Bloomberg’s crew says the city carried out “sting” operations that proved dealers in Pennsylvania, South Carolina and elsewhere were selling to “straw purchasers” in violation of federal law. (Diane Cardwell, “New York City Sues 15 Gun Dealers in 5 States, Charging Illegal Sales”, New York Times, May 16). David Hardy at Arms and the Law (May 15) says that even if the city can prove such allegations, “I still see major barriers in terms of (a) duty (b) causation and (c) damages. Not to mention (d), standing. I mean — if you can prove a dealer on a certain day was willing to make a strawman sale, does that prove he ever did so in the past? How many times? What crimes were caused or not caused?”
NYC sues out-of-state gun dealers
Bloomberg’s crew says the city carried out “sting” operations that proved dealers in Pennsylvania, South Carolina and elsewhere were selling to “straw purchasers” in violation of federal law. (Diane Cardwell, “New York City Sues 15 Gun Dealers in 5 States, Charging Illegal Sales”, New York Times, May 16). David Hardy at Arms and the Law […]
4 Comments
Sting operations and straw purchases.
I’ve always been uncomfortable with these as government actions. For a transaction to be illegal requires firstly two parties to the transaction. If somehow one party is considered not to have committed an illegal act (the government) how can the other party to the same transaction be guilty of an illegal act.
Government sting agents acting with immunity can commit all manner of illegal, unethical, fraudulent, or deceptive acts on the path toward ensuring that the target commits the desired wrongful act at the proper time and place to be recorded and arrested.
Agreement with nevins.
Also, somebody hlp me out: how are the NEW YORK agents able to break the law in “Pennsylvania, South Carolina and elsewhere” with immmunity?
That is, once out of their jurisdiction, what gives them the ability to break the law (the straw purchase) without suffering the consequences?
If I were one of those other states, I would let New York know that prosecution of the stores in question would also result in prosecution of the OFFICERS involved. ALL of them (as they were all party to the crime).
Just to clear up Deoxy, the people involed with the operation were not police officers. They were private investigators hired by the city. I doubt they have any immunity to prosecution by the states in question or by the Feds.
There’s an interesting extraterritoriality angle to this case.
The City is alleging violations of New York Penal Law Section 240.45, according to its court complaint.
But New York’s criminal laws don’t apply outside New York State (they can’t be, under the Constitution’s Due Process Clause), so it’s hard to see how they can be the basis for a civil suit based on conduct occurring out of state.
The only criminal law violations here would be under federal law (if the gun dealer knowingly engaged in a straw purchase) or the law of the state in which the gun dealer does business (Georgia, South Carolina, Ohio, or Virginia, in this case).
Thus, any knowing violations of the criminal law that lead to felons getting their hands on guns sold by these dealers should be prosecuted by a prosecutor in the state where they do business, or by the U.S. Attorney, not by New York City.