Broward dealer's guns linked to Guatemalan shootout (South Florida)

[seafan]

Source: Miami Herald

Federal authorities arrested a Broward gun dealer after they said some firearms he sold were used in a deadly shootout between rival Guatemalan drug traffickers.
Authorities charged Victor Needleman with selling dozens of Glock and FN semiautomatic pistols to an unidentified convicted felon, who then supplied them to drug traffickers in Guatemala during the past year, according to a 16-page federal criminal affidavit.

.....

Needleman, 56, also was charged with selling semiautomatic firearms through ''straw'' buyers and making false statements as a licensed firearms dealer.
According to the criminal affidavit by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, some of the firearms that Needleman sold ``were recently recovered in a shootout between rival drug groups in Guatemala.''

.....

The felon was allegedly supplying guns to a drug-trafficking organization involved in the March 25 shootout in eastern Guatemala, where at least 11 people were killed and seven others were injured.
The Associated Press reported the shootout was between suspected Mexican and Guatemalan drug smugglers. The victims apparently were ambushed outside a water park in Teculután, east of Guatemala City, said Interior Ministry spokesman Ricardo Gatica Trejo. The area is on a smuggling route for cocaine heading from Colombia to the United States.

.....

ATF did not provide additional information about the alleged connection between the Broward gun dealer, the felon and the shootout.

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/top_stories/story/495898.html

[NickB79]

1. Now this is gun control I can totally support

Crack down on the crooked dealers and throw the bastards in prison for a LONG time.

Or, can he be extradited to Guatemala and face charges there?

[iverglas]

2. surely not!!!!

Surely not. Not firearms purchased in the US being used to kill, injure and generally impede the social and economic development of the neighbours!

Noooo. Never.

Just ask the gun dungeon denizens. Nobody exploits the refusal of the US and its various local jurisdictions to take any measures to prevent bad people from acquiring firearms by selling firearms to bad people, and nobody then traffics US-procured firearms into nearby countries in order to facilitate criminal activities. It just doesn't happen.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

7. Doesn't the article contradict you?

You wrote, "Nobody exploits the refusal of the US and its various local jurisdictions to take any measures to prevent bad people from acquiring firearms by selling firearms to bad people"


The article is about him being arrested and charged. Isn't that the federal government taking measures to prevent bad people from acquiring firearms? I've never heard anyone here say that the illegal exportation of firearms doesn't occur. Maybe you could show us some examples.

David

[iverglas]

8. interesting take

The article is about him being arrested and charged. Isn't that the federal government taking measures to prevent bad people from acquiring firearms?

Technicaly, no, I'd say. It's about measures being taken to punish someone who engaged in illegal firearms transactions.

The theory is that the threat of punishment will deter people from doing illegal things.

But, well, we all know how criminals don't obey laws, right?

And we do know what "prevent" means? Was anything prevented in this case? Not that I noticed.


I've never heard anyone here say that the illegal exportation of firearms doesn't occur. Maybe you could show us some examples.

I think you spend quite enough time in the Guns forum that you know exactly what I'm talking about.

But here ya go:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=163876

It's not only poverty propelling Mexicans into the US. Rising gun violence by drug gangs, and lately a military surge against them, have driven many to cross the border. And where do these drug cartels get their arsenal of weapons? El Norte, of course.

Lax gun laws and lax enforcement in the United States have made it easy for Mexican gunrunners to buy and transport everything from AK-47s to Stinger antiaircraft missiles, which then allows the cartels to use these high-powered weapons against rival gangs or against a military attack. More than 90 percent of the thousands of guns confiscated yearly in Mexico have been traced to US origin.

Why look. You posted several times in that thread, including the helpful suggestion: "Sounds like Mexico should withdraw from NAFTA and secure the border."

