HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Tracing weapons from gun ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 10:42 AM

Tracing weapons from gun shows to Chicago gangs



By Annie Sweeney and Jason Meisner, Chicago Tribune reporters
February 17, 2013


As he sold four handguns in a South Side parking lot last year, Levaine Tanksley boasted to his customer that there were plenty more illicit weapons available, investigators say.

"Twenty-five more in four hours," Tanksley told his customer, who was secretly working for law enforcement and recording the conversation. "Give me $5,000 and you can put your order in then. I'll get you whatever, give me a list."

As Tanksley, who police say has ties to a Chicago street gang, made his sales pitch, David Lewisbey was stocking up on more weapons at a gun show 40 miles away in Crown Point, Ind., one of several trips he made across the state border and back in little more than a day, according to federal authorities. Five hours later, Lewisbey, an unlikely gun trafficker then enrolled in college, was back in Chicago as Tanksley made good on his promise and sold the informant nine more guns, authorities allege.

A federal indictment charges the two with illegally selling 43 firearms to the government informant in just under 26 hours, a volume made possible by gun shows and less restrictive state laws in Indiana, by far the No. 1 source of out-of-state guns used in crimes in Cook County. Private gun sales in Indiana don't require background checks, a waiting period or even a record of the transaction. ......................(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-guns-gangs-20130217,0,980710.story



49 replies, 3728 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 49 replies Author Time Post
Reply Tracing weapons from gun shows to Chicago gangs (Original post)
marmar Feb 2013 OP
TheCowsCameHome Feb 2013 #1
spin Feb 2013 #23
Duckhunter935 Feb 2013 #26
Teamster Jeff Feb 2013 #2
frazzled Feb 2013 #3
mucifer Feb 2013 #5
DanTex Feb 2013 #4
graham4anything Feb 2013 #6
Iggo Feb 2013 #9
graham4anything Feb 2013 #10
sarisataka Feb 2013 #12
Iggo Feb 2013 #13
sarisataka Feb 2013 #14
Light House Feb 2013 #15
graham4anything Feb 2013 #19
Light House Feb 2013 #21
graham4anything Feb 2013 #24
graham4anything Feb 2013 #28
Light House Feb 2013 #41
derby378 Feb 2013 #45
gcomeau Feb 2013 #22
mucifer Feb 2013 #48
rdharma Feb 2013 #7
graham4anything Feb 2013 #11
Light House Feb 2013 #17
graham4anything Feb 2013 #18
Light House Feb 2013 #20
aikoaiko Feb 2013 #8
Puzzledtraveller Feb 2013 #16
sarisataka Feb 2013 #25
Duckhunter935 Feb 2013 #27
Paladin Feb 2013 #32
sarisataka Feb 2013 #46
Paladin Feb 2013 #47
sarisataka Feb 2013 #49
cantbeserious Feb 2013 #29
Duckhunter935 Feb 2013 #30
cantbeserious Feb 2013 #33
spin Feb 2013 #31
cantbeserious Feb 2013 #34
spin Feb 2013 #36
cantbeserious Feb 2013 #37
spin Feb 2013 #38
cantbeserious Feb 2013 #39
spin Feb 2013 #40
rdharma Feb 2013 #43
Deep13 Feb 2013 #35
meow2u3 Feb 2013 #42
Scuba Feb 2013 #44

Response to marmar (Original post)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 10:47 AM

1. Get ready, 5 -- 4 -- 3 -- 2

You know they're coming

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheCowsCameHome (Reply #1)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 12:37 PM

23. I suppose that you are referring to gun rights supporters like me. ...

Last edited Sun Feb 17, 2013, 01:30 PM - Edit history (1)

Realize that not all gun owners wish to stop all improvements to our gun laws.

I have my own rules for my private gun sales.

1) I have to have known the person for a period of time such as a year.

2) The buyer has to have a valid Florida concealed weapons permit and be a resident of Florida.

I would welcome a requirement that every private sale of a firearm has to have an NICS background check.

I also would like to see:

1) Far stronger penalties for the straw purchase and smuggling of firearms coupled with better enforcement.

2) Drug gangs as exist in Chicago being treated as terrorist organizations (which they are). The effort to control gang activity should be a prime objective of local, state and federal police agencies and should receive substantial funds appropriated by congress.

