Other State 22 year veteran Police Lieutenant pleads guilty to selling guns without a FFL

[Boboclown]

Since when are private party transfers considered the black market??

Since the "gun show loophole" stopped gaining traction.

 

[Basedgreaser]

Since the "gun show loophole" stopped gaining traction.

Great the dems got a new shtick for uninformed americans to buy into. Well i guess were kingpins of the legal-criminal black market of private transfers through ffl's. Dont forget about all our single gun arsenals we own

 

[Boboclown]

Great the dems got a new shtick for uninformed americans to buy into. Well i guess were kingpins of the legal-criminal black market of private transfers through ffl's. Dont forget about all our single gun arsenals we own

Yo, i got me 2 hipoints. Got me an arsenal.

 

[SUPER X]

Since when are private party transfers considered the black market??

The black market is a racist statement .

 

[Basedgreaser]

"Two hipoints"


"Two"

 

[SHPD_Retired]

He bought and then sold, on average, 27 guns a year. That doesn't sound like a ton. I wonder what the used market is like on non-roster handguns. If he bought the guns on blue-label, he could have made some money.

There must be some evidence showing his intent to re-sell these guns. That, or someone is making an example of him because one of the guns was used in a crime.

You are only allowed to buy 2 guns a year on the Glock Blue Label program.

 

[No_Regerts]

You are only allowed to buy 2 guns a year on the Glock Blue Label program.

I've never seen that enforced and have had store owners tell me they don't care and I could buy as many as I could afford.

 

[bbbass]

One of the guns that Gourdikian sold was recovered at a crime scene two months after it had been purchased, said Bill McMullan, special agent in charge of the Los Angeles field division of the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Explosives.

U.S. Attorney Nick Hanna said in a statement that Gourdikian's "actions clearly violated federal law and introduced unauthorized firearms into the community.

"By his participating in these illegal acts, Gourdikian compromised public safety and violated the public's trust," Hanna said.

And yet Fast and Furious was ok... yeah, the feds don't like competition.

 

[DuneHopper]

I don't see any crimes here, unless it shows deliberately selling to felons, it was a constitutionally sound choice to sell firearms.
Just because FFL's exist as well as the A T F, doesn't mean they are legal to exist to begin with. According to the 2nd Amendment's prior drafts before the final 2nd Amendment was included in the bill of rights, it would have been clear the need for a FFL was a joke, and the A T F would be an illegal arm of the government.

There exist many many illegal arms of the law, unlawful detainment is one such thing. The Police having the right to detain you when they " THINK" a crime has been committed is a big one and is now common place just like using a FFL. A FFL makes you prove you are not a criminal in order to purchase a Constitutionally allowed item.
Still not getting it? Imagine every-time you wanted to have a Rally in Salem or Olympia, you had to ask permission to speak to make sure you can legally say something to the masses. Not permission to rent the spot, but to even utter a single word there, until you checked with a FSL agency and submitted your ID as well as complete, speech to see if it was on the list of speeches that also didn't require a certain stamp to speak it. Ya sounds stupid ..... welcome to the NWO and it wide open used all day long. Won't comply ?
Hmmmm you sure you haven't already? You may have been born into compliance and not even know it, and so will our Grandchildrens and they children. And they will look back at all of us and shake there heads.....how we stood by and let this happen.

Crime, in California, by this cop. The crime is arresting him for lawfully exercising his rights.
And now exercising those rights are apparently immoral.

 

[P7M13]

Broads, Bucks, Booze and now Guns. B3G. Sounds good.
Ignorance is no excuse, but I think this is BS. As the article stated, he is a criminal because he committed "a regulatory crime."

I don't see any crimes here, unless it shows deliberately selling to felons, it was a constitutionally sound choice to sell firearms.
Just because FFL's exist as well as the A T F, doesn't mean they are legal to exist to begin with. According to the 2nd Amendment's prior drafts before the final 2nd Amendment was included in the bill of rights, it would have been clear the need for a FFL was a joke, and the A T F would be an illegal arm of the government.

There exist many many illegal arms of the law, unlawful detainment is one such thing. The Police having the right to detain you when they " THINK" a crime has been committed is a big one and is now common place just like using a FFL. A FFL makes you prove you are not a criminal in order to purchase a Constitutionally allowed item.
Still not getting it? Imagine every-time you wanted to have a Rally in Salem or Olympia, you had to ask permission to speak to make sure you can legally say something to the masses. Not permission to rent the spot, but to even utter a single word there, until you checked with a FSL agency and submitted your ID as well as complete, speech to see if it was on the list of speeches that also didn't require a certain stamp to speak it. Ya sounds stupid ..... welcome to the NWO and it wide open used all day long. Won't comply ?
Hmmmm you sure you haven't already? You may have been born into compliance and not even know it, and so will our Grandchildrens and they children. And they will look back at all of us and shake there heads.....how we stood by and let this happen.