Other useful comments:

59. Mexico needs to allow its citizens the right to keep and bear arms...
61. Maybe Mexico could do a better job controlling the border


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=149541
"Mexican officers arrested at gun show"
illegally buying firearms from a private vendor, who is not required to (and who in fact cannot) do a background check on a prospective purchaser

If Mexican cops can figure this out -- even if they bungle the op -- do we imagine that Central American gangsters and organized criminals can't? Of course, getting their weapons in straight trade for drugs (as Canadian pot exporters do in the US) is just as good. The issue in those cases is how come there's no effort to prevent the US trafficker from engaging in the transaction ... like by registering firearms so that they can be traced to that last legal owner ...

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

9. So charging and arresting a dealer who repeatedly sold to felons isn't prevention.

I think it will prevent him from selling more guns to felons. That's the best kind of prevention, lock up the criminals.

Yes I posted this, "Sounds like Mexico should withdraw from NAFTA and secure the border."

Now can you show me how that represents me denying that there is illegal exportation of firearms to foreign countries. On the contrary I'm agreeing with you. It's a problem, but clearly you don't like my solution.



You wrote, "The issue in those cases is how come there's no effort to prevent the US trafficker from engaging in the transaction ... like by registering firearms so that they can be traced to that last legal owner ..."

They traced these guns to the dealer, he was the last legal owner.


David

[iverglas]

12. I think I've had my blockheadedness quota for the day

So charging and arresting a dealer who repeatedly sold to felons isn't prevention.
I think it will prevent him from selling more guns to felons. That's the best kind of prevention, lock up the criminals.

Actually, that probably put me over the top.



You wrote, "The issue in those cases is how come there's no effort to prevent the US trafficker from engaging in the transaction ... like by registering firearms so that they can be traced to that last legal owner ..."
They traced these guns to the dealer, he was the last legal owner.

And now, the mandatory review -- just so we can see whether we can possibly tell what the referent for the "those" in my sentence was. I actually wrote -- and I'll add some emphasis in the hope of helping you out, mostly turned to despair though it is:

If Mexican cops can figure this out -- even if they bungle the op -- do we imagine that Central American gangsters and organized criminals can't? Of course, getting their weapons in straight trade for drugs (as Canadian pot exporters do in the US) is just as good. The issue in those cases is how come there's no effort to prevent the US trafficker from engaging in the transaction ... like by registering firearms so that they can be traced to that last legal owner ...

And as you know quite well, efforts to trace crime guns in Canada to their last legal owner in the US just aren't all that successful. And that would be because the ownership isn't registered.


In the case that is the subject of this thread, the dealer was the one who made the criminal transfer. If the criminal transfer occurred post-dealer, whoops, not possible.

[gorfle]

11. And therein lies the difference.

Technicaly, no, I'd say. It's about measures being taken to punish someone who engaged in illegal firearms transactions.

The theory is that the threat of punishment will deter people from doing illegal things.

But, well, we all know how criminals don't obey laws, right?

And we do know what "prevent" means? Was anything prevented in this case? Not that I noticed.

Basically, you want to infringe on the rights of the 98+% of firearm owners who don't do illegal things in order to prevent possible bad things that the other 2% do.

I don't want any such prevention, thank you. I'd rather just deal with the other 2%. Maybe it's will serve as a deterrent, maybe it won't, but either way, I'm not sacrificing my rights and freedoms for the sake of the other 2%.

[iverglas]

13. basically

... well, like I said, already met my quota for blockheadedness for the day.

But hey, there's always room for a little disingenuousness.


Yes, I want to "infringe on the rights" of blah blah to prevent "possible bad things".

Or, as some might put it, I want jurisdictions in the US to take effective measures to deter firearms trafficking so that firearms acquired in the US aren't trafficked into Guatemala, or Mexico, or Canada, and used to commit crimes and cause deaths and injuries.

So does the overwhelming majority of the rest of the world. So shoot us, eh?

[gorfle]

16. Only...

So shoot us, eh?

Only if you try and take my guns. :)

[Mojorabbit]

17. Well isn't our govt

the largest arms dealer in the world?

