Leftist Writer Tries To Buy AR15, GETS DENIED FOR VIOLENT PAST!

NeilSteinbergNeil Steinberg, writer for the Chicago Sun Times, saw how easy it was for other journalists to waltz into a gun shop and walk out with a child slaughtering, full auto, death machine, exactly like the one that the Navy Marine Rangers use (leftist talk there), so he decided to try it Des Plaines, Illinois. Only this didn’t quite go according to plan.

In addition to a mandatory 24 hour waiting period in Illinois, it turns out Mr. Steinberg has a troubled past of alcohol abuse and domestic violence, so he was denied the sale.

But before he got that far, he was first faced with the same hurdles that other potential gun buyers are faced with; contradictory and unclear gun laws. As he wrote:

I had trouble even figuring out whether bringing an assault rifle into Chicago is legal. The Internet was contradictory. The Chicago corporation counsel’s office punted me on to that black hole of silence, Bill McCaffrey. I found that Illinois has a 24-hour waiting period between buying and taking possession of a gun. Unearthing that fact alone made the exercise seem worthwhile. I was learning something.

After chatting with one of the salesman at Maxon Shooters Supply about the different AR’s and options, Steinberg is asked to show his FOID card, which is, apparently, some kind of Star Of David for gun buyers in Illinois. He decided on a Smith & Wesson M&P15 Sport, one of the lower end models that lacks a lot of the features and quality of a standard AR.

Steinberg tosses in the normal anti rhetoric with:

Driving to Maxon’s, the whole gun debate clarified in bold relief. There is the danger of the gun. itself. And there is the danger the gun protects you from. Another divide. Which danger you feel is greater decides which side of the divide you live on.

Being fact-based I know, you buy a gun, the person you are most likely to shoot, statistically, is yourself. And your family. More pre-schoolers are killed by guns than are police officers. Nor do I need the sense of security, false though it may be, that guns bring. I live in Northbrook, where criminal danger is remote. My boys laugh at us for locking the doors. I don’t plan on keeping this gun a second longer than I have to for this column.

The gun shop knew who he was.

When it came time to make the purchase, Rob, the clerk with the tattoos, handed me over to Mike, who gave his name shaking my hand, I gave mine. “The writer?” he said. If I wanted to lie as part of my job, I’d have gone into public relations. “Yes,” I said, explaining that I plan to buy the gun, shoot at their range, then give it to the police. He suggested I sell it back to them instead and I heartily agreed. Economical. If they would let me photograph myself with it there, the gun need never leave the store.

Steinberg filled out the background check paperwork, which, according the most hysterical anti gunners, doesn’t exist because you can buy these M47’s with no background check (leftist impression again).

A reporter in Philadelphia bought an assault rifle in seven minutes; 40 percent of gun transactions in the U.S. have no background checks. Here, I had paperwork. A federal form asking, was I an illegal alien? No. Was I a fugitive? Again no. Had I ever been convicted on charges of domestic abuse? No. Handed over my credit card: $842.50. Another $40 for the instructor to acquaint me with the gun the next day.

Then came startling news:

At 5:13 Sarah from Maxon called. They were canceling my sale and refunding my money. No gun for you. I called back. Why? “I don’t have to tell you,” she said. I knew that, but was curious. I wasn’t rejected by the government? No. So what is it? “I’m not at liberty,” she said.

Gun dealers do have the right to refuse sales to anyone, usually exercised for people who seem to be straw purchasers. I told her I assume they wouldn’t sell me a gun because I’m a reporter. She denied it. But hating the media is right behind hating the government as a pastime for many gun owners. They damn you for being ignorant then hide when you try to find out.

A few hours later, Maxon sent the newspaper a lengthy statement, the key part being: “it was uncovered that Mr. Steinberg has an admitted history of alcohol abuse, and a charge for domestic battery involving his wife.”