Crime, in California, by this cop. The crime is arresting him for lawfully exercising his rights.
And now exercising those rights are apparently immoral.

@DuneHopper , you nailed it. However, the number of people who have the wherewithal to ask "how did we let ourselves get to this point?" is becoming smaller and smaller with each passing year.

 

[U8395279]

Im confused as to what is immoral about selling guns without an ffl

Most of my post was edited by an admin. 95% of my comments were removed. For some odd reason, he left in that one sentence, which out of all of the text that I wrote, probably had the least to do with the store. In any event, this massive editing really distorted my post, and totally removed the context of that brief remark.

 

[SHPD_Retired]

I've never seen that enforced and have had store owners tell me they don't care and I could buy as many as I could afford.

I have been asked by Keiths' Sporting Goods how many I have purchased. As they don't keep track I guess it would be up to Glock to come back on you to collect the money.

 

[U8395279]

Shoot I probably buy and sell that many.

In that case, then you are most likely guilty of committing a Federal felony too. Buying and reselling that many guns no doubt puts a person into the business of selling guns, in the eyes of the Feds.

In California, the state maintains a database of all firearms transactions, that can be easily searched. When the one firearm turned up being used in a crime, it was simple for the ATF to then check California's database, and easily find all of these transactions.

I don't know if this could be done if there was a case similar to this one in either Oregon or Washington. The Feds themselves have no searchable database. It is a complex and difficult process, for them to just trace a gun.

 

[Jonnyuma]

This, from the same website as this story (but a different article) should tell you pretty much everything you need to know:
"Show us that you care and you're going to protect us."
THAT, reportedly, is from a 58 yr-old Republican... so says the article. The story is about "assault weapons", but does that seriously sound like something a 58 yr old would say? A REPUBLICAN?! He's apparently pleading w CA congress-critters, but it reads like fake news to me.

If it's a real quote, then it explains a LOT. If it's made up, then it also explains a few things. I just can't for the life of me picture a 58 yr old American, regardless of party, saying that out loud, to other people, where anyone could hear it, to a politician...

 

[U8395279]

He bought and then sold, on average, 27 guns a year. That doesn't sound like a ton. I wonder what the used market is like on non-roster handguns. If he bought the guns on blue-label, he could have made some money.

There must be some evidence showing his intent to re-sell these guns. That, or someone is making an example of him because one of the guns was used in a crime.

I think that in the eyes of the AFT, that 108 guns constitutes a violation. That is why the Feds prosecuted him. If he bought these handguns, and then quickly turned around and resold them, I think that would be all that would be necessary to prove intent to re-sell.

He was taking advantage of a loophole in California's law, which allowed him, because of his police officer status, to buy these non-roster guns. Since these handguns would normally not even be available to other Californians to buy, I would have to imagine that he was able to get very good prices for them, and thus make a profit.

 

[No_Regerts]

I think that in the eyes of the AFT, that 108 guns constitutes a violation. That is why the Feds prosecuted him. If he bought these handguns, and then quickly turned around and resold them, I think that would be all that would be necessary to prove intent to re-sell.

He was taking advantage of a loophole in California's law, which allowed him, because of his police officer status, to buy these non-roster guns. Since these handguns would normally not even be available to other Californians to buy, I would have to imagine that he was able to get very good prices for them, and thus make a profit.

And one text message, PM from a forum, or Facebook post would all that would be needed to prove intent.

 

[U8395279]

Since when are private party transfers considered the black market??

You cannot buy guns with the intent to resell them. That is being a dealer, in the eyes of the Feds.

There have been people right here in the northwest, that have been prosecuted and convicted of doing the very same thing.

 

[U8395279]

And one text message, PM from a forum, or Facebook post would all that would be needed to prove intent.

Very true. He must have advertised them somewhere. There could have been electronic communications captured, and used as evidence of intent.

 

[No_Regerts]

Very true. He must have advertised them somewhere. There could have been electronic communications captured, and used as evidence of intent.

Yep. Hypothetical: "I can get these Glocks cuz I'm a Cop. I'll sell you one for $750".

If he uses the blue label program, he pays $424 for a G17 or G19. He has to know he's making over $200 profit per gun.

 

[U8395279]

While I cherish my gun related abilities allowed me thus far, and so I toe the line on rules to keep them, I feel nothing but shame for our government and its representatives who would make such restrictions on it's citizens.

Well, but California is the role model that many of our governmental leaders here in the Northwest are striving to emulate. So this could be a peek into what could eventually come to Northwest gun owners.

Is Oregon now maintaining and keeping a database of firearms transaction in the state? I've heard some reports that Oregon is now saving this information for a limited time period.

It was California's extensive firearms transactions database, that made it easy for the AFT to search and find all of these sales that this police officer made. No such Federal database exists, despite attempts to create one.