WATE gun show loophole update
In an update to the post about the WATE’s local news catching lawful commerce on tape, I sent an email to the news contact and, what I assumed was the email address for Tim Miller, that said:
Your report on the gun show loophole is disingenuous. There is the right of citizens to engage in lawful commerce. There has never been a federal law written to restrict the private sale of firearms. Additionally, such a law would be unenforceable. By “unlicensed dealer”, you are referring to those citizens who legally sell their own property. By referring to it as a “loophole,” you imply that there is a deliberate effort to skirt the law.
Additionally, the Bureau of Justice Statistics concluded that:
“Less than 1% of “crime guns” were obtained at gun shows.”
And
“Only 0.7% of convicts bought their firearms at gun shows. 39.2% obtained them from illegal street dealers.”
The ATF often fails to investigate illegal purchases. According to the Associated Press, over 7,000 people who should have been barred from buying guns obtained them (i.e., were not stopped by the background check process you hold so dear) through dealers. Additionally, out of 122,000 purchases that were denied due to background checks, only 154 were charged (source)
For some sensationalistic reporting, you may want to attempt to purchase one off the street. However, such an attempt would be dangerous and I don’t recommend it.
I also posted it at WATE’s message board.
Update: I received the following email from Tim Miller at WATE:
Aaron,
I found out the word loophole, although not used in our on-air version of the piece, was included when the script was posted on the website. I have since talked to Angie to get it removed.
Tim
I don’t know who Aaron is but cool. You will notice that the word loophole doesn’t appear in the story now. Having said that, I watched the video they have there. This prompted another email to Mr. Miller:
Thanks. I just watched the video segment.
In it, you also stated that the Columbine killers got their guns from a gun show. This is true on the surface. However, what you may not know is that Manes and Anderson (who bought the guns for the killers) were lawful purchasers and would have passed a background check if performed. She made an illegal straw purchase on behalf of the killers. Additionally, the 18 year old killer could legally purchase his own rifle (since he was an adult). A background check would in no way have stopped Columbine.
I’ll post this at the forum too.
September 17th, 2004 at 4:37 pm
[…] attack on her assertion with an attack on her. She shouldn’t feel too bad as I had one report on WATE changed already though no correction was issued an […]
August 3rd, 2004 at 1:24 pm
Only 0.7% of convicts bought their firearms at gun shows. 39.2% obtained them from illegal street dealers.
I’m confused. I thought your argument was that it is legal for anybody to sell guns to anybody. So what is an “illegal street dealer”?
August 3rd, 2004 at 1:37 pm
Good point. However, I’m quoting gun facts. So, i searched for the US DOJ stats and found this.
Turns out gun facts misquoted. The stat is actually:
39.2% Street/Illegal source
Which implies either/or. Good catch and thanks for keeping me honest.
August 3rd, 2004 at 1:51 pm
Oh yeah, almost forgot: Per the report, illegal source means:
Theft 7.6%
drug dealer/off street 15.7%
fence/black market 7.6%
I guess they’re assuming the drug dealer who sold it was forbidden from possessing it, hence it is illegal.
August 3rd, 2004 at 3:18 pm
Is a fence/black market sale the same as a straw sale?
Interesting statistics. I’m impressed that WATE was willing to engage you to such depth on their message board. I’ve found most reporters take the high road and avoid confrontation pretty readily. You did a good job of making this one think, and hopefully his next report will be a bit less biased.
August 3rd, 2004 at 4:21 pm
I have commented on their boards for some time and have found that WATE’s admin is quite willing to engage in debate and they are quite reasonable.
August 3rd, 2004 at 6:08 pm
I can vouch for the character of Tim Miller. From the year and a half I worked with him, I can assure you he’s a stand up guy. If he made a mistake, it was unintentional.
Unfortunately, the media as a whole is uninformed when it comes to reporting gun stories.
August 3rd, 2004 at 9:55 pm
CJ, i don’t question the character. I think it’s, as you say, uninformed. Yet, when the decid to inform themselves, they get all their talking points from anti-gun folks. Additionally, I find it odd that they are often so oppositional about being told when they’re wrong. I was pleasantly surprised that this was not the case with WATE.
August 3rd, 2004 at 10:32 pm
Well, if you have any problems with them, let me know π I’ve still got some pull there!
August 3rd, 2004 at 10:38 pm
If you’ve got some pull, maybe you can arrange for them to rovide ON AIR time for SaysUncle or maybe a reprsentative from the GOA to respond to the innacuracies in the report. I posted that suggstion on their message board, but the moderator did not respond to it.
August 5th, 2004 at 6:26 pm
Well, I said I got “some” pull… but not that much! π
November 21st, 2006 at 11:01 am
[…] It’s not all bad. I still commend Tim Miller for correcting an error. […]