“As a convicted felon, Kohlhepp could not legally purchase firearms. In 1987, [the serial killer] was convicted of kidnapping in Arizona and sentenced to 15 years in prison. But he likely turned to one of several illegal means to get his weapons, said ATF spokesman Gerod King. ‘Felons can acquire firearms from other criminals, through straw transactions, by theft, burglary and/or robbery. But there is no legal way for them to purchase or possess firearms.'” – Feds investigate how Kohlhepp amassed weapons [via goupstate.com]

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

37 COMMENTS

  1. You heard it here first, folks. Criminals have to break the law in order to break the law. This revelation changes everything.

  2. They left out “Direct from A T F gun-running (but only if you are Mexican.)” Such modesty.

    • I wouldn’t say mexican, I would say drug cartel member. The ATF was selling guns to drug cartels and they could not careless if they were mexican, irish, russian, etc. As long as you were a drug cartel, the ATF was will to sell you guns.

      • The ATF&E (and very big fires) was helping 1) itself; 2) gun-grabbers; 3) President Obama; 4) the evil POS (D); and satan; to deport America’s largest inventory of transferrable select-fire weapons ON THE MARKET. If such weapons were ever to have been found to come back into this country (that would be illegal importation, and) they could then be confiscated and destroyed.

        F em all.

        We need the HPA NOW, and we need sales of POST 1986 SELECT FIRE WEAPONS BILL BY TOMORROW B1T<hES !

        Again, F em all.

  3. “But there is no legal way for them to purchase or possess firearms.”

    And, that, friends, is all anyone ever needs to know.

  4. After reading the article I still believe that if someone who has control of their faculties cannot be trusted with a weapon, they should be incarcerated or executed. He was convicted of kidnapping, holding someone captive with violence, he should have never been released back into society.

    • Alcoholics can’t be trusted with alcohol, but can otherwise function as productive members of society. You proceed from false principles.

      • I know of one alcoholic that wouldn’t be with us today if she’d had a gun. Just a data point.

        • You don’t know any such thing. Future facts are as phony as alternate facts.

          Besides, many a time and oft I’ve read on this very site how suicide rates are independent of the means. Means substitution ensures that a determined person will commit the act regardless of the specific means available. That the person you refer to did not, has not, committed suicide means that they likely did not really want to.

          Finally, women tend not to use firearms to commit suicide, anyway

        • Con’t speak to RF’s anecdote, but it is certainly possible that an alcoholic with a gun could pose a threat to someone else while in an alcohol-induced rage and thereby wind up shot, a result that would not happen if they had no access to firearms and would NOT be suicide.

      • Ah yes 2017 when making a judgement call is just to judgie and stuff. Leads to melting of snowflakes.

    • Omer Baker beat me to the punch.

      Let’s review the exceedingly simple facts:
      (1) Kohlhepp is a serial killer.
      (2) Arizona convicted Kohlhepp or kidnapping.
      (3) Kohlhepp was in prison for several years.

      And he was walking freely among us in society because … ?????

    • Exactly. Here’s the sound-bite:

      “If you’re too dangerous to be walking around on the street with a gun, then you’re too dangerous to be walking around on the street WITHOUT a gun as well.”

    • Too late for that. The Supreme Court has already ruled that it’s perfectly legal to break the law.

      Then again, they’ve also allowed judges to disobey Supreme Court rulings. So maybe someone might defy the system altogether and actually hold someone legally accountable for something somewhere? We’re through the looking glass.

      • Welcome to bizzarro world, where we have been for some time now. Unless you would prefer to call what the US has become, “Idiocracy”. What with an ex-wrestler(the rock, AKA Duane Johnson) running for president next time that moniker might be very appropriate.

  6. What amazed me while reading the article was how much they talked about the amount of ammo he had. This really seems to have become a real talking point lately, and I think points toward where some of the anti gunners are going to be focussing their attention for future legislation.

    • Despite the fact that piles of ammunition don’t do you any good since you can only carry a finite amount.

      But liberals don’t ever see logic the same way we do, so…

  7. A person would have to be crazy to sell a firearm to a private individual who wasn’t a blood relation or long term friend of proven good character. That’s asking for a heap of trouble. The initial cost of retaining an attorney will be more than the value of most firearms. The cost of incarceration is very high too.
    If you need the money, it’s better to take less money and sell it to a pawn shop or legitimate storefront dealer.
    If you don’t need the money, you shouldn’t sell the gun, you will likely regret it later.

    • Even if you only sell to the two groups you mentioned, unless every member of those two groups does the same, you’ll likely be in the same boat if the gun is ever found at a crime scene and you were the original “papered” purchaser.

    • From a criminal background standpoint, the law only requires that you not sell to someone whom you have reason to believe is a prohibited possessor. Now, maybe you don’t want to hang your hat on “reason to believe.” Still, that’s a pretty high evidentiary standard for the prosecution to meet. If the reason to believe were that obvious to a jury, then it likely would have been that obvious to you at the time of sale and you would have aborted the transaction. If not, well, too bad, so sad. Don’t sell to bad guys.

      Overall, though, you’re otherwise in the clear as long as you exercise a modicum of good judgment. Just declare to would-be buyers that you will require valid I.D. and a signed bill of sale to complete the sale. Bad guys will likely self-select themselves out of the deal.

    • There is documentation you can use for CYA purposes. My state issues CCW permits and county sheriffs issue handgun purchase permits. Gun clubs require one or the other as a condition of membership to screen out prohibited persons. Ranges do the same for rental guns. I would be comfortable selling a firearm to a stranger if I could examine his driver’s license and permit and make copies for my own records. If I were questioned about the sale, they would be proof that I exercised due diligence.

      • That’s how I’ve always done my face to face transfers. Get their CCW, jot down the number and county, and I’m good to go. If one were to show up at a crime scene, well, I’ll have proof that the buyer was vetted by the sheriff’s department. I’m sure they’ll become awfully quiet pretty quick.

      • In other words, you Nancys are helping to create the registry that the progs demand. Got it.

        • Baloney. How is it a “registry” if the seller keeps the info to defend him/herself if the gun ends up at a crime scene? The government doesn’t get the info unless a crime is committed and the original owner is confronted; it is the antithesis of a registry.

          Or are you just another sour felon who can’t buy guns legally, and doesn’t want to see the flow of private sales shut-off or made more difficult to use?

  8. That guy had a lot of money tied up in guns and ammo. The Barrett alone is $6-7 grand. Where did all the money come from?

    • That’s the price to get one legally. For an unusual piece like that, it’s probably a lot more expensive to get one illegally.

  10. Legal law abiding citizens are hammered over the head by a government with laws, taxes, fees, restrictions. Telling us this will stop criminals and nut jobs. BS. We all know this is about control of us, the serfs, the unwashed, the cash cows. We are at WAR, tyranny never rests. Just look at commie kalifornia.

  11. The source article describes the family members of two of Kohlhepp’s murder victims clamoring for Fedzilla to charge/prosecute whoever provided the murder weapons to Kohlhepp since they share responsibility for the murder.

    Strangely, none of the surviving family members are clamoring that government employees share responsibility for the murders even though THOSE GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES LET A VIOLENT CRIMINAL OUT OF PRISON.

    My answer to mitigate violent crime is exceedingly simple: when a person demonstrates utter contempt and/or total disregard for human life and dignity, they can never again be with us in society. (Whether that means they spend the rest of their life in prison, banished, or get the death penalty is a separate debate).

    • I’m all for banishment to an island somewhere, where said predators would be left on their own to survive or die as they choose. The only one who can rehabilitate a felon is the felon himself.
      The only problem there has ever been with this approach is, it works so well that the nastiest of the breed get killed by the others with more sense, and then these more sensible ones realize the benefits of cooperation and settle down and build a civilization. Which is then co-oped by those who put them there in the first place because of the taxation(AKA theft) potential(e.i. Australia).

  12. I dont understand the hypothetical about selling a gun. There are zero good reasons for selling a gun. Every gun ive sold i regret it. Most people here hate bureacrats, and yet all i here is fear the govt and lawyers and do paperwork, act like a bureacrat if u dare wanna sell your gun, which i thought was a right. 1. Never sell your guns. 2. Dont be a wuss. 3. Never do paperwork its for liberal elites

  13. Why is kidnapping not a life sentence, it was at one time maybe even death But that was when we had a real Justice system and executions were fast now it’s inhumane, costly, and not a deterrent to crime I say bull to that, a dead criminal is a safe criminal, were these criminals humane to their victims. Can a dead criminal make anymore victims. We have bought into these liberal studies that it’s not a deterrent, again dead criminal is a safe criminal. Eliminate appeals and do a study to make it stream lined, I want death sentences to hurt too because victims felt something too.

Comments are closed.