[bossy22]

18. I'm all for it

its called border security (dare i say it). and i have a plan. When we pull out of Iraq, national guard troops should be redeployed to the mexican border as a temporary measure. In the meantime congress will beef up the border patrol and research ways to better secure the border.

there is about 1 agent for 2 miles of border right now....no wonder things can slip through so easily

[Raskolnik]

10. Could you please point out examples of people making such an argument?

"Nobody exploits the refusal of the US and its various local jurisdictions to take any measures to prevent bad people from acquiring firearms by selling firearms to bad people, and nobody then traffics US-procured firearms into nearby countries in order to facilitate criminal activities. It just doesn't happen."

If you could point me to the posts making such silly statements, I would be happy to join you in correcting them.

Of course, if this is just a ridiculous straw-man argument, it would be a remarkably dishonest way of characterizing those posters whom you frequently chastize for mischaracterizing your own remarks, wouldn't it? I'm sure that's not the case, however, so I eagerly await those links.

[iverglas]

14. and I should do your research because ...?

Same basic story, posted by same person (who then had nothing much to say), about 18 months apart:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=145591
"Weapons flowing from US into Mexico leave their mark""

"I could see the possibility of U.S. black-market handguns flowing south, but when you can get RPG's and full-auto AK-47's cheaply in Central America, why would you want to buy NON-automatic civilian carbines at greatly inflated prices on the U.S. civvie market?"

(Nobody is really doing that. What they're doing is trading drugs for guns.)

I guess one is all I really need, since really you're the one making the claim that nobody said what I said was said.


"First, while I don't doubt that small arms, particularly handguns, are smuggled from the US into Mexico, much of what they're actually concerned about here is not caused by supposedly lax US gun laws."

The poster who made that assertion doesn't seem to have elaborated on it.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=145591

The entire thread is basically an elaborate group diversionary-grooming exercise to avoid the subject of the OP:
"American guns help fuel Mexico's drug trade killings"


"IMO the real problem is this...
Buying a weapon legally is extremely difficult in Mexico. The country's defense secretary issues all gun licenses -- the wait is a year or more, and the cost about $1,900. Licenses must be renewed every two years."

So, what, maybe there's trafficking, but who cares? -- Right! --

"I dont think guns flowing into Mexico from the US is a problem, I dont think guns flowing from the US into Canada are a problem. I also do not think guns flowing into the US from Mexico or Canada are real problems either."

"A real problem is when government which is unable to protect its citizens (I.E. all of them) prevent said citizens from protecting themselves.
That pretty much sums it up."


Want more, find it yourself. It's out there.

Oh, don't forget to look up "hyperbole", and maybe "sarcasm", while you're out there.

[Raskolnik]

15. Weak, Iverglas. Exceedingly weak.

None of those statements come remotely close to validating your ridiculous statement. Not even a tiny bit.

Your post wasn't hyperbole or sarcasm, it was a bullshit straw-man (oblique, at that) that you couldn't support. You know it and I know it, so have the dignity to stop flailing around trying to justify it.

[krispos42]

3. Good.

Now if only the ATF would investigate all straw purchases with the same zeal.

[sergeiAK]

4. Agreed. I don't understand why the BATF seems so lax on this issue

While they enforce the more ridiculous laws to the letter. Even the GOA will applaud the BATF prosecuting straw buyers, as well as the fact that straw purchasers are generally putting weapons directly into the hands of those who will use them for crime. Given this, the BATF's lax attitude towards such issues is puzzling.

[krispos42]

5. If your form 4473 (or whichever it is) gets bounced...

shouldn't the police at least ask a question or two?

I mean, yeah, sometimes people don't know they can't buy a gun ("I didn't realize that conviction was still keeping me from buy a gun"), but, c'mon!

[NickB79]

6. That always pissed me off when I worked at a gun shop in college

Twice I had BATF calls come back "Denied" for a firearms purchase. In my mind I was wondering "Is this guy a felon? Convicted of domestic assault on his wife? Was it a simple mistake, or did I just witness someone commit a felony right before my eyes?". I knew those questions would never be answered, because I knew there would be no follow-up by law enforcement. That was infuriating to say the least.