Take our user survey and make your voice heard.
More than 200 firearms, from .22 caliber pistols to a submachine gun, have been seized in what New York called Monday the biggest seizure of illegal guns in the city's history.
In a statement, Mayor Michael Bloomberg's administration hailed the undercover operation as proof its hard line on guns -- and controversial stop-and-frisk police tactics -- work.
"New York is the safest big city in the nation," said Bloomberg, an outspoken advocate for tougher gun laws across the United States.
"But year after year, illegal guns flow into our city from states that don't have common-sense laws that keep guns out of the hands of criminals," he said.
"There is no doubt that the seizure of these guns -- the largest bust in the city's history -- has saved lives."
The guns seized originated from the southern states of North Carolina and South Carolina -- a 12-hour drive to New York along Interstate 95.
No permit is needed to buy a rifle or shotgun in either state, and South Carolina doesn't require permits for a handgun either.
Sales of assault rifles in both states are unrestricted.
Among the weapons seized included a fully automatic Cobray nine-millimeter submachine gun with 30-round high capacity magazine and three assault pistols with flash suppressors and high-capacity magazines that hold 30-plus rounds.
Also taken off the streets was a 7.62 x 39 millimeter assault rifle manufactured by Chinese arms conglomerate Norinco. Resembling the iconic AK-47 rifle, it sells for around $400 through online gun brokers in the United States.
Of the 19 people charged, three were already in custody on unrelated charges. The others were picked up in New York, North Carolina and South Carolina in a series of arrests from Aug 2.
Stung by the rejection of New York's controversial stop-and-frisk law last week by a federal judge who deemed it unconstitutional, Bloomberg's administration stressed how one suspect expressed jitters about the tactic in a phone call picked up by an court-authorized wiretap.
"I can't take (the guns) to my house, to my side of town, 'cause I'm in Brownsville," a low-income and predominantly African-American section of Brooklyn, the suspect said. "So we got, like, whatchamacallit, stop and frisk."
Stop-and-frisk sees New York police officers briefly detaining anyone they feel is on the threshold of committing a crime -- but critics say the tactic is used excessively against young African-American and Hispanic males and yields relatively few arrests.
Bloomberg, who is winding up his third and final term as mayor of the city of 8.2 million -- where police permits are required to buy or carry any kind of gun -- has said he would appeal last week's federal court decision.
As the head of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the billionaire media tycoon has campaigned vigorously for tougher national and state gun laws, defying gun advocates like the National Rifle Association who insist that Americans' right "to keep and bear arms" is enshrined in the Constitution.
Last week Bloomberg credited stop-and-frisk with taking some 8,000 guns off New York streets over the past decade.
In July, Bloomberg's administration and Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said 90 percent of guns used in crimes in New York in 2011 came from out of state.
Last December's massacre of 20 school children in Newtown, Connecticut, about 90 minutes from New York, prompted calls for tougher U.S. guns laws -- but also a surge in sales as gun enthusiasts scrambled to arm themselves in anticipation of a ban that never came.
© (C) 2013 AFP
18 Comments
Login to comment
badsey3
Whenever you purchase a gun from a FFL (Federal FireArms Licensee) in the US there is a Federal NICS check.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Instant_Criminal_Background_Check_System
With the huge backlog in checks and massive gun sales sometimes people are getting their guns without the NICS checks being done - gun is later taken back in that case (Maryland taking up to 100 days).
http://articles.herald-mail.com/2013-08-14/news/41416095_1_background-checks-gun-dealers-gun-shops
Noliving
Assault rifles are fully automatics/Machine guns. Semi-automatic only rifles such as the AR-15 are not assault rifles. There is no need for them to have further restrictions than any other firearm. Quite frankly it would be stupid to have less restrictions on a bolt action than on a semi-automatic; you should just have the same restrictions regardless.
What a surprise that is pretty much true in every state including California does not require a permit. Hawaii is the one that I can think of off the top of my head that does.
JeanValJean
The timing of this "news" is merely to give Nanny Bloomers a soapbox to stand on in defense of his unconstitutional whatchamacallit "stop and frisk" people of color program.
Better article:
http://rt.com/usa/new-york-gun-seizure-678/
MarkG
Severe punishment for "braking firearms laws" would be a start to curb illegal guns. Legal guns are and always have been a very minor problem. Mentally misadjusted types are and always have been a problem. This is more serious than anything else.
If you want to save lives, ban bicycles, ladders, rope, and hundreds of other killers.
Noliving
No kidding!
Get Real
Here's one for all the gun fetishists:
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/0433b30576/cold-dead-hand-with-jim-carrey
CalvinMontblanc
Of course most of the time, pretty much any gun is legal until its pointed at your face. Where else in the country is a .22 pistol, as mentioned above, illegal?
The problem is the fact that guns are floating free across the country. You cannot tell an illegal gun from a legal gun just by looking, most of the time, because guns are so ubiquitous in America.
And do you know what is the difference between a legal shotgun and an illegal sawed-off shotgun? Application of a legal hacksaw available at Wal-mart.
But here in Japan if you so much as see a gun on the street, you pretty much know its illegal. The only place I have even seen so much as an empty shotgun cartridge has been in forested areas.
You forgot the chique factor. Sure, a bolt action is great for long distance sniping, but that is not at all typical of murders or even rampages by nuts. Coordinated nuts seem to want more of a Columbine type event these days, and those who just snap one fine day don't reach for the bolt action either.
Its not at all nutty to focus on the guns that are in vogue with killers, gang members and nuts. If a hunter, genuine militia-type or man who wants to protect his home cannot get an AR-15, there are plenty of other weapons to choose from. Anyone serious about these things is not all that upset about not being able to get the vogue gun. They just get another.
TorafusuTorasan
@"chique (chic?) factor", "in vogue", and "vogue factor"
These are just euphemisms for people with a gun fetish. Imagine Madonna leaping around on stage with a rainbow colored Uzi in a leather holster.
CalvinMontblanc
Exactly. Those without a gun fetish can live without the gun they want in exchange for the gun that they need. Fetishists often give up their stupid ideas for not being able to get one detail just right. Legal clamp-downs on what seems purely aesthetic does have meaning.
Madverts
"JeanValJean at Aug. 20, 2013 - 10:12AM JST The timing of this "news" is merely to give Nanny Bloomers a soapbox to stand on in defense of his unconstitutional whatchamacallit "stop and frisk" people of color program."
The biggest haul, ever yet you dispute the fact this is "news" Jean?
Elbuda Mexicano
America is one very, very messed up country! Mr.Bloomberg is trying to keep NYC from becoming part of the wild west, my kudos to him. Stop and frisk?? I think we need every where every time 24/7 for every punk, fool, high on drugs that thinks they can do anything to anyone any time. NO!! Our freedoms stop when our stupidity begins. Ok, I am gonna get on the train with a fully loaded AK 47?? Anybody gives me so much as a dirty look, MAKE MY DAY??
Noliving
OK.....Bolt actions should have the same restrictions as a semi-automatic. If you have a restriction that says you need a permit to get a semi-automatic you should also be required to get a permit for a bolt action. There shouldn't be that type of difference. For example in Hawaii you need to provide proof that you have gone through firearms training for a handgun but you don't need to provide proof of firearms training for a shotgun or rifle of any type. Does that restriction only being placed on handguns really make sense? What if they placed that restriction on semi-automatic handguns but not on double action revolvers, which by the way have the same fire-rate as semi-automatics, would that make sense to you to do that?
Well it is because they will just switch to a different gun that is just as lethal. For example you ban the AR-15 and guess what they switch to? Ruger mini-14 ranch rifle, same caliber, same rate of fire and same magazine capacities and type but without pistol grips, collapsible and or folding stock, flare launcher, threaded barrel, bayonet lugs. You are not solving the problem by doing that, you are not solving any problem by doing that. But lets do it your way, lets say those guns fall out of vogue with the killers, gang members and nuts. Do we get those guns back when they fall out of vogue? California banned the TEC-9 handgun because it was in "vogue", guess how effective that has been on overall gun crime in that state by banning that handgun.
If you honestly believe that the AR-15 is popular because it is simply vogue you are greatly mistaken. So if they just get another gun how is that solving the problem? In fact wouldn't those other guns just become the new vogue guns? What happens then? Do you ban those guns? Right now the US, especially NYC is going through iPhone theft problem, if I was to say that anyone who wants a smartphone cannot get an iPhone, there are plenty of other smartphones to choose from. Anyone serious about these things is not all that upset about not being able to get the vogue smartphone; they'll just get another. Would you consider that an acceptable argument to ban the iPhone?
AR-15s are almost never used in crime, they make up less than 100 homicides a year in the US and it is going down not up. Have they been used in high profile incidents? Yes they have but those incidents don't even make up .1% of all homicides in the US. Mass shooters are not going to be deterred one iota by banning the AR-15. More people are killed by someones hands and feet in the US than are killed by the combined deaths of all rifle and shotgun types.
So in other words gang-members, mass shooters, and murders.
Not what seems but is purely aesthetic. How does it have meaning when the people doing these killings don't care about the aesthetics of the gun? You honestly believe that the aesthetics is how these people primarily choose their guns?
Which begs the question what has banning sawed-off shotguns really done for reducing gun crime in the US? Why are they still illegal with out a license?
TheQuestion
But they're not going for popular guns. AR-15's and other 'assault' style weapons don't even rank in the ATF top 10, the list is heavily populated by knock-off .38 handguns and Chinese 9mm under the name of Bryco or Raven arms. Nowhere on the ATF list does a rifle, let alone an 'assault' style rifle, even make the list. The only long gun that appears at all is the economy version of the Mossberg 12 gauge shotgun. Restricting or banning semi-automatic long guns would have little or no impact on crime and banning or restricting regular handguns would be similarly ineffective because most of these cheap Chinese or small manufacture guns are imported or produced illegally. In the instance of Raven Arms, that company has been sued into bankruptcy because of fraudulent and criminally reckless business practices. Bryco is owned by the same people as Raven and is similarly under heavy lawsuits. Regular citizens rarely buy these firearms because they're cheap pieces of garbage.
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,320383,00.html
The justification for banning sawed-offs was that they were more easily concealed but the fact of the matter is that if you have a pump action shotgun with a standard magazine tube you're only capable of taking off about a 10-12 inches leaving the overall profile still being in excess of 2 feet long. You can go shorter with break-action shotguns but as the barrel gets shorter muzzle velocity drops sharply and it becomes impossible to hit anything reliably. It just makes a lot of noise and sends shot everywhere. The only use they really have is as a home defense weapon for civilians and as a door breaching weapon for police.
badsey3
http://www.gunbroker.com/All/BI.aspx?Keywords=norinco+ak
They are about $600-800+ now but once were $100-200 (there is a Norinco ban in place for the US, but not Canada). Not worth it since the quality back then was only ok and there are many other variants better now that are cheaper.) Norinco M305 (M14 clone available in Canada) is awesome (early ones had some issues that have been worked out)
MarkG
What no poster comment on is make possession or use of an illegal gun a high fine and or jail time offense. I have seen courts simply release potential violent users and simply confiscate the weapon. Give them 3 years for that offense! Fire such a weapon 6 years. Use it against another human-20 years.
The risk of carrying an illegal gun becomes more costly to those who want freedom.
SuperLib
Seems kind of silly to support laws that create the 99% while saying going after 1% is useless. Sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy. And the killing on the streets will always make up a vast percentage of the gun deaths. If you want to use that as your supporting evidence then you probably would support RPGs being legal.
I asked you this before. If so many other things are so dangerous, then why do gun supporters always want to put guns in schools for defense? If knives are just as dangerous then would you put knives in schools? Of course not. You want guns. Not bows and arrows, flame throwers, tractors, hands and feet.
Noliving
Depends on the State but they actually are legal.
SuperLib
Sad.