[HiPower]

:D :D :D :up: :up: :up:

source (http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2005/02/22/houston_atf_may_investigate_cnn_felony/)


Houston ATF May Investigate CNN felony
|By SayUncle|
Thanks to a reader, I have copies of emails from an ATF agent who was forwarded the CNN transcript. The email from the ATF agent says:

I have forwarded this to the Houston office. There is no straw purchase since the transaction does not involve a licensed dealer. However the owner did sell a firearm to a non-resident of Texas which is a violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(a)(5).

I should note that it depends on what is meant by “owner.” The owner (or original seller) sold to a Texas resident who gave the weapon to the other reporter. We’ll see.

I’ll update this post with details as more information is confirmed.

Heartless Libertarian wants to make sure this doesn’t go away and is advocating calls to Houston ATF. I have now confirmed that the ATF is aware but people should keep up the pressure.

I think this may be a first SayUncle Exclusive!

Update: Triggerfinger thinks the agent is only partially correct. And, competition aside, my post is the first confirmation that some one at the ATF is aware not the first notice that people are contacting them.

Update 2: Heartless Libertarian points out that the ATF agent in the email is focusing on the seller (presumably the guy who sold the rifle to the CNN person who was a resident of Texas) and not the transfer:

Only problem here is that Griffin, the CNN reporter, and his crew, are in violation of section 922(a)(3) of the same law, which the ATF doesn’t seem to concerned about.

Update 3: Via Matt, Michael Bane notes:

Based on my conversations with legal experts within the firearms industry, CNN did indeed violate at least one, and probably two, federal firearms laws in their reporting of the .50 caliber controversy last week.

Representatives of the industry are currently in touch with the ATF.

More to come.

[Popeye]

Keep the pressure on. Let's see what happens.

[NavyChief]

Sorry, I'm not gonna hold my breath... :down:

[wildames]

I'll not hold my breath and I'll give 100 to 1 odds that nothing happens except a little conversation.

[Lupey]

:dunno: what I miss???

[7.62mmFMJ]

So we are down to wishing that CNN is hung with a rope? A rope that we despise as being unconstitutional?

[Lupey]

So we are down to wishing that CNN is hung with a rope? A rope that we despise as being unconstitutional?


Whats good for the goose is good for the gander (or something like that)

[ScarletPumpernickel]

ALERT FROM JEWS FOR THE PRESERVATION OF FIREARMS OWNERSHIP
America's Aggressive Civil Rights Organization

February 23, 2005

JPFO ALERT: DID CNN REPORTER COMMIT FELONIES IN GUN BUY?

On February 18, 2005, CNN aired a segment in which reporter
Drew Griffin purchased a .50 caliber rifle. In doing so,
Griffin may have broken one or more federal firearms laws.

And he filmed it to boot.

The video of the transaction can be found at
http://tinyurl.com/5ftnr (look in the upper right corner
for the box labeled "Powerful Rifle Readily Available".
It's in RealPlayer format). A transcript of the show can be
found at http://tinyurl.com/6r26q.

Some pertinent quotes from the clip:

"But before I shelled out $2,500 to buy this gun, I
wanted to make sure I could buy ammunition."

"The transaction at a house in suburban Houston took
about 20 minutes. We walked out with a case holding the gun
... We flew home. [W]hen the bags arrived for our flight, I
simply picked it up and left."

"By going through a private seller, private seller,
private buyer, it's strictly a cash transaction. We made
sure that the two, the buyer and the seller, were in the
same state."

Based on the above quotes, we can extrapolate a few
details:

1) Griffin states that _he_ was going to "shell out $2500"
for the firearm, implying that he was the ultimate
purchaser.

2) The private-party sale took place in Houston. In saying,
"We made sure that the ... buyer and the seller were in the
same state," Griffin seems to imply he had a third party --
a Texas resident -- buy the gun for him.

3) After the sale of the rifle, Griffin flew home and
"picked up" (took possession of) the rifle.

So what laws may have been broken? Griffin purchased a
firearm from a non-licensed party in a state in which he
was (apparently) not a resident. According to 18 U. S. C
922(a) (3) and (5), 922(b) (3), 27 CFR 178.29, that's a
felony, Drew.

Additionally, CNN personnel, from the producer down to the
cameraman, were undoubtedly involved in planning the
purchase. That's conspiracy -- another felony. And if money
were transferred from CNN to the reporter (or the Texas
resident) for the purpose of committing a felony, well...

MORE QUESTIONS THAN ANSWERS

Of course, it's perfectly possible that the presumed third-
party Texas resident purchaser retained ownership of the
firearm. If that's the case, it's likely no laws were
broken (although it would mean that CNN deliberately misled
viewers).

So, is Griffin a resident of the state of Texas? Did he
purchase the rifle himself or was a third party involved?
Who provided the money for the purchase? Who has possession
of the rifle currently? The answers to these questions
could mean the difference between Drew Griffin walking free
or sitting behind bars for a decade or more.

PROSECUTE OR NOT?

If Griffin was indeed a non-resident of Texas and purchased
the rifle as the segment implies, should he be arrested,
fined or jailed? JPFO says no -- because _no one_ should
be punished for the simple act of purchasing a firearm. In
our view, these laws are unacceptable infringements on an
innocuous commercial transaction. Furthermore, when they
become commonplace, these laws encourage the careless,
malicious behavior shown by the BATFE agents in our
documentary _BATFE Fails the Test_
(www.jpfo.org/batfevideo.htm).

That being said, if Griffin (and others of his ilk who
bleat about the availability of .50 caliber rifles) really
believes the government needs to "crack down" on gun sales,
it seems only right and proper that he suffer the
consequences of his actions -- the same consequences any
"ordinary" person would suffer.

Prosecute Drew Griffin -- or stop prosecuting anybody who
commits a victimless "gun crime." Fair is fair.

[7.62mmFMJ]

:agreed:

[Phil in Alabama]

Absolutely, if we're going to have laws, let's enforce them, equally, on everyone, period. :mad:

[wildames]

Re:"Prosecute Drew Griffin -- or stop prosecuting anybody who
commits a victimless "gun crime." Fair is fair."

If they do not prosecute, I have a pal that the Feds owe about 18 months back to him.

[dipodomys]

:D You know they won't prosecute Drew because he's on TV. That makes him some kind of celebrity or something. He deserves it more than any other because he knowingly did it to make a point. He was actively seeking the chance to do something illegal just to prove how easily it could be done. He should suffer the consequences. Then they can scream that he's only being prosecuted because he made ATF look bad. ;) :psycho:

[armoredman]

wildames, do you think your friend could have a lawyer use this "case" as a precedent for a new trial, or rehearing?

[wildames]

I don't know.....his "case" was some years ago...he lived through it....I suspect he wants to let it lay in the past. His was a "case" of persecution by the Feds IMO....rediculous....I only hope they persue real bad guys with as much zeal....but then, real bad guys are difficult....my law abiding friend was "easy".