HomeCrimeCriminals And Terrorists Buy Guns With NO Questions Asked – Shocking Video

Criminals And Terrorists Buy Guns With NO Questions Asked – Shocking Video

Ladies and gentlemen, this is how easy it is to buy a gun with No names, NO ID, NO background check, No paperwork,and NO questions asked. These filmmakers buy handguns and even a military-style, semi-automatic assault rifle in just seconds. Because there’s no paper trail thanks to the NRA, GOA, and gun-worshiping psychopaths everywhere – NONE of these weapons is traceable to the buyer. So why do the TEApublicans say background checks won’t work? Why would any law-abiding, rational, and sane person accept this as the status quo?

This video should scare the Hell out of you.

Share on RedditShare on LinkedInDigg thisShare on StumbleUponPin on PinterestShare on TumblrShare on Google+Email this to someonePrint this page

About AATTP

AATTP
Americans Against The Tea Party is a group committed to exposing the Tea Party’s lies, violence, racism, ignorance, intolerance, bigotry, and corporatist fascist efforts to subvert our democratic process – and we are organizing to defeat Tea Party/GOP candidates on ballots everywhere.
  • Pingback: TEApublicans Vote To Allow Suspected Terrorists To Buy Guns/Explosives! - Americans Against the Tea Party

  • Pingback: Ohio Police Shootout With AK-47-Wielding Suspect Caught On Tape(Video) - Americans Against the Tea Party

  • Pingback: Honest Pro-Gun Commercial? (video) - Americans Against the Tea Party

  • Bob Cull

    Unfortunately, Andy, people like pyrodice can’t see the futility and lack of logic in their arguments.

    • pyrodice

      You’ve demonstrated that you wouldn’t recognize logic if it slapped you in the face, and you continue to do so by only resorting to emotional appeals, personal attacks, and denial of established facts.

  • Roland J Olson

    So when these transactions were prosecuted what sentences were handed down….. as clearly these are in violation of BATF regulations?…. charges?…wait…there were charges filed….oh…it was just a movie?….can I see the one where the little girl goes back to Kansas?

    • Bob Cull

      Who said there will be no charges filed? No it was NOT a movie, it was an investigative report. The guns were turned over to the authorities and I’m sure given the circumstances they are looking into the matter. Just because the crew did not speak up in a room full of gun nuts and say “oh, by the way we are doing an investigative piece here and we are now making a citizens arrest” does not mean nothing will be done. It does mean that they were smart enough not to tip their hand and wind up in an alley somewhere with a bullet in the head.

      • pyrodice

        So the priest with a hard drive full of kiddy porn who says he was just soliciting it to compile a list of people to turn in is going to do 20 years, and be on megan’s list his whole life, but the same rationale from liberal media flies under your radar?
        I just want to make sure we both understand that committing a crime for the right reasons still has to get checked by a grand jury.

        • Bob Cull

          This is not a legitimate comparison! These were investigative reporters, they committed no crime. The redneck gun runners committed the crime. They immediately went to the authorities to report the crime and turn over the guns which were illegally sold to them. You paranoid whack jobs who are so sure the government is out to get you are probably criminals to begin with.

          • pyrodice

            We’re probably ALL criminals. The sheer number of laws indicates that the average person commits three felonies a day, if you’ve ever seen those numbers, but raise your hand if you’ve never done any illicit drug experimentation! *hand*. Not so many as you’d think, is it? The president admitted to it, and there’s plenty of evidence that the last two did, too. We’re all crooks, if you want to believe government. But SOLICITING a firearm under illegal circumstances is criminal as well: Did you ever see them OFFER their IDs, as those IDs are required by law? It’s a charge in itself. You’re complicit if you don’t correct a crime in progress, especially when you’re a component of it.

            So yes: its a legitimate comparison. Especially since the hypothetical priest didn’t TAKE any pictures of children, just asked if anyone could pass theirs along. You see?
            Also, I did see the video, and they didn’t turn the guns in to the police, they turned them over to corporate security, which I’m a bit surprised you don’t have an issue with, because “corporate” is usually the LIBERAL paranoid whackjob buzzword.

