College student indicted on over 300 counts after allegedly selling guns to undercover officer

[Savage Jav]

Those were the best days. I could set a meet up any time of day morning-noon-night, buy what I was after in a parking lot and go on with my day.
It was so easy back then, I truly miss it.

Its how I got my first gun, still kind of regrets selling it but it allows me to try something new

 

[American123]

I'm not saying I necessarily share this viewpoint, but on the flip side, some might feel like he's doing good work by flouting blatantly unconstitutional laws and getting guns behind enemy lines.

Yep, if the guy has committed only the crime of not obeying tyrannical law - I salute him. If his list includes other immoral acts, then I wouldn't.

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

Its how I got my first gun, still kind of regrets selling it but it allows me to try something new

I have a few in the collection that were pre BGC era. The other thing I miss was the cost savings. No middle man transfer fee.

 

[po18guy]

Apparently a vegan, suspect is a Rhodes street scholar paying school bills. Only the NY Post has the pics, that I can find. https://nypost.com/2022/01/26/colle...z-accused-of-selling-loaded-guns-to-nypd-cop/

 

[Member 52301]

Bronx college student, 23, hit with over 300 weapons charges, accused of selling guns to undercover cop

Shakor Rodriguez, 23, trafficked guns and ammunition to New York City and sold 73 firearms to an undercover police officer, the Bronx District Attorney's office said.

www.nbcnews.com

This news story sounds like the OLD, original Law and Order tv show from 30 some years ago or so.

Ones with Jerry Orbach in it. May be rest in peace - he was a good actor on stage and screen.

Cate

 

[Alexx1401]

Why would it take 17 months and 73 purchases at a cost of around $100,000 to make this low-level arrest?

That was the first thing I thought when I read this. Why in the hell did they let this go on for this damn long? How many guns did the idiot sell to others while the police were setting this up? WTF!

 

[Alexx1401]

I have a few in the collection that were pre BGC era. The other thing I miss was the cost savings. No middle man transfer fee.

YEP! I VERY much miss being able to buy something. Play with it and give it a good try. Later when something else caught my eye I could sell something and buy another. Now I own more guns than I have ever had in my life. its not worth the hassle or cost to sell. So I often will not let myself buy something I really want to try out.

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

YEP! I VERY much miss being able to buy something. Play with it and give it a good try. Later when something else caught my eye I could sell something and buy another. Now I own more guns than I have ever had in my life. its not worth the hassle or cost to sell. So I often will not let myself buy something I really want to try out.

^100%
There were times where Id have an idea about a firearm and think it would be nice to own.. Id take it out over a month or so and if I just didnt like it I could sell it off quickly.
Whats crazy is, most everyone back then had their own way of record keeping and ID verification plus those that requested CHL's ensuring the buying party was safe to sell to.

Im the same way in terms of firearm retention, more firearms now more than ever. Of course its easy to buy but scheduling a sale, not knowing if it'll be a 2 trip sale (for those without CHL) plus having to make the price appealing enough for a buyer to want to pay BGC on top of the asking price or deduct it from the asking price just eats away at potential funds.
Easier to just keep it these days.

 

[Alexx1401]

^100%
There were times where Id have an idea about a firearm and think it would be nice to own.. Id take it out over a month or so and if I just didnt like it I could sell it off quickly.
Whats crazy is, most everyone back then had their own way of record keeping and ID verification plus those that requested CHL's ensuring the buying party was safe to sell to.

Im the same way in terms of firearm retention, more firearms now more than ever. Of course its easy to buy but scheduling a sale, not knowing if it'll be a 2 trip sale (for those without CHL) plus having to make the price appealing enough for a buyer to want to pay BGC on top of the asking price or deduct it from the asking price just eats away at potential funds.
Easier to just keep it these days.

Yep. I still have digital files of the guns I sold as a "just in case". Range sells guns on a commission. I have thought real hard about selling a couple that way. At least then I don't have to do anything. Just hate the loss for no good reason

 

[The B]

That was the first thing I thought when I read this. Why in the hell did they let this go on for this damn long? How many guns did the idiot sell to others while the police were setting this up? WTF!

i bet he didnt sell guns to ANYONE else. that cop fed him $100k, why risk bubbleguming up a good thing by selling to others who might be cops or informants?

 

[po18guy]

This news story sounds like the OLD, original Law and Order tv show from 30 some years ago or so.

Ones with Jerry Orbach in it. May be rest in peace - he was a good actor on stage and screen.

Cate

I do not think Jerry's snarkiness was an act. That made it no less enjoyable. Also enjoyed ex-Chicago PD Det. Dennis Farina. Easy to see how he talked himself into show business.

 

[Member 3687]

Because it's NYPD and not the ATF. Sometimes it helps to actually read the article.

Well thank you for asking and yes, I did read the article it was such a well written article and yes NYPD did investigate and make the arrest for the guns coming into their state but crossing state lines with guns for illicit purposes is a federal offence and controlled by the ATF.