3) In order to take much of the profit motive out of dealing drugs our nation should consider the legalization of some drugs such as marijuana.

4) Mandatory jail sentences for anyone caught illegally carrying a firearm in public, doubled for those who have a violent criminal record. Room for those convicted could be made by freeing many who are serving time for mere drug possession.

5) Major improvements to our existing NICS background check system which would of course require more financing.

6) Efforts to improve our mental health care system.

What often distresses me is "feel good" laws such as recently passed in New York State. While I do agree with some of the provisions of this law, I question others.

New York passes major gun control law -- first since Newtown massacre
15 Jan 2013 4:38pm, EST

By Becky Bratu and Pete Williams, NBC News
New York lawmakers on Tuesday approved the toughest gun control law in the nation, expanding the state's existing assault weapons ban and addressing gun ownership by those with mental illnesses in the first major legislative action in response to the Newtown, Conn., school massacre.

***snip***

Called the Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act, New York's law:
Bans possession of any high-capacity magazines regardless of when they were made or sold. Only clips able to hold up to seven rounds can be sold in the state. Clips able to hold seven to 10 rounds can be possessed, but cannot be loaded with more than seven rounds. If an owner is found to have eight or more bullets in a magazine, he or she could face a misdemeanor charge.

***snip***

Tightens the state's description of an "assault" weapon. Previous state law defined an assault weapon as having two "military rifle" features, but the new law reduces that specification to just one feature.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/15/16515653-new-york-passes-major-gun-control-law-first-since-newtown-massacre?lite


I fail to see what benefit limiting the amount of rounds that an honest citizen can have in his magazine to seven will accomplish. Obviously if a criminal has a Glock pistol with a 17 round magazine he will load it to the brim while the owner of the home he invades will only be allowed to have seven rounds in his magazine.

Is a semi-atuo rifle with a pistol grip really that much more dangerous than a semi-auto rifle without that feature?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spin (Reply #23)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 01:00 PM

26. agreed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 10:48 AM

2. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 10:52 AM

3. Thanks for the confirmation of this

A few weeks ago I wrote a response regarding how easy it was for gang members and others to acquire guns from Indiana, especially because of their lax gun laws, and just outside Chicago city limits in Illinois. I was told that was impossible, because of laws on the books. It was a big-time scolding.

We who live in the city know otherwise, which is why we want laws at the federal level: universal background checks, prosecutions of individuals who acquire a weapon for a criminal, and yes, a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #3)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 10:55 AM

5. People need to realize that Indiana boarders the south side of Chicago. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 10:52 AM

4. IBTGT (I beat the gun trolls)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 11:10 AM

6. Which is why checkpoints should be at all borders in states that want no guns in the street

 

Have them lke tollbooths in NYC or the produce checkpoints going into California.

Make sure ZERO guns get through, then deal with all guns in the street legal and illegal after that.

Put a ring around them and it can happen legally.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #6)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 11:46 AM

9. We could build a fence!

That'll probably work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Iggo (Reply #9)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 11:48 AM

10. You don't need a fence. Just tollbooths.

 

and the money can go to fun anti-gun things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Iggo (Reply #9)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 11:56 AM

12. Just to let you know

G4a is not being sarcastic... also a big fan of stop and frisk to get guns, BB cameras everywhere for our safety etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarisataka (Reply #12)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 12:02 PM

13. I'm hip.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Iggo (Reply #13)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 12:09 PM

14. cool

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #6)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 12:09 PM

15. Kinda like the East Germany had?

 

Or Soviet Russia? Or better yet, why not a national stop and frisk without probable cause like in NYC? Your hero, Michael Bloomberg, loves that program.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Light House (Reply #15)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 12:26 PM

19. How would you know that if you only have been here a week?

 

Do I know you from another name?

oopps.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #19)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 12:30 PM

21. There is such a thing as research.

 

You know, that thing in the upper right hand corner.
Ooooops.
Are you in favor of a national stop and frisk program modeled on NYC's like your pal, Mike likes?

