somebody approached me and asked me to go purchase a gun for them, I would obviously say no, but lots of people bring their private firearms to gun shows and walk around to swap or sell.

    Next time I go to a gun show I am wearing my 'ATF should be a convenience store shirt'...
    There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil.

    http://miscmusings.townhall.com/

    Who is John Galt?

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #32
    VIP Member Array Redneck Repairs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    5,133
    I guess I am not seeing the illegal part. If somebody approached me and asked me to go purchase a gun for them, I would obviously say no, but lots of people bring their private firearms to gun shows and walk around to swap or sell.
    Again we have to speak to intent . I fyi am one who does swap/buy/sell privately at shows and other places , and no there is nothing illegal about it as long as the intent is not to purchase/acquire a weapon for another person.

    There is where we must speak to intent , say your at a show and while stumbling around on a jerky high , between a trade and convincing your wife she does not " need " that crap to hang in the living room , a fella walks up and asks " Hey do you have a commander in .38 super ? " You tell him Nope and he advises he is looking for one and will pay good $$ for it . Well low and behold you then see just that pistol on a table marked considerably cheaper than the price he mentioned . You being the sharp sorta fella you are do a deal for it instead of just noting it to tell him where it is , and in fact shortly see the fella outside having a cigarette . You then tell him Ya Know i now have a .38supe commander , He buys it from you . That is where we get into problems .

    The conversation can be argued to establish intent to straw purchase and the sale to him somewhat confirms it .

    Now i dont believe for an instant that an agent would fabricate such a conversation from whole cloth and lie on official documents such as an affidavit for warrantless arrest or affidavit in support of an arrest warrant .

    However i will say that i have less than full faith and confidence in BATFE's vetting of Confidential Informants for credibility , honesty , ect.. , as well as the actual oversight they apply to CIs ( such as actually recording all contacts the ci makes ect.. ) .
    Your average CI wants paid ( be the payment cash or reduction of charges ) and only gets paid for results ( successful arrests/prosecutions) When you couple that with BATFE's notable lack of standards even for their testing lab much less street investigations it does not give me a warm and fuzzy feeling that unk sam is on my side .
    There are some damm fine agents in BATFE ,I have worked with some , and met others doing compliance inspections . However there are some real immoral imposter's of an agent out there under official color too that will overlook many problems in a case to show the activity of an arrest, especially if they can blame it on the CI should it blow up in their face.
    Make sure you get full value out of today , Do something worthwhile, because what you do today will cost you one day off the rest of your life .
    We only begin to understand folks after we stop and think .

    Criminals are looking for victims, not opponents.

  4. #33
    Administrator
    Array QKShooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Off Of The X
    Posts
    34,620
    Not entrapment but, don't they usually give you an opportunity to change your mind or "back out" if you agree?

    They do when somebody wants to "hire a hit" and is actually talking to a LEO rather than a hitman.

  5. #34
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    43,837
    Quote Originally Posted by AMH View Post
    Wouldn't that be entrapment?
    Not really, more like stupidity...
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  6. #35
    Senior Member Array KenInColo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Western Colorado
    Posts
    991
    I think that BATFE agents are doing this b/c any transaction consummated on the grounds of an 'advertised', open-to-the-public gun show might be construed as not being within the realm of a Private Party Transaction.

    I was once warned, by a LEO, that one should not post "Gun for Sale" notes on the bulletin board of your local gun club because it then makes it a Non-Private Party transaction and subject to all the regs & paperwork of a retail transaction. A Private Party Transaction can contain two (2) and only two (2) participants I don't think there can be any middle men and I know there can be no 'straw' men in the transaction.

    How 'bout this for a hypothetical scenario:

    An attractive female (unknown to you she's a BATFE agent), w/a black eye or other visible bruises, approaches you w/a story about her old man beating her up all the time. She begs & pleads with you to buy a gun for her. She just has to have this gun now b/c after the last beating, she knows that the next time he's gonna kill her.

    To make it look even better, she says that she can only afford the gun and not any 'commission' to you but she just has to have a gun by tonight, before her husband gets back.
    An armed populace are called citizens.
    An unarmed populace are called subjects.

  7. #36
    VIP Member Array TN_Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shelby County TN
    Posts
    11,068
    I have had that very thing happen to me as well.

    It was at a show in Mobile Alabama a couple of years ago, right before we moved to Tennessee in fact. I said no, walked away and found one of the Mobile County Deputies at the door and told him what had happened. He told me that the guy was BATF what was going on and told me I had passed the test so to speak.

    I didn't really find it amusing but I understand why they were doing it.
    ,=====o00o _
    //___l__,\____\,__
    l_--- \___l---[]lllllll[]
    (o)_)-o- (o)_)--o-)_)

  8. #37
    Senior Member Array Shizzlemah's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    723
    that is still illegal, and it is still not entrapment.

    i'd suggest that she take the money and buy a bus ticket instead.

    if the person is legal to buy, they can buy from any dealer directly or flip through the local trader rag for private sales. A 3-party transaction is usually stupid and often illegal.

  9. #38
    Distinguished Member Array bandit383's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    1,681
    Not a legal eagle...but based on the definition posted: "A person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime"...I would say offering 50 or 100 clams would be an inducement.

    Unlike buying pot (or whatever illegal) directly, the officer is offering an inducement. I'd have to err towards entrapment.

    Rick

  10. #39
    VIP Member Array artz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    2,351
    I'd laugh if someone body slammed the guy and tried to place him under citizens arrest.
    " Refuse to be a victim, make sure there is a round chambered ! "

    Just call me a pessimistic optimist !

    U.S. Navy vet 1981-1992

  11. #40
    Senior Member Array cwblanco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Amarillo, Texas
    Posts
    835
    Quote Originally Posted by archer51 View Post
    I also believe if you ask him if he is associated with a LEO Agency in anyway and he says "no" it then becomes entrapment also.
    Nope. Lying is a frequent LEO tool. For example, an LEO undercover officer working in the drug enforcement arena, might not have long to live if he were completely honest with his contacts.

  12. #41
    Distinguished Member Array morintp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    1,233
    Quote Originally Posted by bandit383 View Post
    Not a legal eagle...but based on the definition posted: "A person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime"...I would say offering 50 or 100 clams would be an inducement.

    Unlike buying pot (or whatever illegal) directly, the officer is offering an inducement. I'd have to err towards entrapment.

    Rick
    I read that definition too. I didn't have any clear knowledge regarding entrapment, and wanted to see what it really is. According to that definition, the above BATF operations would be entrapment. Now, I don't know that the definition provided was accurate, because to be honest, I trust Sixto's opinion much more than a random web posting, and he seems to think it's all on the up and up.

    ENTRAPMENT - A person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit; and the law as a matter of policy forbids conviction in such a case.

    However, there is no entrapment where a person is ready and willing to break the law and the Government agents merely provide what appears to be a favorable opportunity for the person to commit the crime. For example, it is not entrapment for a Government agent to pretend to be someone else and to offer, either directly or through an informer or other decoy, to engage in an unlawful transaction with the person. So, a person would not be a victim of entrapment if the person was ready, willing and able to commit the crime charged in the indictment whenever opportunity was afforded, and that Government officers or their agents did no more than offer an opportunity.

    On the other hand, if the evidence leaves a reasonable doubt whether the person had any intent to commit the crime except for inducement or persuasion on the part of some Government officer or agent, then the person is not guilty.

    I would think, in most of these cases, that there would be reasonable doubt that a person would have tried to buy the gun for the BATF agents else without being persuaded first.

    In slightly different words: Even though someone may have [sold drugs], as charged by the government, if it was the result of entrapment then he is not guilty. Government agents entrapped him if three things occurred:

    - First, the idea for committing the crime came from the government agents and not from the person accused of the crime.

    The BATF agent is initiating the discussion here, and giving the "idea" for the crime

    - Second, the government agents then persuaded or talked the person into committing the crime. Simply giving him the opportunity to commit the crime is not the same as persuading him to commit the crime.

    The agent is trying to persuade the person into committing the crime by offering more and more money.
    This might be where Sixto and this definition diverge paths. Sixto was talking about "coercion", which is much different than "persuasion"


    - And third, the person was not ready and willing to commit the crime before the government agents spoke with him.

    The person wasn't walking around offering to illegally purchase guns for people, and probably never thought about doing it before being asked.
    Now if the definition of entrapment provided is correct, then I could see where a lawyer could easily fight this in court.

    Does anyone have any opinions or other definitions?

  13. #42
    New Member Array bullseyebob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ashland, Oregon
    Posts
    9
    In Orange County, we have Uniformed LEO's strolling about.. I would approach them and say "That guy over there in the blue jacket just offered me money to make a straw purchase"...Your response was quite correct!

  14. #43
    Administrator
    Array SIXTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    19,381
    Quote Originally Posted by morintp View Post
    Now if the definition of entrapment provided is correct, then I could see where a lawyer could easily fight this in court.

    Does anyone have any opinions or other definitions?
    You guys are forgeting about the second half of the deal; The dealer. You being the "strawman" are not the main target, its the dealer.

    The UC agent will go with you to the dealers table to make the purchase. During that time, he will make it clear in the converstation whats going on. The dealer is supposed to be wise enough to figure things out, and know the rules of the game. They are not there to bust you and me who may or may not know any better.

    Dont get me wrong, that would still be illegal and you will get in trouble over it, but your not the main target. You have plenty of chances to back out and warnings. You have to fill out the 4473 and sign & swear you are the buyer etc. Its not a simple transaction.
    "Just blame Sixto"

  15. #44
    Distinguished Member Array morintp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    1,233
    Quote Originally Posted by SIXTO View Post
    You guys are forgeting about the second half of the deal; The dealer. You being the "strawman" are not the main target, its the dealer.

    The UC agent will go with you to the dealers table to make the purchase. During that time, he will make it clear in the converstation whats going on. The dealer is supposed to be wise enough to figure things out, and know the rules of the game. They are not there to bust you and me who may or may not know any better.

    Dont get me wrong, that would still be illegal and you will get in trouble over it, but your not the main target. You have plenty of chances to back out and warnings. You have to fill out the 4473 and sign & swear you are the buyer etc. Its not a simple transaction.
    I completely disregarded the dealer, not realizing he/she would be the main target. I just assumed it was the person being asked initially.

    I've never had this happen to me, but I was uncomfortable when I let my brother borrow money to buy his XD40. I didn't know if it could be contended that I bought a gun for another person, but I didn't buy the gun myself,, I filled out no paperwork, he filled out the form and bought it. I just let him borrow the money. I'm pretty sure that's legal.

  16. #45
    Member Array i12flytoday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Charlotte NC
    Posts
    54
    Personally, I don't believe in entrapment the way a lot of people read it. Especially in a case like this. A crime is a crime. And a stupid crime is a stupid crime. I'm sure I will get flamed on this, but hey, I'm not talking about an illegal search or something here. If an officer is posing as an illegal gun dealer and says "Hey man, I've got a full auto military issue M16 here. Wanna buy it?" then the person is still guilty if he buys it. The only time I think you are entrapped is if you are under duress when the crime occurred. For instance, if you are pursuaded to commit a crime because an officer threatens your family or your job or whatever if you don't commit the crime, whether you know it's an officer or not, then you are entrapped. But if an officer walks up to you and offers to sell you an ounce of blow, it's your ass. If you don't know the person is an officer, then logically, you would have committed the crime if someone that wasn't an officer approached you. Also, I would think that the transaction would have to be completed (meaning you would have had to purchase the weapon) in order to make it stick. At that point, I would think they can get you on falsifying a gov. document as well.

    Just my opinion of course.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Warning!!
    By Darth AkSarBen in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: August 3rd, 2009, 09:08 PM
  2. WARNING!! National Bullet Co. WARNING!!
    By Haywood in forum Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: December 6th, 2007, 12:34 PM
  3. Too much warning?
    By CharlieMike in forum Carry & Defensive Scenarios
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: January 26th, 2007, 09:57 AM

Search tags for this page

ccw harrassment in chesterfield county

,

gifting a handgun to a relative in tennessee

Click on a term to search for related topics.