My statement did not say that the NYPD did not do the investigation or did not make the arrest is stated it could possibly be a fabricated case by the government or the ATF just like Fast and Furious or the fake gun shop set up in Milwaukie to collect so called bad guns off the streets in 2016.

I hope this clarifys my statement.

you have a great day.

 

[GrayGoose]

304 counts of firearms related charges for selling 73 firearms to an undercover cop...
Remind me, how many charges did Eric Holder get for his firearm tracking scheme that involved illegally selling over 700 guns to cartels and resulted in people getting killed, including a federal officer?

 

[308]

Remind me, how many charges did Eric Holder get for his firearm tracking scheme that involved illegally selling over 700 guns to cartels and resulted in people getting killed, including a federal officer?

Zero charges….rules for thee, but not for them

 

[Member 52301]

I do not think Jerry's snarkiness was an act. That made it no less enjoyable. Also enjoyed ex-Chicago PD Det. Dennis Farina. Easy to see how he talked himself into show business.

I loved Dennis too!

"We're authorized."

LOL

Cate

 

[gmerkt]

Typically, mass straw purchasers aren't selling their contraband to ordinary, honest, law-abiding citizens. More typically, the contraband guns to to felons, drug dealers and distributors, and assorted crooks. Or in this case, government agents, but that was an act of enforcement.

I'm going to swim against the tide here and say it's my preference that felons, drug dealers and distributors, and assorted crooks not have guns.

It's true that the Founding Fathers did not include the words, "felons, crooks, drug dealers" in the 2A. In those days, convicted violent criminals were usually hanged and it wasn't an issue. However, the 2A isn't the final federal word on the subject, because it is 18 US Code 922 that embraces the idea that felons, drug users and mental defectives ought not to have guns. Which the Founding Fathers, had it been necessary, likely would've agreed with.

 

[The B]

Typically, mass straw purchasers aren't selling their contraband to ordinary, honest, law-abiding citizens. More typically, the contraband guns to to felons, drug dealers and distributors, and assorted crooks. Or in this case, government agents, but that was an act of enforcement.

I'm going to swim against the tide here and say it's my preference that felons, drug dealers and distributors, and assorted crooks not have guns.

It's true that the Founding Fathers did not include the words, "felons, crooks, drug dealers" in the 2A. In those days, convicted violent criminals were usually hanged and it wasn't an issue. However, the 2A isn't the final federal word on the subject, because it is 18 US Code 922 that embraces the idea that felons, drug users and mental defectives ought not to have guns. Which the Founding Fathers, had it been necessary, likely would've agreed with.

nah. i doubt seriously the founders would approve of the brand "felon" to begin with, would absolutely consider drugs and the free trade thereof to be effectly inprohibitable, and that "crooks" had their rights stripped by default when in custody (or executed) and returned by default once released.

ill point out there were zero drug prohibitions during their time, nor felons, and crooks were fully restored citizens on release... so, duh

 

[bradsteen]

Guessing the extended duration was either to try to identify bigger fish in the supply chain or to build more weight on the case. Prosecutors tend to be protective of their success rates and often will not take on cases where the outcome is in doubt. Having a ton of evidence to introduce at trial ensures that even if some is thrown out on a technicality there is still enough to continue the prosecution. Could be wrong, but I'm guessing LE probably brought the case to the prosecutor at least once and was told to go back and gather more evidence.

A case being prosecuted has little to do with "protecting citizens from the bad guys" and a lot more to do with optics & perception. What looks better to a jury - "cops bust arms dealer" or "cops bust man for selling guns"? If they prosecute right away, the guy looks small-time and therefore more sympathetic. 30+ guns makes the guy look like a bigger catch to the layperson, which plays better in the news and helps to insulate them from accusations of profiling or targeting protected classes. It also reads better in the media, and makes LE look more effective to the average citizen.

I'm not trying to sound sarcastic or anti-LE - I am fully supportive of and appreciate their efforts. They have a tough, thankless job that comes with a ton of PR challenges, and they do what they have to do to get by. I just think the politics of prosecution and heavy reliance on plea deals sucks as a practice. It encourages people to admit fault to avoid more severe penalties, and results in some criminals not being prosecuted at all, others being prosecuted for lesser crimes than what they actually committed, and others prosecuted to the fullest extent possible. This creates many opportunities for abuse of the system for political expediency or personal gain.

 

[gmerkt]

Having a ton of evidence to introduce at trial ensures that even if some is thrown out on a technicality there is still enough to continue the prosecution.

"Thrown out on technicality" is a big reason why we are seeing so many older cases being dredged up now and the convicts being released as "innocent men." Clever defense attorneys can pick a case apart with points that have little relationship to true justice. Like the recent Bill Cosby case. Or the Michael McFadden case in Colorado.