Don't try to deflect, just answer please.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Light House (Reply #21)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 12:49 PM

24. 100% of my gun posts are anti-NRA, anti-gun. How bout yours? Guns are WMDs after all.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #24)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 01:09 PM

28. Mayor Mike took another one down.All the NRA candidates are going to lose.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #24)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 04:09 PM

41. Thanks for deflecting and not answering the question.

 

I'll put you in the column as wanting Magic Mike's stop and frisk as a national policy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Light House (Reply #41)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 06:37 PM

45. We can also put him down in the "guns = sarin" column

WMD, my knee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #6)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 12:32 PM

22. That is an incredibly ridiculous suggestion.

Basically, turn every individual states into a controlled zone with border control and searches for weapons in order to pass through? Might as well just declare individual states their own countries while you're at it and get it over with.

This is simply a glaring illustration of why gun control needs to be implemented at a federal level. And by that I mean actual gun control, not these nonsense carry looking weapon bans or controls on the capacity of a magazine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #6)

Mon Feb 18, 2013, 08:53 AM

48. Illinois has NO money. We are broke. That is a very costly proposal.

We need national laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 11:35 AM

7. We were discussing this exact topic the other day.......

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rdharma (Reply #7)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 11:50 AM

11. It's the exact opposite. One needs to get 100% of ALL guns off the street to get rid of problem

 

and it can be done
either state by state or nationwide

just a little tweak here, a little tweak there

and just reclassify the NRA as a terror organization and get rid of their voicepiece soundbytes.
Put a ring around it and it can be done

eradicate the access to any new gun and bullet like a new panademic is eradicated, by putting a ring around it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #11)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 12:13 PM

17. Yeah, because putting walls up on borders works so well.

 

We've managed to stop all drugs coming into the U.S, because of the wall at the border. Wait a minute, no we haven't.
What next, mine fields, machine gun nests?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Light House (Reply #17)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 12:24 PM

18. 90% of people used to smoke.It's still legal and 90% don't

 

the nra is dead.
they just don't know it yet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #18)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 12:27 PM

20. WTH does that have to do with putting walls up on borders?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 11:41 AM

8. Chicago folk sure are desperate to buy and sell illegal firearms.


What's up with Chicago?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 12:11 PM

16. I always said this was the biggest part of the problem

the gang angle of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 12:53 PM

25. spit-shined Sig Sauers, Glocks, Berettas and Rugers

They don't take very good care of their guns- saliva is acidic and will cause rust.

On a more serious side, why is LE wasting so much effort on the two jokers that were charged? They are the equivalent of the street corner pot dealer.
LE knows the source, they know they Indiana sellers are violating straw purchase laws (which they would need these two for prosecution) and dealing with out an FFL. Either charge would be up to ten years in a Federal prison. Give a half dozen ATF agents cash and let them shop the show for an afternoon. If the article is reasonably accurate, they would make 3 to 10 arrests and stop a lot more gun trafficking than getting a couple guys who drive a van around Chicago looking for gang bangers to sell guns to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarisataka (Reply #25)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 01:05 PM

27. Yep

Lets fund and enforce existing laws. Chicago also has to aggressively go after gangs and the residents need to stop covering up over these killings and let the police convict more of the thugs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarisataka (Reply #25)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 01:36 PM

32. How About We Give The ATF A Director, While We're At It?


The agency has been without a Director for more than six years, thanks to pro-gun pressure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Paladin (Reply #32)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 09:43 PM

46. I am in favor of that, however...

just because the ATF does not have a director does not mean the agents are sitting on their hands. Though several times in the last few years it would have been better if they had sat on their hands

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarisataka (Reply #46)

Mon Feb 18, 2013, 08:49 AM

47. The Gun Militancy Movement Has Knee-Capped The ATF For Years.


Perhaps you're happy with the ATF, just as it is. Those of us who favor meaningful gun control in this country want the agency in good working order, from the top down. That includes having a savvy, aggressive Director in place, somebody who brings about maximum positive results with a minimum of mistakes. Somebody, in other words, who will keep Wayne LaPierre and Ted Nugent awake at night.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Paladin (Reply #47)

Mon Feb 18, 2013, 12:22 PM

49. I think the ATF

Is near a rogue organization rife with sexist and cronyism.
I would like a director who will clean house of those who believe they are above the law. I believe Holder's biggest mistake was missing his opportunity to do that. We can then reform the all or nothing penalties that face FFLs now to differentiate between dealers who make a technical mistake and those who abuse the system.
The ATF will then be well prepared to go after those, who are illegally selling, with or without a license and stop the flow of arms to criminals.