          • Bob Cull

            I’m a whack job? I’m not the one who believes that people are using a gun for self defense 4,000 times a day! I’m not the one who thinks the government is out to kill me and that I need an arsenal of military weapons to protect myself from them! I’m not the one who thinks the average person commits several felonies every day! I’m not the one who thinks that a law is only necessary if everyone will obey it! I’m not the one who is delusional or paranoid, and I do understand why you would be against being required to pass a background check that would include a mental screening-you would never qualify to own so much as a cap gun!

          • pyrodice

            Well hell, don’t let FACTS get in the way of your beliefs. you can’t possibly imagine that in a nation of 300,000,000 people, cities of up to what, 12 million? that somehow 4000 people a day have found the presence of their firearm to deter an assailant or burglar?
            Yeah, wake me when your mind is open and your foot is outta your mouth.

            “I’m not the one who thinks the government is out to kill me and that I need an arsenal of military weapons to protect myself from them!”

            I DARE you to find anywhere that shows that this represents me or my beliefs.

            “I’m not the one who thinks that a law is only necessary if everyone will obey it! ”

            You’re fundamentally misunderstanding the nature of the objection, and I wish it was as simple as that you were doing it on purpose… It’s a law, like drugs, or alcohol that WILL do more harm than good. Say you believe them when a politician tells you “if this saves even one life, it will be worth it”… What you find out doing your own research is that to save that one life, it cost 12 lives in the meantime. Will you still do it?

            Why did prohibition end? Maybe you can tell me that? Do you think someone screamed at them: “Well hell! People don’t always obey the MURDER laws, either!” and changed their minds?

          • Bob Cull

            Mine is not the mind that is closed, that is a trait of the far right. I am not the one who claimed that 4,000 times a day someone defends themselves with a weapon, I merely pointed out the absurdity of the assertion. There would be stories in every news outlet in the nation every day about it if it was happening. You also should know that it is never an act of self defense if you use deadly force to protect property, meaning that even if it was true that guns were employed with that frequency, some of those cases would have to be people violating the law by using deadly force where it is not permitted. I tried to find any evidence of those numbers and could not even find a right wing nut blog that attempted to claim those numbers. I have no obligation to prove the assertion of another.

          • pyrodice

            You haven’t “pointed out” any such absurdity, you’ve only made an assertion that YOU cannot form a belief that matches actual surveys and numbers… But let’s go ALL the way over to the other side. Let’s assume EVERYONE is a fucking liar except “your guys”, in handgun control inc. Brady’s own numbers said 108,000 defensive uses per year. There are 16,000 TOTAL homicides in a year, maybe 10,000 by guns.
            So you’re ok with eliminating part of that 10,000 by victimizing 108,000 people who would otherwise be able to best their assailant.
            Why the fuck would I take you seriously, after that?

            Oh, but do go on telling me how much you hate the far right: I don’t give a flying fuck. I’m not a religio, I’m not a moralist, I’m not a defense-spending advocate… In fact, I was a libertarian till I realized they were still advocating for government in places where government didn’t need to be. Quite a few of those, you and I would probably agree on, if you weren’t stuck on hoplophobia, right now.

          • Andy

            All people are saying is that to own a gun you should need a background check. So if those people were not precluded they would still have guns. This is the problem with this whole anti gun control argument. Now if you questioned who should be precluded and what access the goverment should have to mental health records then this might be more productive. When people are able to purchase assult style weapons this easily and the counter argument is thst we need more guns to defend us against all the guns you can see the futility of this situation.

          • pyrodice

            I’m also pretty sure I already linked you the article naming EVERY survey’s numbers, so your complaint about doing my research for me is frivolous, and cannot be taken seriously. To reiterate:
            http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdguse.html
            He cites THIRTEEN OTHER SURVEYS, beyond his own, linked within, but also here because I believe you truly are too lazy to click that link
            http://www.guncite.com/kleckandgertztable1.html

          • pyrodice

            Andy, it’s gun prohibition by degree. We let the 1934 national firearms act happen, we let the 1968 gun control act happen, we let the brady bill happen, and none of it actually made the violent crime rate go as low as the oft-mentioned “wild west”. Now you want to try the SAME things that have either failed (had no effect on crime) or heralded gun confiscation (no grandfathering on existing owned guns, and other unconstitutional and/or downright frightening things) and you’re still clinging to “this isn’t a ban! This isn’t anyone losing their guns!” Except that we’ve seen it happen before, and it is. Thing is, you’ll find most gun owners are NOT ignorant of history, and aren’t looking to repeat it.

  • tamara

    I’d love to see what happens when a bunch of black people or middle eastern people (or really any people that don’t pass for Good White ‘Murikkkans) walk into one of these gun shows…..

    • pyrodice

      For the most part, they don’t care. and for good reason: When was the last time someone tried to commit a shooting or any sort of terrorist attack at a gun show?

    • Bob Cull

      They don’t have to there are plenty of “good white Murricans” who are more than willing to buy them at the gun show and then resell them to anyone with the cash to pay.

    • Gail Anderson

      I agree with Tamara. I et you they woldnot sell any guns to black people or the middle eastrn people. And it is important to have background checks. In the videio you could have ben an ex con with a record a mental paitent and because they can’t be bother taking the time to check these people out, they just want the god dam money it put our society in danger. I don’t believe in gunes. There is NO NEED for anyone to be walking around with those style weapons for any reason They should be banned.

      • Bob Cull

        Or they could have been someone who WOULD sell to obviously dangerous people. Why does any buyers ethnicity enter into the conversation at all. Most Muslims do not want to do us any harm.

  • Toby

    The most important thing here is the ease of the transactions. The second amendment spells it out clearly.

    • Bob Cull

      Oh yes! Of course it is really important that any dirt bag be able to easily obtain any weapon he wants, after all that is a God given right! What an a$$hole!

      • pyrodice

        Are you under the impression that laws are going to keep dirt bags from buying what they desire?

        Maybe we should outlaw Meth, Cocaine, and Heroin then. I hear that stuff’s REALLY bad, and all over.

        • Bob Cull

          Hey, you know what thieves don’t obey the laws against theft, so let’s do away with them too. While we’re at it how about the laws prohibiting murder? Killers don’t obey them either, so we don’t need them. You people are either dumb as a bag of rocks or disingenuous when you make that argument. I don’t care what law you choose you will find those who do not obey them that is not a justification for eliminating that law.

          • Pyrodice

            Yes, let’s equate laws with victims and laws with none, and when you don’t see the distinction, accuse the OTHER guy of being an idiot.

            If you don’t have any facts on your side, all is not lost; you can still call the other guy dirty names.

          • Bob Cull

            OMG!!!! So there are no victims of lax gun laws? I dare you to walk into a roomful of people who have lost loved ones to a gun and say that! I promise you will not walk out, you will be carried out. There is never any point to citing facts to Neanderthals they simply cite something they found on The Blaze, Red Flag, Drudge etc. which nay says it. We all know that those sites are excellent sources of “facts.” Hey I know I’ll bet you can find something on Youtube that will “prove” everything you believe.

          • pyrodice

            Malum prohibitum ≠ malum in se.

            that you don’t know the difference is… disturbing.

          • pyrodice

            Nobody is a “victim” of me owning guns.
            Let’s review:
            “He murdered my father”
            “He raped my sister”
            “He owned a gun at my mom!”
            Wow… that’s… That’s some evil crap right there!
            Hold me, I’m scared!

          • Bob Cull

            One cannot reason with the unreasonable, but here we go. No one has ever proposed taking anyone’s guns unless he breaks the law or is found to be mentally unstable. No one has ever proposed banning all guns. I have owned guns my entire life, well, since I was 12 years old (52 years ago) but I have never felt the need to own a military weapon, I had enough of that while I was in the army and you know what? They GAVE it to me and actually PAID me to shoot it. You want to use those weapons I suggest you do just that, you join the military and they will give them to you and pay you to shoot them.

          • pyrodice

            Bob, you’re right: There’s no point arguing with the unreasonable. You’re lying to me, and I’m positive that you know it.
            http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/02/foghorn/debunking-the-myth-that-no-one-wants-to-take-your-guns/

            and hey, thanks for the tip, my eight years in the Navy were great, thanks… But I knew then as I know now that I wasn’t defending ‘the people’. I was making money doing a relative minimum, once I got a civilian job afterwards, to compare. And taking tax dollars to do it. Wouldn’t do it again. Why? Because I’m not a naive 18 year old kid anymore.

            If you’re pointing out your age on purpose, you’ve managed to convince me that you’re too old to change your mind, no matter what evidence or proof you’re presented with.

          • Bob Cull

            I know nothing of the kind! I have not once lied on any post I have ever put up on any page anywhere and you can kiss my a$$ punk because no one is man enough to call me a liar! I have never used a biased source to back my facts but you dirt bags always want me to go to an NRA or other right wing conspiracy theorist site to see the “truth”. I’ve seen your version of the truth, example: NRA claims that 4,000 times a day someone defends himself in this country with a gun…THAT IS A LIE!

          • pyrodice

            I’m man enough to do it, I did it, and you’re squirming.
            I’ve got my numbers, and I’ve showed them to you. All YOU’ve done is say that you don’t like the numbers so you’re going to call them wrong and nobody better question you. Well, the world doesn’t look like that… Maybe you were a bully in middle school, but this is the internet, and that sort of thing makes you look retarded. Put up or shut up.
            Well, you don’t HAVE to… You can just keep looking stupid.

        • Pyrodice

          But hey: the solution has a 90 year track record of not working, so lemme know when you think you’ll decide to make it actually happen.

        • Andy

          Erm….. Meth, cocaine and Heroin are outlawed. The idea that we can’t make something illegal because people wont obey the law is quite frankly moronic. Moreover if you make that argument you are clearly also a moron. The point of this clip is that the background checks have so many holes in them that the laws become easily circumvented (stop me if I am using too many long words). The NRA and congress are shameful puppets to the gun industry who seek to undermine any gun control at any opportunity so they can then claim it doesn’t work. Put simply gun control hasn’t worked in this country because we have no gun control.

          • Pyrodice

            So there’s no meth, heroin or cocaine on the streets then, that’s what you’re telling me.

          • Andy

            No that’s not what I’m saying. What I’m saying is that we make those drugs illegal and it reduces their availability. If someone then goes out and buys heroin successfully we don’t just throw our hand up in the air and say “oh well no point in any drug related laws then”. But really this is all a smoke screen as we are talking about gun control. If a really bad person wants to buy a gun then yes they probably will be able to. But the ease with which they can do it now is ridiculous. Likewise in a place like Chicago all their gun control laws are completely eroded by the fact straw purchases are so easy. As I said before we cant systematically dismantle the effectiveness of gun control and then complain that it doesn’t work.

          • AATTP

            We write laws as deterrents, and many times they work as such.

          • Bob Cull

            Are you really that stupid? How can anyone who is able to read and write say anything so stupid? Maybe you are using speech and text recognition software to read and write for you. No one said that there are no illegal drugs on the streets due to the fact that they are illegal, the point is that you do not refuse to make a law because someone may disobey it, of course there will always be those who disobey any law you enact but the fact that you will not get 100% compliance is not sufficient reason to not even bother. DUH!!!!

          • mike

            I don’t know if they could get a country wide gun control package to ever pass, I think they’re better off trying to get them passed at the state level. At least with that there’s some progress. Though even with the universal background checks, I would guarantee there would be plenty of trunk deals going on.

          • Bob Cull

            Do you honestly believe that there aren’t already a lot of car trunk deals going on?! Those inventories are most likely coming from just this sort of purchase, all they have to do is go to the gun show make a deal like this and now they have a gun to sell that cannot be traced back to them.

          • pyrodice

            Anyone who thinks drug laws have reduced the availability of drugs in this country needs to walk into a junior high school and start asking questions. You could acquire any drug you wanted from talking to people in 6th grade. Do you think outlawing alcohol helped out the problem of alcoholism too? Here’s an ECONOMIC tip, if you’re savvy enough to get the connection: If the drugs were getting harder to get, the prices would go up. When the feds crow about capturing a semi full of mexican crap, we check the street value of it, and it doesn’t even blip. The amount of drugs flowing in this country are inconceivable. Now tell me: Do you think the cops in this country aren’t part of the gun culture? Who do you think most of the gun owners ARE? Ex-cops and ex-military. You really think they’re going to be getting the bad end of any deal you can propose? There’s plenty of corruption to go around. The money’s just too good.
            Anyone who thinks we have no gun control has never even touched a gun in their life, and as such are wholly unable to discuss it intelligently. There is a list of over 34,000 firearms laws on the books. If you could even TELL me the exact number of the laws you’d be halfway to getting around “ignorance of the law is no excuse” but I’ve got $500 that says you can’t tell me how many firearms laws there even ARE, state and federal, without a solid day of googling.

          • Andy

            pyrodice,

            I’m not quite sure where to begin on that one but as you have shot down two of your previous arguments in your own statement let me just recommend that you wrap another sheet of tin foil round your head, turn up Alex Jones on the radio and do whatever else it is you do…
            Let me just state a couple of things. 1. No body wants to outlaw guns. so comparisons to prohibition are irrelevant and misleading. 2. The number of firearms laws is not the issue its the systematic devaluing and clear cut inadequacy of them that people want to change, If you want to remove some I’m OK with that but lets have meaningful consistent ones in their place.

            As to your economic (sorry ECONOMIC) tip, I refer you to my first two tips above.

            Now lock the doors and shut the blinds, I hear a chopper overhead.they are coming for you just like you said.

          • pyrodice

            Sorry Andy, but calling your opponent a nut doesn’t constitute an argument, it just shows that when you’re out of anything else, pound the pulpit and call the other fella mean names.

            Tell me that they’re not trying to ban guns again, that’s hilarious. the rhetoric IS out there, and Will Rogers saw you coming decades ago with ‘diplomacy is the art of saying “nice doggy” til you can find a rock.”

        • Jake

          Why was my comment denied? This website is biased.

        • Jake

          Oh, one more comment “This video should scare the hell out of you.” That’s terrorism. You should be imprisoned and awaiting a trial you’ll never get. Using the fear of the video to gain support to take away our right as American citizens. That’s terrorism, textbook terrorism. Just sayin’.

          That’s LITERALLY textbook terrorism lol:

          ter·ror·ism
          /ˈterəˌrizəm/
          Noun
          The use of violence or intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.

          • https://www.facebook.com/harleyrider2011 Ray Greene

            And somehow telling the gun nuts that Obama is coming to get your guns and that all Lefty liberals want to do is ban all guns isn’t a scare tactic and therefor terrorism under your definition?.Or that somehow the city ,community or society you live in isn’t safe and around any corner even in your own homes there are people just waiting for the right moment to take you and your family out? or any of the other myriad of excuses you guys have for denying a meaningful conversation on gun control? Bit of a hypocrite there Jake…

  • Bob Cull

    I must have heard wrong! I know I’ve heard Wayne La Pierre and his buds many times saying there is no such thing as the gun show loophole, that even at a gun show you will have to undergo a background check and that in order to take the gun out of state you have to have it shipped to a licensed fire arms dealer for pick up. No one is ever going to convince me that these lying butt wads don’t know that this goes on all the time, they just don’t want any interference in obtaining their arsenals.

    • Tim Simpson

      “I dare you to walk into a roomful of people who have lost loved ones to a gun and say that! I promise you will not walk out”. No, either you will find yourself in a room full of “victims” who will always be victims, who whine and complain and blame others for their misfortune. OR, you will find yourself in a room full of guilt and self-loathing. The guilt and self-loathing comes from them knowing had they been able to defend themselves they might have saved a life or a loved one. Instead, you make yourselves victims and then dwell in it. Then you turn it into misguided anger at those of us who choose to be responsible for our own safety. You never need a gun right? That is, until you need one.

      When seconds count, the police are just minutes away. Common sense escapes liberals.

      • AATTP

        “The guilt and self-loathing comes from them knowing had they been able to defend themselves they might have saved a life or a loved one.”

        That has got to be one of the most delusional things we’ve ever read–and we get Tea Bagger comments ALL day everyday.

        • Bob Cull

          Couldn’t have said it better!

        • Roland J Olson

          If thy eye offends you, pluck it out. In you case bring someone else’s eyes and see if they will pay you fund the next cause

          • AATTP

            Can anyone decipher this gibberish salad please?

        • pyrodice

          Yes, I’m sure 2.5 million defensive gun uses a year are all mirages, and that if your daughter walks an empty street home, you’d rather she was unarmed because rape is somehow better than dealing with having ended a rapist’s life.
          Tell me how these things which happen hundreds of times DAILY are farfetched.

          • AATTP

            WT actual F are you talking about?

          • Pyrodice

            It wasn’t that complicated. 2.5 million times per year, lawful gun owners use firearms in defense of self and property. Versus how many TOTAL deaths by firearm in this country?
            But you’re ok with the population of a small city being robbed, raped, or killed just to satisfy your hatred of a subset of inanimate objects.
            I’d say to stop playing dumb? But I’m not convinced you’re playing.

          • Bob Cull

            Now the question is settled. You are definitely delusional! I knew that it could not be possible but I looked it up and the only source for that 2.5 million uses for self defense is some other whack jobs ass! It made no sense on the face of it. If there really were over 6,800 incidences per day it would be all over the news. Get professional help!

          • pyrodice

            No Bobby, YOUre delusional. The world doesn’t fit hat you imagine it should, so you’ll dismiss it.

            http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdguse.html

            It’s funny that people who USED to believe in gun control have believed so fervently in it that they’ve gone forth to DO the research, and upon releasing their findings, they’re panned by their former party because it doesn’t line up with what they want to believe to be true.

            As also stated here http://1389blog.com/2012/12/23/larry-correia-refutes-the-gun-controllers-once-and-for-all/

            “For information about how more guns actually equals less crime, look up the work of Dr. John Lott. And since liberals hate his guts, look up the less famous work of Dr. Gary Kleck, or basically look up the work of any criminologist or economist who isn’t writing for Slate or Mother Jones.”

      • Jake

        Tim is right. What if a criminal illegally obtains a firearm, and breaks into your home with the intent of stealing everything you own regardless of your presence? Well, if they’re home, they’re getting gunned down, nothing stands in my way. Well, call the police! They can help! Whenever they get here. After we were all lined up on our knees and systematically executed. Oops, I guess the police were a bit too slow. A bit of an extreme argument, but that’s all this place seems to be is extreme this and extreme that. I can’t remember what country it was… There was a country where the firearm per capita ratio is almost 1. Crime rate? Next to 0. More weapons = lower crime rates.

        Taking away firearms is a terrible idea, mostly because it’s unconstitutional. We have the right to bear arms for a reason. “Well, you don’t need HPR’s and assault weapons.” Depending on the situation, yes, we do. Remember how DHS bought that ridiculous number of anti-personnel rounds? What are those for? Well, it’s not for an invading foreign military. Military soldiers use body armor, AP rounds will barely scratch that. Besides, it’s not DHS’s responsibility to defend our country, it’s the national guard. So why does the DHS even exist? What else could the ammunition possibly be used for, I wonder?

        Ultimately everyone has their own opinion about everything. The government, the weapons, civil liberties, all of that stuff. Just remember that everyone has the right to pursue happiness, without interrupting someone else in their right to pursue happiness. Taking away firearms is unconstitutional in more than one way, that’s the bottom line. Restricting who can own one is also unconstitutional, what if the person who has had issues in their life that prevents them from owning a firearm genuinely wants one to defend their home based on past experiences relating to the issue that prevents them from owning one? What if someone that can legally obtain one without prior issue preventing them from getting one only wants it to cause harm? Restrictions will likely help, however at the same time it can cause issues. There is no real way to determine someone’s intent. That doesn’t mean everyone should give up their right just to stop the small potential.

        • https://www.facebook.com/harleyrider2011 Ray Greene

          I always wonder where the hell you guys live that you are so terrorized by what if’s and irrational fear that somehow you are being targeted at all times either by the government or by roving gangs of thugs. I just don’t get it..If you live in an area that is so overridden with that kinda crime why the hell don’t you just move instead of living in fear everyday? You’ve also proven that you guys live in a world of hypotheticals..What if this happens or this happens..this might happen as well..instead of living in the world of reality and reacting based on what actually occurs and not on what someone told you might happen.

          • Pyrodice

            And yet, despite its completely theoretical nature, I bet you still wear your seatbelt. How scared of car accidents are you?

Scroll To Top
website security Website Security Test