Report on internet gun sales rebuts activists’ claims

GUN control proponents often advocate policies that are either ineffective or address nonexistent “problems.” This prevents action on credible remedies supported by people on both sides of the Second Amendment debate.

For example, it’s often claimed “loopholes” allow criminals to obtain firearms via transactions that would be illegal if conducted through a licensed dealer at a retail store. Several Democratic members of Congress requested that the U.S. Government Accountability Office investigate whether sellers on the internet provide firearms to prohibited individuals. Between July 2015 and November 2017, the GAO reports, its investigators “made 72 attempts to purchase firearms or firearm components from private nonlicensed sellers” on traditional “surface web” sites.

None of the 72 efforts succeeded.

“Tests performed on the Surface Web demonstrated that private sellers GAO contacted on gun forums and other classified ads were unwilling to sell a firearm to an individual who appeared to be prohibited from possessing a firearm,” the GAO reported. “Of the 72 attempts agents made to purchase firearms on the Surface Web, 56 sellers refused to complete a transaction: 29 sellers stated they would not ship a firearm and 27 refused after the disclosure of the undercover identities’ stated prohibited status. Furthermore, in five of these 72 attempts, the accounts GAO set up were frozen by the websites, which prevented the agents from using the forums and attempting to make a purchase.”

Imagine that: Law-abiding citizens are law-abiding.

The GAO’s results are in stark contrast to the claims of some advocates who insist most private sellers proceed with online gun sales even when a transaction involves an illegal purchaser.

The reality is that online sales are regulated. Under federal law, licensed dealers must identify buyers, keep transaction records and run background checks. Federal law also requires that gun sales across state lines be conducted through a licensed dealer. And federal law bans sales when a seller has reason to believe a potential buyer is prohibited from owning a firearm.

In 11 instances, GAO investigators didn’t obtain a weapon because a private seller “appeared to have scammed” the buyer. The seller accepted payment but provided no gun in return.

So even in the worst instances, private sellers weren’t willing to make illegal sales, but were occasionally willing to fleece the kind of people who try to make illegal gun purchases.

GAO agents did buy two weapons on the “Dark Web,” but only after seven tries. Given that the report cites law enforcement officials characterizing the Dark Web as “completely anonymous” and “designed to facilitate criminal activity online,” that’s a pretty low success rate.

Activists who blame “loopholes” for gun crimes and offer even greater regulation of private gun owners badly miss the mark. Research has shown nearly 40 percent of criminals obtain weapons through “straw purchasers.” That’s already illegal, but authorities rarely prosecute straw purchasers, even though the associated penalties run as high as 10 years in prison and $250,000 in fines.

If people really want to reduce criminals’ access to guns, then why not enforce the laws on the books? Clearly, gun owners and sellers in the private sector are doing their part.