Sunday, June 23, 2013

Ohio is a Top Supplier of Guns to Other States

The Wall Street Journal

Federal data released this week show that 1,601 guns legally bought in Ohio last year were linked to crimes such as robbery and murder in 36 other states.

Another 5,375 guns stayed in Ohio and were linked to crimes in 2012,  based on the data from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

The stats show Ohio also was a top contributor to gun-related crime in other states in 2011, with about 1,700 guns showing up in crimes in 38 other states.

Law enforcement and gun-control advocates say it's no surprise.

"People know they can come to Ohio, get a gun and take it someplace where there are tougher restrictions," Columbus Deputy Police Chief Jeffrey Blackwell said. "It happens at gun shows in the sticks and through underground schemes on city streets."

The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence says the state has too many loopholes for gun ownership that serve as a "beacon" for a gun-trafficking market. The law doesn't require background checks for all gun sales, and the state doesn't keep track of who buys them. Violent misdemeanors, such as domestic violence, don't disqualify someone from making a firearm purchase.

Now that last bit is interesting. Domestic violence misdemeanors don't disqualify Ohio wife beaters from buying guns legally. I could swear our pro-gun commenters had claimed otherwise.

I guess I'll have to adjust my stereotyping of the southern states to include Ohio.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.


  1. Sure Mike, go ahead and contradict Federal Law, because you know better!

    Anyone who has EVER been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence is (with very few exceptions relating to rare expungements, reversals, and pardons) permanently banned from possessing any firearm for any reason at any time under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). This applies to military and law enforcement personnel as well as civilians. Any law enforcement officer who is or was convicted of MDV will be immediately fired. Any member of the armed forces will be discharged. This applies retroactively.

    1. Tell that to the WSJ. I'm sure it's just sloppy reporting.

    2. Mikeb, do you comprehend the difference between Federal and state law? If Federal law bans something, why does a state need a duplicate law?

    3. Quoting a gun control group constitutes "sloppy reporting"?

  2. And for the hundredth time, we tell you that FEDERAL LAW makes it illegal for someone with even a restraining order against them, much less a domestic violence conviction, to buy a gun, making a state law, such as you are demanding, redundant and unnecessary.

    But keep on calling us liars and misrepresenting what we say and what the facts are so that you can get new laws in a few states to make gun ownership double plus illegal.

    1. And for just that many times I'm showing you an indication that at the state level this is not the case. The WSJ didn't just make that shit up.

      Could it be like the discrepancy between federal marijuana laws and what's really going on in some states?

    2. Oh my, no, it’s not at all like marijuana laws. Ohio never passed a law expressly making it legal for domestic abusers to buy guns in their state. There are no conflicting laws on the books. Even if they did, it’s the feds who control the licensing of FFLs and the NICS system, so it still wouldn’t matter.

      Another thing, Ohio is smack dab at the median level for Brady rankings (they are 25th). So when they claim Ohio guns are going to 36 other states- that’s a lot of states with looser gun laws than Ohio.

      Finally, the WSJ is not the one who claimed DV abusers can legally buy guns in Ohio. They are quoting the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. Yes, Virginia, gun control have been known to lie.

    3. I'm not saying that the WSJ make up the idea that Ohio doesn't have a law banning those with domestic violence convictions, I'm saying that Ohio passing one wouldn't matter either way.

      With the Federal Law as it is, abusers could be arrested, charged with prohibited person in posession, and sent to prison at any time.

      As for the comparison to marijuana laws, the big difference is that there's a marijuana lobby that pushes for state laws that actually contradict the federal law. This would be like a domestic abuser lobby that pushed for state laws that explicitly allowed wife beaters to buy guns.

      There is no such analog in the law, and no such lobby is going to form since all non-wife beaters pretty much consider abusers the lowest form of life on the planet.

    4. "As for the comparison to marijuana laws, the big difference is that there's a marijuana lobby that pushes for state laws that actually contradict the federal law."

      As opposed to the gun lobby, which spends millions encouraging people to comply with the gun laws, is that it?

    5. Ummm, your comment doesn't make sense. Are you saying that the NRA is at fault for Wife Beaters because they don't spend millions of dollars urging them not to beat their wives?

    6. T., you've gone so far out on a tangent that you lost me.

  3. "Domestic violence misdemeanors don't disqualify Ohio wife beaters from buying guns legally."

    That is false. Read federal form 4473 and see for yourself.

  4. I see that this has already been well handled. Good try, Mikeb, except that it really wasn't.

  5. "The WSJ didn't just make that shit up."

    Correct, a gun control group did. The paper just quoted them.