Found This article thought an anti-rights turd who doesn’t need mention.
A local man, who police said was preparing for an alien invasion, was arrested on a warrant Thursday morning little more than a month after he paid cash for a .30-06 rifle that was advertised in a classified ad.
After the sale took place at 57-year-old Dane Eisenman’s Sherwood Drive home, the Danbury resident who sold the rifle to Eisenman called police because Eisenman had started talking about using the rifle to kill aliens, police said….After checking his background, police discovered that Eisenman is a convicted felon. As such, he is not allowed to own handguns or rifles.
Police issued a warrant for Eisenman’s arrest, and he turned himself in about 11:15 a.m. Thursday on a charge of criminal possession of a firearm.
OH NOS The “GUN SHOW LOOPHOLE!!!”. You’ll note in the story that the seller is not being charged, as he did everything legally. He certainly seemed concerned enough about this man’s background, why didn’t he run a background check? Easy, because HE CAN’T. All he got was the man’s driver’s license information, and he decided to call the cops who did the simple task.
You’ll also note the guy seems a bit off his rocker, but I’ll point to the number of people who were hurt in this incident.
“Yeah Weer’d, but what if the cops hadn’t been called?”
Well this is how dangerous this guy is:
Eisenman was released on a promise to appear July 9 in Bridgeport Superior Court.
Took the gun away and let him go. Seems smart to me…
Look if this guy is such a danger that he might go blasting “Aliens” with a deer gun, what’s to say he’s not going to try and squish them with his Buick? Or crack their skulls with a frying pan or a crow bar?
I’ll also note it doesn’t say WHAT his felony was. It could have been murder, it could have been hunting out-of-season. Despite the vast difference in those two crimes its all the same in the eyes of the law, and that needs to be changed. Also private sellers should have access to the NICS system. Frankly I think EVERYBODY should have access to the system, or at least all state driver’s licenses should come with a color code that simply will state if the person can pass a NICS or not. Not what they did, or when they did it, just their current status. Its not only valuable for private sellers of firearms, but for employment (Private and public) and for law enforcement, as a quick flash of an ID can save some times, also a follow-up with the real NICS can help sniff out fake IDs.
Also one last bit of foolishness. I’m guessing the .30-06 in question was your basic hunting rifle, likely a bolt-action. Now that’s hardly a toy, but its also not my first choice to slaughtering the alien hordes, and its not a gun that antis are going after very strong (Yet).
What if this guy had instead been selling machetes? Axes? Chainsaws? Crossbows? Modern Muzzle-loaders? His old Cadillac?
If this guy was such a menace to society with a .30-06, why would this have not been a news story if he’d bought the above? And why is it Ok if he’s wandering around free right now?
Gun laws are one thing, but laws in general need to be looked at very closely.
I’ll also note it doesn’t say WHAT his felony was. It could have been murder, it could have been hunting out-of-season.
Or perhaps walked out of a range with a .22 casing stuck in his boot?
http://borepatch.blogspot.com/2010/03/common-sense-gun-control.html
If he happened to live in Mass for a spell, maybe 🙂
That sucks!
A real funny- during the winter when the kiddo was in 5th grade he went to school with a piece of .22 brass in his boot for an entire week before someone noticed it stuck in the treads when he got home.
I guess we all lucked out that the boots didn’t tip over at school or who knows what insanity might have occurred. (Some of the teachers are real tundra bunnies about that sort of thing…)
… try and squish them with his Buick …
How’d you find out about Plan B? I mean… erm… (cough) What were you saying?
/(Chuckle)
Good post.
At the risk of sounding controversial I think we have too many crimes being catagorized as felonys. I also think that after a man is convicted for any crime and serves his time, all civil rights should be restored. Voting, and the right to keep and bear arms. If a man is convicted of a heinous crime and would continue to be a danger to society then he should simply not be released. Our crowded prisons are filled with people who are not a danger to society and would be better off working and paying restitution than spending time at our expense doing nothing.
Paul in Texas
Sorry; can’t agree to private access to NICS. Someone (probably both parties) have to give up too much personal private information to make a NICS check, or any other useful background check. If you want to know that this particular Ian Argent can pass NICS I need to give you name, DOB, and address (SSN is optional on the 4473, last I looked). To an untrusted person. Who promises to send it to the fed, over an unsecured channel. Yep. All the info you need to open a credit card in my name, I’ll hand that right over to get a bubba’d Mosin. I ain’t thrilled about putting that on a 4473 that the gun dealer has to retain forever.
If you don’t record both sides, Mrs. Grundy can do a NICS check on everyone on her block with no-one the wiser. Thanks, but, uh, no thanks.
Wouldn’t be thrilled with putting the Scarlet F on a driver’s license, particularly, either. The waiter at TGIF surely doesn’t need to know the guy he carded is a felon, I wouldn’t think.
All very valid points. As I think you know I have some VERY mixed feelings on the GCA ’68 law. Obviously HUGE chunks of it a useless bullshit. Still I know we don’t have the incarceration infrastructure to keep everybody who can’t be trusted with a gun locked up.
Of course there is no clean way to do it, which makes the conflict worse.
One category of prohibited person in NJ that isn’t (AFAIR) prohibited federally is that of alcoholic (“any person who is presently a habitual drunkard”). Given your views on drunk driving, would you consider that to be an appropriate category of prohibited person? (From my point of view it depends on the definition of “habitual drunkard”, which I couldn’t find). They don’t belong in jail, certainly.
I believe there is a non-trivial intersection between “the group of people who have been judged beyond a reasonable doubt as unsafe to to community to have a firearm” and “the group of people who (no longer) should be incarcerated.” If nothing else, it’s expensive to incarcerate someone, a cost that comes out of my tax dollars; and that not every violent crime merits the death penalty meted out by the justice system. Breaking and entering, for example.
Private sale *is* a trivial source of firearms for the goblins, after all. Isn’t that the argument we make when the “gun-show loophole” comes around (buttressed by the government numbers)? Is it wise to force every private sale to give up enough info to do an effective background check to close what amounts to a negligible amount of firearms used in crimes?
Flip side – I agree that there are way too many ways to become a prohibited person. Dial it back to “felonious crimes of actual or potential violence” and sentence individually – IE, 5 years of imprisonment, and additional 5 years of restrictions on keeping and bearing arms for a specific offenders sentence. If you can’t go for that, the restoral of rights process *must* be fully funded, the burden of proof *must* be on the government to demonstrate that this particular offender is a danger to the community if allowed to “keep and bear”, AND the process must be available at minimal to no cost to the person seeking restoral of rights.
I really like that idea. Also I have no problem with opening a system where a person can appeal to a court that they are a “Reformed” prohibited person and have the status repealed (tho I do not like records being expunged, as past behavior is ALWAYS relevant to the present)
But by all means I believe all but habitually violent people, people who have a mental illness that deeply effects their judgeship (and no, I don’t think any in this class should have driver’s licenses either) and people who have been ruled addicted to a mind-altering substance but have not yet proven they are cleaned up.
And of course I fail to see the relevance of firearm ownership to people who have committed non-violent felonies.
The anti-community like to point out how Alan Gotlieb is a convicted felon of tax fraud. I think its unfortunate, but I don’t see how he’s any more of a treat to the man-on-the-street than you or I are, when it comes to deadly weapons. I just don’t want him to help do my taxes 😉