A well run, aggressive enforcement organization will marginalize WLP and TN making their rants irrelevant. Such an ATF would have support from both sides of the issue by all except the most extremes of `no restrictions` and `ban them all`. The extremes will never be happy anyway so i do not feel too bad leaving them hanging.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 01:16 PM

29. Solve The Problem - Ban Firearm Ownership And Tax Ammunition

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #29)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 01:35 PM

30. first one

will not happen until you overturn the second amendment

second one has already been accomplished many years ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duckhunter935 (Reply #30)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 01:41 PM

33. Society Can Choose Another Path - Including Gun Intolerance

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #29)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 01:36 PM

31. Gee, I was just assured by another poster that no one wants to take my guns. ...



The pro-gun folks like to paint the gun-control people as hysterics. It is clear to me that it is the pro-gun people who have taken a hysterical attitude. Frankly, they seem to be reveling in this martyred and beleaguered position of "just normal folks whose rights are under fire." So let's say it again: No one wants to take your gun. NO ONE WANTS TO TAKE YOUR GUN. No one wants to take your gun!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1016&pid=55848

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spin (Reply #31)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 01:42 PM

34. Gun Tolerance Can Be Revoked

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #34)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 02:33 PM

36. True but ...

remember that there an an estimated 80,000,000 gun owners in our nation. Add to that the voting age members of their families and you have an enormous voting block. Many gun owners have a significant amount of money invested in their hobby. They see little reason to give up their investment and enjoyment because few people with severe mental issues and a good number of criminals misuse firearms.

Many seriously believe that a firearm can be a very useful item to have in your home or even on your person if you are attacked by a person who intends to seriously injure or kill you. Such people may or may not be excessively paranoid but violent crime does still exist in our nation.

For these reasons many gun owners will turn up at the polls to vote against Democrats, including Democrats who strongly support gun rights, just because some Democrats like you wish to disarm them. Realistically pushing for draconian gun laws hurts our party and threatens all the good we have been able to accomplish in the last few years. Democrats at the local, state and national level will face a far more difficult elections in the future because some in our party are overreaching.

If we are able to limit the number of firearms in criminal hands by passing better laws and by enforcing them we may be able to significantly reduce gun violence in our nation. Better mental health care may help eliminate or greatly reduce tragic massacres as we have recently endured.

I feel that we can make our nation much safer if we simply realize that disarming this nation is impossible. Some states may be able to enact strong gun control but any law requiring the total disarmament of all citizens would likely be shot down by the Supreme Court.

But you have every right to your opinion and perhaps years in the future you may be able to achieve your goal. Times do change and what is impossible today may be quite possible in 20 years.

Violent crime in our nation today has dropped to levels last seen in the mid 60s according to FBI statistics. No one can say exactly why but it is somewhat amazing when you consider that gun sales have absolutely skyrocketed in the last decade. There does not appear to be a direct correlation between the number of firearms in civilian hands and the amount of violent crime as if that was true we would see an increase in such lawlessness.

I feel we need and can find real solutions that yield real results. Let me assure you that gun owners also wish to live in a safer country. No honest and responsible gun owner enjoys reading stories of innocent children being gunned down in schools or on the streets of Chicago.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spin (Reply #36)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 02:43 PM

37. Society Has To Decide What Acceptable Loss Of Life Will Be Tolerated

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #37)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 03:07 PM

38. I feel we will have a productive debate this year. ...

At the end no firearms will be banned but we may see some much needed improvement to our current gun laws.

Time will tell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spin (Reply #38)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 03:23 PM

39. Maybe Yes - Maybe No - Time Will Tell

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #39)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 03:44 PM

40. We can both agree on that. (n/t)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spin (Reply #31)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 04:44 PM

43. But Wayne LaPierre said! ......

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 01:45 PM

35. But, but, but Chicago has tough gun laws that aren't working!

Because there is no way to buy guns in Ohio and bring them to the city!

And criminals and disobedience and stuff!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 04:21 PM

42. If this isn't a good reason for universal background checks...

then what is?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marmar (Original post)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 06:27 PM

44. The conservatives are OK with this due to victim demographics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread