Washington Post Seems to Believe ISIS Propaganda on Buying Guns in U.S.

By Larry Keane

Background Checks
Washington Post Seems to Believe ISIS Propaganda on Buying Guns in U.S.
National Shooting Sports Foundation
National Shooting Sports Foundation

NEWTOWN, Conn – -(Ammoland.com)- Not surprisingly, ISIS is wrong about another aspect of how things work in the United States.

According to the Washington Post, terrorist propaganda materials argue it is easy to obtain a firearm in the U.S. with no ID and no background check. While the materials make it clear that one cannot walk into a federally licensed firearm retailer (FFL) and expect to walk out with a firearm without undergoing a background check, there are, not surprisingly, plenty of other facts that ISIS gets wrong.

Unfortunately, the Washington Post does not seek to set the record straight about the facts.

To assist on that front, below we will debunk the assertions published by the terrorist group and reprinted by the Washington Post.

The materials suggest that gun shows are an “easier means of arming oneself for an attack.” However, every time a firearm is purchased from an FFL, a background check is required by federal law. Most of the vendors selling firearms at gun shows, about 75 percent, are FFLs, who are required to run background checks at gun shows just as if the transaction were taking place in their store. In practice, federal law is just the floor of restrictions on gun shows. Many gun show promoters require that all vendors leasing space at a show, including private parties, must agree to run background checks, regardless of whether they hold federal licenses or not.

The vast majority of guns sold at gun shows go through federal background checks.

This is why so few criminals obtain firearms at gun shows. According to the Justice Department, less than one percent (0.7) of state and federal prison inmates that possessed a firearm during their current offense acquired their guns from gun shows. By contrast, nearly 40 percent reported acquiring their guns illegally, such as by theft.

ISIS goes so far as to suggest ambushing and robbing an FFL if it’s not possible to obtain a firearm legally. If it were as easy to get a firearm illegally as the article suggests, why would they need to steal guns?

The Washington Post proceeds to note that gun control groups call for banning people on the terrorist watch list from purchasing firearms. We’ve tackled this issue before on the NSSF blog. Suffice it to say, the list is huge, secret and deeply flawed, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office.

What we do know is that when an individual attempts to purchase a firearm, his or her name is bounced against the watch list and if there is a match, the FBI NICS notifies federal law enforcement and the transaction automatically goes into a delayed status for three business days (meaning the gun is not transferred during a gun show) while federal law enforcement is given an opportunity to determine if there is a lawful basis to deny someone and if not, to take appropriate law enforcement actions they deem appropriate.

And as far as the suggestion that “you can go down to a gun show at the local convention center and come away with a fully automatic assault rifle, without a background check…” the terrorists are wrong again. Even in a private party transaction, it is illegal to purchase an automatic firearm without a special ATF license and plenty of red tape.

One would think that the Washington Post would be more concerned about the sources it uses for its reporting. We wonder if ISIS has written about how to fool the mainstream media.

About NSSF  The National Shooting Sports Foundation is the trade association for the firearms industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and the shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of more than 6,000 manufacturers, distributors, firearms retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen's organizations and publishers. For more information, log on to www.nssf.org.

  • 59 thoughts on “Washington Post Seems to Believe ISIS Propaganda on Buying Guns in U.S.

    1. @vanns40 @WildBill et al.
      Gentleman this is your admin speaking. We at the office of Ammoland are in receipt of a complaint that you boys have been feeding the trolls. I want you boys to be nice and treat people fairly especially “Jamie” as he feels the need to get admin assistance to ban your comments because you have been “razzel dazzling” him with your facts and rational arguments and “Jamie” needs a safe space now. So please boys show everyone here at Ammoland that you can play nice in the sandbox regardless of others political views, nevermind how they seem to lack any fact or rational. Bless his heart, now boys we want you to play nice.
      Your admin Brian

      p.s. And ‘Jamie” says you guys are a bunch of big meanies

      1. Thanks Brian. While I did not reply to Jamie, here or at any other topic thus far, I have been on a few other rows with certain individuals where I have unfairly used and hammered home common sense, factual evidence, and history lessons with extreme Prejudice. I plead guilty to having had many evenings laughing in complete and unrepentant mirth while witnessing multiple individuals refuse to put down their shovels as they dug their holes deeper and deeper. There are thousands of hairs that lost their lives as they were ripped out by their roots in the prime of their existence due to my wanton disregard as I shattered the fragile fantasy worlds of several individuals, and not just some here on Ammoland.

        From now on, I will make a concerted effort to “Play nice”, though I cannot promise to abandon facts and rational arguments as those are 100% addicting. In fact, someone told me I should take a class to help me overcome that addiction recently, but I’m not sure I can justify the waste of money. After all, that is money I can use at a Gun show where all these Private Sellers hang around.

        God Bless

        Sincerely,
        A really Big Meanie

      2. @Brian, I reviewed my comments to jaime, and thought that I had been most diplomatic. But you are the boss, and we all will redouble our efforts to say something nice or not say anything at all. Playing nice, here, Roger. Sierra 7 Bravo 10. Out.

    2. The WaPo is not even fit to be a stinking dead fish wrapper or a doggy poop scooper.
      FACT IS that very very few if ANY thugs buy their forearms at a “Gun Show” and the same applies to terrorists; the liberal anti-gun, anti SECOND AMENDMENT morons have yet to present ANY evidence to the contrary.

      1. Can’t use it to line a cat litter box either. The cat just acts disgusted and won’t use it. Same effect with the NY Times.

      1. How about not

        Linking to terror propaganda actually against terms on most comment sections like this

        And how about you get CIA give up thier sources so might beleive what they say

        If you want it not hard to find on search engines

        1. @Jamie, Don’t be so defensive. We are just trying to communicate with you. If English is your first language, then my apologies. As to your ISIS links we just wanted to read the same ones as you rather than some thing different. I hardly think that the CIA is going to share link info with me. I can hear them laughing, already.

    3. FYI – It is already a federal legal requirement, that any private seller engage in “due diligence’ to the best of his ability, to verify that the buyer he to whom he sells is not a “prohibited person,” and that (s)he is a legal resident of the state in which the sale takes place, etc. No background check, per se, is required, probably largely because such a check could not be performed by a citizen without an FFL anyhow. The NICS system is not open to the public at large.
      Is it possible for someone who is a prohibited person, a terrorist, etc., to buy a gun illegally from a private seller – sure – it’s POSSIBLE. It so rarely occurs though, that it seems the private sellers may be doing a pretty good job of “due diligence,” otherwise they’d be a bigger source of the guns felons acquire illegally. Also, most of the terrorists we have dealt with, like the Pulse Nightclub shooter, were able to pass the NICS checks and acquire their firearms legally, because they lack any record of prior crime.
      As for gun shows being kind of lax about the rules-none of the ones I attend regularly fit that description. In fact, a few years ago, I remember an incident occurring at one of the monthly gun shows in my city, that resulted in the apprehension of a “straw buyer” (who was not only turned in by a mixture of both patrons and dealers at the show, several of whom reported his behavior to the police providing security), but he even got a little “roughed up” in the process of their holding him for police when he tried to leave before the cops could get him. It really stuck in my mind because he ultimately turned out to be an undercover ATF agent. You may also remember that the FFL dealer who provided the guns for the ATF’s “Fast and Furious” debacle, actually notified the ATF of a suspected “straw buyer” and was told by THEM to go ahead and sell him the guns he wanted. The DEALER was both honest and alert to nefarious activity. In my experience, that is generally the case with both dealers and private sellers I know.

      1. GREAT story about the spook FBI agent trying to “illegally” buy guns and not only getting foiled and captured, but outed then roughted up!!! Perfect!!! Trying to entrap dealers at a gun show, getting “made”, then dealt with by both sellers and patrons!! Doesn’t get more rich than that. Nice work.

        The saddest part of the Fast and Furious debacle was the few honest FFL’s who, in spite of getting the OK from BATF for obviously rotten sales to “proceed”, some who refused were later destroyed by escessive “law enforcement” action by BATF…. later entrapment schemes, false accusations, trumped up charges, cancelling their FFL, criminal charges.. I am remembering one New Mexico family, I believe it was, name is Reed or Reese, something like that. They lost nearly everything because they refused to make obvious straw sales when BATF OK’s them…. so BATF “inspected” until they “found” some “irregularities”, then charged them criminally. the key “evidence” was a straw sale to a “customer” who had all the paperwork in order, passed the BGC, but was “prohibited”…. the “buyer” had lied on his forms, FFL had no proof othewise, got the Proceed code and made the sale. In court, the Feds claimed “they SHOULD have known…….” despite all the legal requirements being met. So, even when all the duckies are standing in perfect formation, BATF can still destroy those whom they haev targetted.

    4. I normally don’t comment. But two things strike me here, and the half truths are as bad as out and out lying.

      1. Liberals think that a AR-15 is a fully automatic weapon, and can’t understand why anyone would need one. I have tried to explain to my liberal relatives that those are not automatic weapons, but rather semi-automatic, etc. etc.. So the press you talk about works to those who are inclined to listen to it.

      2. The author here states, most gun shows require individuals to require background checks, but who checks that? In my local shows, I bet you that I could walk out with just showing my Carry Permit. Which in my state is an easily copied piece of paper with no photo and nothing that states I can’t alter it copy it etc.. So that’s not a viable alternative, yet you can read for sale articles on the internet that state must show CCP. That’s not a background check really.

      While I understand that the WaPo was out of hand here, and the author likely has never shot a gun in his or her life, that doesn’t excuse personal responsibility to do background checks on those that you sell to as an individual. After all we are all about personal responsibility. So let’s place that on ourselves as well. That’s not giving an inch to the left, that’s being proactive and a good citizen.

      Fyi I totally believe in the 2nd amendment and the 1st as well as all the others. They are an absolute, if people want to change what they say, then they need to mount the effort to repeal or amend an amendment not in the courts. But I also believe that much like a prudent person would not yell fire in a crowded theater for the “fun” of it, I also believe that that same common sense needs to be used when selling your guns on the open market. Or perhaps it would be better to just let the FFL process it for you.

      1. There are strict requirements for the qualifications for and format of a CCW permit before a “dealer” can accept it in lieu of a background check. Ohio, my home state, just upgraded their permitting process to this end. But, even with that the dealer is still required to have the customer fill out the required form; the dealer just doesn’t need to run buyers through the NICS system if they have a qualifying CCW permit. I just went through this process, with my recently renewed Ohio permit, for the purchase of a CZ .22LR and it was a much easier and faster process.

        1. then in south dakota you show the permit and no 4473 required

          not all states do things exactly the same or else new york and california insanity would run amok all over nebraska

          1. jamie, Just calm down. No one here is biting you in the kiester. I think English not the language that you grew up with and the gap is not quite bridged. You are jumping to conclusions about arguments that we are not making.

            1. Nope. You are jumping to conclusions

              When people telling you say things never actually said not hard to see troll starting fights

              And the English as not my language is jumping to conclusions

              Not all people is English professors and how about little thing called auto correct forcing strange things or else it changes your whole comment

          2. Interesting. The form 4473 is a FEDERAL requirement, so I don’t see how any state can bypass it. The state issued CCW licenses on the other hand vary widely, and some can be used as ID (the TX License to Carry, for example, is a state issued ID card similar to a driver’s license, complete with photo, and is allowable official ID for various things, including voting). Since those with a state issued CCW permit are typically being constantly monitored by the NICS system, the fact of the CCW being still “in effect” makes a NICS check superfluous, and the feds consider that a reasonable rationale for forgoing the online NICS check. Whether or not the CCW permit itself is considered a valid ID is another question altogether. I can easily see a state not controlling their CCW permits per se, well enough to allow their use as formal ID, but if one IDs oneself with a driver’s license and then shows a current CCW license, I’d think that would justify skipping the federally required NICS check. I don’t see any legal way to skip doing a form 4473 for the feds though.

            1. States can get permission for permit holders to use check already done when get the permit as your check each and every time

              South Dakota works this way

              Show valid permit and cash on counter and out you go with the gun

            2. Jamie has no idea what he’s talking about when he says “show valid permit and cash on the counter and out the door you go”. If it’s a license’s firearms dealer you MUST fill out a 4473, that’s Federal Law. There is no way for a State to bypass it. And Jamie, please name me one gun store where you can do that, in South Dakota or anywhere else. Name them right here, right now. No more BS, no more I don’t understand this or that. Name them now or just admit you’re blowing smoke.

    5. So what is it people don’t understand about liberals like the WaPo telling lies and doing whatever dishonest thing they can think of to persuade the ignorant? The only problem with most gun control laws is they only work with the law-abiding. Assault, robbery and murder are and have been against the law for a long time. That does not seem to prevent criminals from repeated offenses – so how are gun control laws going to prevent criminals from using firearms illegally? Background checks and gun-free zones for example? If guns are bad, why to wealthy people and politicians (potentially wealthy people) have bodyguards with guns? Because they are more deserving than the non-wealthy? Don’t believe me, believe the crime reports from Chicago. You can bet your butt that the politicians have guns and armed bodyguards, lots of gun control laws and look at the murder, assault and robbery statistics.

      1. You sir are absolutely correct. Only wish that logic could get through all the brainwashed liberals. It is aggravating that facts and logic are outweighed by emotion and entitlement.

      2. Yup. The alledged shooter at the Newtown school debacle, as reported, had committed somewhere between 20 and 40 federal and state felonies iin the time period AFTER he murdered his Mother and the time he broke into the school, BEFORE he alledgedly shot anyone inside. No laws stopped him, per the commonly believed story. (yes, I’m hedging my statements, as I am not convinced it really happened, or certainly not the way THEY say it did, but that is beside the point. The story, AS TOLD, has him committing all those felonies, violations of gun laws on the books, and apart from any of the alledged murders.

      3. facts and logic

        my facts about what isis says comes direct from isis not some liberal rag or some blog

        know the enemy beat the enemy — reading their tactics training stuff helps do that

    6. Just saw an outlandish recital of liberal anti-gun talking points that go along with the absurdity of this newspaper article. It was on the network crime drama “Training Day”. The premise was that you can easily go into a licensed gun shop and buy gobs of automatic weapons, military-grade armament, grenades and explosives. Bloomberg’s shills could not have done a better job lying to viewers. Needless to say, that will be the last time I watch this propaganda show.

      1. What do you expect from hollyweird? There are a number of shows That portray gun shops in the same light. There was one show that showed a criminal going into a gun shop and coming out with a laws rocket launcher and half a dozen rockets to go with it, these are the types of shows that the bloombug think is are true!!!!!!

      2. @Cal and all else: That is why I think that all movie producers, and video games should be held to using what is legal on the streets to john q public especially in California . One exception might be something actually depicting combat relating to actual military. We should all start a letter campaign to our legislatures demanding a law to that effect.

    7. Every seller of weapons registered at EVERY gun show, that go BANG, in the State of Maryland – – – MUST run a back ground check.

      1. not all states have the laws of maryland or washington

        fine for you to say what happens there but what happens in maryland not required to happen in like iowa

        1. @jamie, Yes, I can see it now, legions of ISIS operatives, disguised as Iowigian farm boys, combing the state of Iowa buying guns from Iowigian grandpas selling an odd assortment of hunting rifles and obsolete target pistols, all for the logistical support of ISIS in Syria. Can’t you find something more normal to obsess about? They should be putting the Jackalope on the Endangered Species ya know!

          1. how did you get to this from the fact of iowa simply not have the same laws as ohio

            oh right you got to go off on a wild not related posting just to not admit iowa not using the ohio law books so you are exactly right that when ohio passes a law then every other place in the world got to follow that law now too

            not

            1. I just picked Iowa as an example. Don’t get wrapped to tight, hamie. You can substitute Indiana or Nebraska if you want.

            2. And never said it was farm boys from any place being Isis

              How about little thing like radical mosque sends couple people to buy from some private seller in some other state where laws from California not exist

            3. Think you started responding to my comments to a person already got deleted

              Vann40 had bunch of idiotic things as reply to you but aimed at me

            4. Jamie: If they go to a State to buy and they’re not a resident of that State that’s illegal. You’ve made our point for us! If you’re a criminal you’re willing to break any laws to accomplish your goal. Private sellers that I’m aware of check to make sure that the person they are selling to is a resident of their State.

            5. Thanks again vanns

              You take simple correcting what the article uses as supposed facts and try and make it a fight about who is a criminal and what criminals do

              You get things way off topic and of course you know all

              Tell me if should like pizza or macaroni and if none then tell me exactly what to like and what to hate since you know all there is and ever will be

              Bye troll

            6. And no, Jamie, I responded directly to you. The fact that you couldn’t make the connection isn’t my fault. And like Bill I doubt that spell check is to blame for the garbled syntax.

          2. and by the way your idea of sending obsolete hunting rifles to syria is a nice try

            iowa people is more than brain dead out of it hicks

            iowa and many other states have many different kinds people

            yes some have the handed down duck gun but others have all kinds of modern stuff

            and no not about sending to syria or else things like ohio state attack would not happen if simply trying supply the syrian fighters

            nice try at trolling

    8. this writer and washington post misses the point of what isis was saying — actually do get copies of their stuff every month and if read whole thing it was about finding a private person not doing checks and buy from them

      the actual terror planning article from isis has things both washington post and this writer not includes making me think they never bothered reading from original source

      1. by the way isis is technically correct on the private dealer at a gun show thing since even the writer of this article admits to the word many for shows requiring private people do checks but not all shows do

        1. There are no “private dealers”. Or, if you sell your car privately, at a swap meet or car show, are you a private dealer? Stop with the ridiculous terms that come straight out of the Mad Mommies play book.

          1. wrong. ALL sellers with a table at a gun show are dealers, even if they only deal in pemmican or books. You KNOW what the term means…. why throw rocks?

            1. @Tionico, Brother, I am not so sure about that. People that sell a gun out of their private collection are not considered dealers by the BATFE. Oblabla was trying to get that changed to if a person sold more than one per year out of their private collection, then that person would be considered by BATFE to be a dealer. But that effort failed. Correct me if I am wrong.

            2. We are not talking about books, we are referring, specifically, to firearms and there is a very specific definition, according to ATF, regarding what constitutes a “dealer” and what does not. Look it up under 27CFR.

          2. any show like a gun show or swap meet you are called a dealer and not matter if you filed corporation papers or just some schmuck cleaning out the garage

            1. @jamie, No that is clearly wrong. Not everyone is a dealer. The BATFE definition is “Dealer. Any person engaged in the business of selling firearms at wholesale or retail; any person engaged in the business of repairing firearms or of making or fitting special barrels, stocks, or trigger mechanisms to firearms; or any person who is a pawnbroker. The term shall include any person who engages in such business or occupation on a part-time basis.”

        2. @jamie, so that is the next anti-Second Amendment Civil Rights campaign: use the fear of ISIS and some disinformation to convince the uninformed useful idiots to demand more gun control.

          1. actually do read the stuff directly from isis

            the terror training article does say find private person not doing checks and buy from them

            got this direct from isis training stuff just issued 3 days ago

            1. @jamie, how is it that you are in contact with ISIS to obtain their “terror training articles”?

            2. @wild bill

              they have sites they post stuff on and is open to the public

              just go and read

            3. by the way —

              to beat the enemy got to know the enemy

              news articles pushing author agendas not ever going be able do that

            4. So? I fail to see your point except that those who are willing to violate one law will generally violate any law to obtain what they want. That’s what the criminal element does. Or are you trying to suggest that it’s worth it to force every law abiding citizen to prove that he IS exactly that before he can purchase an inanimate object in the hopes of deterring an infinitesimal number of criminals who may attempt to circumvent the law? If so, then why stop with gun sales? Why not have criminal background checks before you can buy a truck, car, machete? All have been used by terrorists and with pretty good success. Where would you have infringement on the individual’s rights stop? Or is there no limit in the search for security?

            5. @vanns

              nice try trying and twist my words

              trying to correct the author and washington post made up facts no way supports more laws or makes excuses for crimes or even makes the point you try and make my words be about

              try staying with the facts and not read the micro printing between the lines that simply not exist

              when they get the facts wrong yes got to correct their version of so called facts and is about nothing else no matter how hard you try

            6. I didn’t “twist” your words at all nor did I reference the Wash. Post article. I correctly quoted you, completely and in context. You simply wanted to conflate being a private seller of firearms and having a table at a show with selling books at the same show and call them both “dealers”. It is as ridiculous as it sounds. Following your logic I carried it one step further. If you don’t like the line the logic follows don’t make the comparisons.

            7. Hey vanns

              How about you put down the vodka and take a reading class

              You saying things was said that never was is twisting people’s words

              no more fighting you

              Yes the sky does rain purple candy flavored as chocolate if you say so

            8. Vanns

              You never quoted exactly and in context

              Then again yes the sky does rain purple candy in chocolate flavor if you say so

              No more fighting. Any person wanting truth can compare reality and your fantasy land

          2. there is sites they post on and is open to public

            just takes a go and read hour and other intelligence operations

            same ways military gets intelligence to plan the next battle

    Leave a Comment 59 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *