What percentage of guns used in crime are stolen?

Great Debates
21

Ducati, I don’t quite get this claim that the number of criminals buying guns “privately” at gunshows is trivial. is there a cite for this? I’m personally mystified as how one could tell since there would be no record of the sale and trying to trace a weapon used in a crime back would not be possible or do I miss something?

[I’ll also say this until I’m blue in the face, dollars to donuts that most people using “gun show loophole” have no idea that the ardent gun enthusiasts think it’s a goddamn lie. At least, I thought it was a pretty straightforward descriptor. hell, I still think so, but since I prefer a debate on merits instead of inflammatory language, I’ve started using “private sellers at gun shows” instead.]

22

First, let me clarify: I believe anyone using the term “loophole” when referring gun shows and sales is being intentionally inflammatory. A loophole circumvents or avoids the intended rules in a system. There are no rules restricting private gun sales from one individual to another. There may be state or local laws that I’m not aware of.

There are many ways for a seller to privately sell a gun. Craigslist -until they take down the ad- Armslist, and many, many more.

Data? I don’t have it. Experience? A lot. I’ve been around gun shows for 30 years as a customer, security, vendor, and volunteer. I’ve met and spoken with thousands of gun folks about private sales, and every damn one of them - me included - demand ID from anyone buying a gun from them. Some just want a record. Some are paranoid, and want that paper trail. Most hope that just asking will weed out some felon trying to get a gun. No responsible gun owner that I know wants their gun used in a crime. Ask anyone but your dad or brother if you can borrow a gun for the weekend, and every one of them will say “Hell No!” You can borrow a rake. You can borrow my air compressor. My guns don’t leave my sight or my family, and I promise you that’s a universal truth.

Are there unscrupulous sellers who only see green? Sure. Have criminals bought guns from them? Probably. Have those guns been used in crimes? Probably. The problem is that CNN, you, and a few other people have never been to a gun show, walked the tables, and actually looked at the truth of the matter. Here’s what you don’t know:
The individuals selling their personal guns with no background check required take about 10 tables at a 1,000 table show. Their guns? 99% are high-grade shotguns, safari-level rifles, Lugers, and ancient muzzle loaders. Yep. The geezers sitting there chatting with one another are selling collectible guns that many people would have to sell a car to afford. Beautiful Purdys, Kreighoffs, Perazzis, and Smiths. You might find a Luger for 1,800 bucks, but frankly the hoodrats prefer Lorcins for $79. The older single action revolvers or 1911’s that they have will start at 2 grand. These guys are hardly providing a loophole for the homeys, or providing weapons for any criminals. And they **will **get your ID.
I think a great deal of the disconnect between gun people and anti-gun people is a complete lack of understanding and knowledge of what the vast majority of us think and feel. I’d say about 40 of our states are full of people who are incredulous at the anti-gun crowd and what they think. If you didn’t grow up with guns as a part of your life, I understand that you can lack well, understanding about that lifestyle. I **think **my experience tells me what it’s like to be black in America, but I bet if I got dropped in Compton tomorrow as a black man, my head would spin.

Background checks for all gun sales? I’m all for it. Every gun, every time. It’s a step towards reducing criminals possessing guns.
Gun buybacks? Sure. But only if the guns are sold back to the public. With a background check. Why? The owners obviously don’t want or need them, and they live in a closet or under a bed where they’re liable to be stolen. Every gun that goes from a closet to a responsible owner is one less available for criminals. It’s a game of attrition that we should be playing. Every gun that gets registered and kept secure is an asset, not a danger.

If Og promised me tonight that there would never be another mass shooting ever if I took my life, I’d head for the train tracks right now.
Sadly, that won’t change anything anymore than demanding 10 round magazines, no assault rifles, no bayonet lugs, no pistol grips, and all the other stupid shit that non-gun people know nothing about.

Stopping bad people from doing bad things has been a learning experience for about 4,000 years, and we’re getting pretty good at it. We’re almost there. Segregating the evil and the crazy should almost take care of it.

That’s where our focus should be.

23

I’d say you’re wrong in the majority of cases about being deliberately inflammatory. Obviously we agree to disagree on this one. YMMV.

Actually I did grow up around guns in small towns where it certainly wasn’t abnormal to buy your own shotgun at 12. No matter where you fall on the gun debate, they are a hoot to shoot. I’ve even been a less than responsible operator (I’m not saying that guns, booze and weed were all involved at the same time while under age, but I have had a lot of fun shooting off rounds in the woods).

We have people on these boards that claimed to be licensed FFL’s at gun shows complaining about the “private sellers”. Any simple web search will pop up tons of exposes of private purchases without checks either at gun shows or in a McD’s parking lot.

I would love to hear responsible gun owners like you start off the debate with
“Background checks for all gun sales? I’m all for it. Every gun, every time. It’s a step towards reducing criminals possessing guns.” followed by “where’s the debate?”

Usually it’s someone that starts with “when you peel my cold dead fingers off the trigger”

24

Any rough idea where the cutoff is? If 200 is too many, and 1 is perfectly fine, how about 10? 50? 100?

25

I have guns, I went to a gun show this weekend and I refer to private sales as the gun show loophole. Here is why, the gun show highlights the problem with private sales more than any other venue.

All they required for me to buy a gun at some vendors at this gun show was a driver’s license. No background check, just proof of state residence. Now the crowds at these gun shows are not comfortable environments for criminals. There are a lot of cops at these gun shows, they may not be in uniform but they are EVERYWHERE at these gun shows. However, anyone can go to one of these gun shows for $10-$20 and buy almost any gun under the sun with a driver’s license.

And every single one of them should be subject to a bacakground check.

What do you think of national gun licensing and national CCW?
How about a national gun registry?

Attrition works just as well with destroying the gun as it does with reselling it. Why do you care if someone who buys a gun destroys it and turns it into a plowshare?

1 is too much. EVERY gun registered, EVERY gun owner licensed.

26

The ATF, which is well known to be anti-gun, seems to be very happy keeping it vague.

27

Another question: the guns that were purchased by the US Government (and later exported to Mexico) as part of operation “Fast and Furious”-exactly how were they purchased? Do the records of the sales transactions exist anywhere? This would be interesting.

28

Some seem to have the idea that guns purchased legally now can be tracked forever. That’s not true. The vast majority of guns in america could not be tracked anywhere. I for one think that’s the way it should be. I don’t want the government knowing where every gun is.

29

If a private individual or company wants to do this, without any assistance from government whatsoever - no tax breaks, no personnel assistance, nothing that would cost one red cent, that’s fine with me. But if it costs even $0.01 out of a state, city, county, or federal budget, that’s unacceptable to me and I will argue against it, provided I am a citizen of the jurisdiction in question; I would rather my taxes go for things that are useful, such as vital services, education, and so forth, than to purchase valuable property for no reason other than to destroy it.

30

If a gun is purchased at an FFL, they know who the purchaser is. You don’t lose track of the gun until the gun is sold or stolen. That is why a national gun registry for all gun sales is a good idea. It helps you keep track of guns and criminals don’t want tracable guns.

I am willing to have the government maintain a confidential list of guns if it will reduce the utility of guns for criminals. The chances that our government is goping to turn tyrannical are slim to none. 12,000 people are murdered by guns every year and a good number of them would probably have survived if it was tougher for criminals to get their hands on guns. 18,000 people commit suicide with guns every year, the number of successful suicides would be drastically reduced if these suicides were attempted by slitting your wrist or taking sleeping pills.

I think law enforcement is up to the local government. There is nothing even vaguely unconstitutional about a gun buyback program. At this point you aren’t protecting your rights, you are protecting inanimate objects.

31

Are there a large amount of suicides attempted with stolen guns? I’m failing to see how a registry would affect the number of suicides. I have been close to too many suicides in my life. In each case the person used either their own gun, or one owned by a family member. I realize that anecdote does not equal data, but I’d like to see some numbers.

32

Yeah I don’t know why I made that connection between suicides and registration. But in an attempt to make an irrelevant statement more relevant, the registration process might identify depressed people and keep guns out of their hands, but I admit, its pretty weak sauce.

33

I thought this article was interesting: Frontline: How Criminals Get Guns The article says “Stolen guns account for only about 10% to 15% of guns used in crimes.” It says most of the guns come from straw purchases. When arrestees were asked how they acquired their gun “56% said they paid cash; 15% said it was a gift; 10% said they borrowed it; 8% said they traded for it; while 5% only said that they stole it.”

I think this highlights how registration of each transfer could help reduce guns in the hands of criminals. Right now the straw purchaser can just give the gun to the criminal without any paper trail. If instead he had to register that he transferred it to another person, and that person had to register that he received the gun, it would be much easier for authorities to spot gun transfers to criminals.

34

Look, that study is suspect in two ways. First of all, there is a huge difference between how a arrestee got his gun, and how criminal get theirs. If I was arrested for shooting a intruder, but later the charges were dropped as it was justifiable, then that’s different that how a career gang member gets theirs.

Next of all, the arrestee has had their right read. Now, yes a lot of criminals are stupid, but do you really expect them to admit to another felony right then & there? “I … errr. Paid cash for it. Yeah. That’s it…cash. I don’t remember who I bought it from.”:dubious:

35

Good point about the data. But I agree with what they say about a criminal is not going to try to steal a gun when there’s such a good black market. Why break into random houses and cars searching for guns when he can just buy one off the street or have his friend buy it for him. Straw purchases are so easy and hard to prosecute that he would have to be a moron to get caught. Unless the buyer explicitly tells the clerk that he’s buying the gun for someone else, there’s little evidence that it’s a straw purchase.

36

Because he’s a *criminal *and thus doesn’t have $600? If he had $600 to throw around, he wouldn’t be a criminal. Read Freakonomics.

37

I’m not sure I understand your point. If you’re a criminal that wants a gun, which path is simpler:

A. Break into random homes and cars until you find a gun. Risk getting shot by the gun owner since you are actively seeking out places where there are guns.

B. Acquire sufficient money by means legal or not and purchase a gun

Even if he doesn’t have $600, it seems like it would be much easier and less dangerous to get $600 than break into places hoping to find a gun.

38

I doubt the fence would volunteer that the gun was hot, as this would lower the value of the weapon. In a private transaction, just as the seller doesn’t know if the buyer is a criminal, the buyer doesn’t know if the seller is a criminal. That is, unless someone asks and tells, which it isn’t necessarily their interest to do.

39

Not if your modus operandi is to break into peoples’ homes and steal their stuff… if you happen to find a gun, that’s cool, but if not, then you’re just taking your chances on finding a home where the owners are (a) home and (b) armed. They’re not actively seeking out places where there are guns–they’re seeking out places where there is stuff to steal, which may or may not include guns.

40

And, if they don;t need guns they will sell them to others who need them. So, yes, perhaps the gang-banger who did a drive by on a rival gang “bought” his gun, but he bought it at half-price from a thief or a fence.

Look, we can trace the sale of all guns down the line from the company to somewhere or someone. If that someone has sold several/many guns used in murders, dont you think he’d be arrested as a accessory? And that the ATF, no friend to gun owners, would publicize that they could track this % of guns downline to guys who bought & resold guns? Strangely, that figure is missing.

Now, if the ATF has not supplied that figure that means (to me, anyway) that wehn they tracked the guns downstream they mostly ended up with stolen guns or guns bought by the criminal legally across the counter.

The ATF hates the “gun-show loophole”, so since they would have the facts & figures to show that it was a major source of criminal guns, they’d have had huge press announcements about it.

I am not saying that "straw man’ purchases or a few guys that sell a dozen guns a year or more to anyone who has the cash aren’t some part of the problem. But if they were a major part, the ATF would be screaming it.