He goes on to cry about being singled out, thinking that the same policies don’t apply to everyone else, then blaming the EVIL, SHADY GUN INDUSTRY for everything:

Well, didn’t see that coming. Were that same standard applied to the American public, there would be a whole lot fewer guns sold. Beside, they knew I planned to immediately sell it back to them.

OK, Maxon has had its chance to offer their reason.

Now I’ll state what I believe the real reason is: Gun manufacturers and the stores that sell them make their money in the dark. Congress, which has so much trouble passing the most basic gun laws, passed a law making it illegal for the federal government to fund research into gun violence. Except for the week or two after massacres, the public covers its eyes. Would-be terrorists can buy guns. Insane people can buy guns. But reporters . . . that’s a different story. Gun makers avoid publicity because the truth is this: they sell tools of death to frightened people and make a fortune doing so. They shun attention because they know, if we saw clearly what is happening in our country, we’d demand change.

H/T to This Ain’t Hell, who suspects that the rag intentionally sent their violent reporter to do this job because they could turn around and scream “LOOK HOW IT EASY IT WAS FOR A KNOWN WIFE BEATER AND ALCOHOLIC TO GET A DEATH MACHINE!”

Comments

  1. GTO says

    I hope the Feds prosecute this idiot for making false statements on the 4473.Laugh that off you drunk & wife beater. The FFL should have already reported him.

  2. silkworm19 says

    It is not newsworthy that this moron got rejected from legally buying a firearm because of his documented violent past, this is the way the law works. The real story is the unvetted and undocumented Syrian immigrants coming to this country and being given full Constitutional rights, including the 2nd Amendment, even though it’s likely many of them have violent pasts and should be rejected just like the reporter.

  3. says

    “Being fact-based I know, you buy a gun, the person you are most likely to shoot, statistically, is yourself.”
    Unfortunately for him, that “fact” came from a flawed study that was debunked decades ago.

  4. Anon. E Maus says

    “Were that same standard applied to the American public, there would be a whole lot fewer guns sold”

    The same standard IS applied to the American public you wife beating piece of shit.

    • GomeznSA says

      Yep – it not the tool that is used for good or ill, it is the person that wields it. Good luck to EVER getting anyone on the left admitting that though. Much easier to blame the tool so as to not have any aspect of personal accountability or responsibility for their actions.

  5. Stuck_in_Ca says

    “More pre-schoolers are killed by guns than are police officers.”

    Remove Chicago, Philidelphia, D.C., and Newark from the data pool and this statistic is no longer true. The only places gun violence thrives are liberal mecca’s of stupidity and denial.

  6. SUPER 68 IS DOWN says

    This reporter should be arrested and charged with lying on a federal document (BATFE 4473) as well as a prohibited individual trying to purchase a firearm

  7. Jeffery Rightmire says

    Nobody can buy an ASSAULT weapon with out special FEDERAL license. The are full auto, not semi-automatic like an AR-15 which is NOT an assault weapon. Jeeze get it right folks before you spew.

    • GomeznSA says

      Actually no one can buy an ‘assault weapon’ since it is a made up term. BTW it is not a “FEDERAL license” – it is a tax stamp. I suspect most of us got what you were trying to say but never forget that the antis will seize on each and every time we get something even the least bit wrong. 😉

      • SidneyGlick says

        The term “Assault Weapon” was assigned to some machine guns by the BATF believe
        it or not. Jeffery Rightmire you are correct, you have to get a tax stamp to purchase a
        machine gun. And unless you have purchased a machine gun, you ain’t seen a
        background check pal.

        • Aparition42 says

          Tax stamp, permission of local head of LEO, MASSIVELY invasive background check, specially licensed firearms dealer to broker the deal, oh and the little matter of LOADS OF MONEY. Because you have to pay every step of the way, and it’s illegal to possess, sell, or transfer any select-fire or fully automatic firearm that wasn’t already manufactured and legally owned prior to 19 May 1986. Fixed supply and growing demand has priced them out of the hands of the vast majority of Americans.

          Oh, and when they say “possess”, they mean it. Don’t get caught holding one your buddy owns either without filling out all the proper forms.
          No select-fire rifle or carbine currently in use by the U.S. military is legal in the hands of a civilian.

    • PistolPackinCityCouncilor says

      Not true Jeffery. ANYONE who can lawfully buy a gun can buy a BATF transfer stamp to lawfully purchase a full auto or other Class III weapon. It takes the signed permission slip of a city police chief or a county sheriff & a full set of finger prints, then $200 for each stamp & a 3-6 month waiting period.

  8. AgentExeider says

    So…wait a second, wait a second… The system actually worked and Neil Steinberg is even more pissed about it. Seriously? At what point do we admit to ourselves Neil that your pushing an agenda.

    • TJ says

      My thought exactly. He fails a background check with good reason (background checks that he and his ilk can’t shut up about), and then he starts screaming conspiracy. Progressive logic at its best.

      Never mind that Mr. Pacifist beats on women.

        • TJ says

          You know, I don’t. On the one hand, I look at him and think, “what woman would have him?” On the other hand, he seems too wimpy to take on a guy. I’m stumped and just don’t care enough to look up his bio. I’m just gonna assume his partner is as female as Moochell and let it go at that.

    • Cornbread_Noah says

      I bet he’s having a breakdown at the Wife Beaters Anonymous meeting tonight. He’ll probably get drunk, beat up someone’s granny then go apply for another gun.

    • Aparition42 says

      Of course he’s angry. He had such a brilliant plan to show how unreasonably easy it is to purchase a firearm. He was probably going to throw in some shocking details about how awful it is to have to fire the thing at the range. Those jerks at the gun store ruined everything. One of them even had tattoos so you just know they’re terrible people with no value for human life. Then they had the audacity not to answer a question over the phone. Who cares if that’s standard procedure that all citizens have to deal with? Don’t they know reporters are supposed to get special privileges?

  9. Indiana Mike says

    Leftist garbage says a person is 22 times more likely to shoot themselves with their own gun than a miscreant. So, on a slow weekend in Chicago when gangbangers murder only 10 people, 220 people accidentally shoot themselves with their own gun?

    • Frdmftr says

      Just FYI, in case you don’t already know this: That bogus statistic was derived from the bogus studies published by a Dr. Kellerman when he worked for the CDC, and it is not true: You cannot accurate calculate the likelihood of something happening that has already happened, because the likelihood is then 100%. This is, in fact, the specific reason Congress passed laws defunding any firearm research conducted by the CDC. But doofuses like Michael Strickland use the garbage all the time, hoping their readers don’t know any better.

      • GomeznSA says

        IIRC the ‘original’ genesis for that figure came out of Seattle/King County several decades ago. Problem was they ‘neglected’ to acknowledge that it was based on suicide statistics – which as most folks know accounts for around 2/3 of the ‘gun deaths’ annually……………….

        • Aparition42 says

          Another little detail you won’t find on the front page is that “children” in those studies includes anyone under the age of twenty five.

      • Aparition42 says

        There’s that. There’s also the small point that “firearms related deaths” aren’t a disease. The CDC spends more than half its budget on “research” that has nothing to do with the agency’s sole reason for existence.

        Prime target for some of Trump’s “savings”. Force executive agencies to stick to their jobs and shut down all the propaganda arms of the DNC currently working in disguise as civil servants.

  10. Indiana Mike says

    As a Liberal Propagandist in good standing, Neil Steinberg ws shocked, SHOCKED, that any laws should apply to him. Doesn’t “the law” understand how Liberal, good and wise and superior is he? Because a Liberal, drunken wife beater, is a GOOD drunken wife beater.

    • therealguyfaux ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ says

      It wouldn’t surprise me (not an IL resident, so I can’t be sure of this) that the ID card costs a certain amount, and the requisite training (if any) costs a certain amount, and still guarantees you nothing, i.e., you can’t buy firearms without one, but having one doesn’t mean you CAN. It just means somebody made money off your dumb a$$.

    • DaBruinz says

      Seems to me that the police should be investigating him on how he acquired said FOID card. Pretty sure there is questions and background check that you have to pass. And lying on that is breaking the law..

      Did he break the law to get it the say way he broke the law by lying on the 4473?

  11. Howard Fortyfive says

    I’d like that dufus mofo to get 5 years at the WORST state joint Illinois has. Big man gets drunk then beats on his old lady. What a worthless piece of shit he is.

  12. TxPoor says

    Always thought of myself as a rebel, willing to get close to “the line” with law enforcement. Don’t think I have the guts to lie on my 4473… Federal prison doesn’t sound like a “fun adventure”… oh.. right.. leftist reporter.. nevermind.

  13. RJ says

    Yes, I’m sure he was denied because he is a reporter. They were just looking for a reason not to make money on selling the gun, and then having the opportunity to sell it again, and then get some free publicity for their shop. I think he must have been absent the day they taught investigative journalism in journalism school. It is very easy to find a list of gun laws and ordinances in various cities and states. It is also very easy to find out that someone who have a record of domestic violence will be denied in a background check every time.

    So, instead of writing a story about the truth, the background check did what the background check is supposed to do, he writes an article decrying the fact that the background check worked. This is why I have so much respect for the news media today.

    • Aparition42 says

      My wife studied journalism her first two years in college. They don’t teach “investigative journalism”; they teach propaganda 101. They’re not even subtle about it. She had an assignment about all the different synonyms for the word “said” that they could use to influence the readers’ perception of a quote.

  14. Bootsie ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ says

    “Gun manufacturers and the stores that sell them make their money in the dark.”

    What an idiot. There is no more transparent and regulated industry in America than the firearms industry. Sheetheel wife beating urinalist got his political agenda shoved up his tookus and is now whining because the laws work.

        • GRComments says

          Mike Royko didn’t care for crooked cops. He didn’t hate cops in general. Royko and Obama are totally different in their intent and actions.

          • VikVega!!! says

            Royko vilified the cops and sided with the thugs that were burning Gage Park to the ground. And he choose the violent demonstrators at the dem convention over the cops, too. He also sided with Daley when old man Daley refused to let the cops unionize.

            Royko was a cop hater, just like Obama.

    • sargeh says

      I worked on the news staff for the ST’s sister paper, the Chicago Daily News several years. I was surprised the Sun-Times had fallen this far down the gutter. They used to have an honorable staff. At most newspapers, they’d be looking for a new columnist and editor. This clown’s career has peaked.

  15. VikVega!!! says

    Now that Neil was stupid enough to try and embarrass this gun store in print, I hope they now tell the authorities that ol’ Neil lied on federal form 4473.

    Prosecute the libbie!

  16. Frdmftr says

    While I am enormously pleased that an anti-rights liberal goofball got his come-uppance — and was still arrogantly dumb enough to write about it — I would like to point out that it is because of the Marxist insurgency supported by the likes of him that we, the law-abiding people, have to put up with the flatly, flagrantly, EGREGIOUSLY illegal violations of our rights under the rule of law that entrapped him, to wit: None of the impairments to his right to purchase a firearm are legal: Background checks have never prevented a crime in the history of the illegal Brady Act that created them and were never intended to: They are intended to sucker citizens into asking government permission to exercise a right government has no lawful authority at any level to issue or deny. If you have to ask government permission to exercise a right, it is not a right; it is a revocable privilege.
    It also suckers the citizen into waiving his 4th Amendment right to be secure from interrogation or search in the absence of probable cause of wrongdoing, in exchange for permission (or denial) of a right.
    It also suckers the citizen into waiving his 5th Amendment right to be secure from the denial of any right without due process, i.e., a conviction of a criminal act in a Court of Law.
    It also suckers the citizen into waiving his legal right to be secure from having to waive a right in order to exercise a right.
    And it also sucker the citizen into waiving his 10th Amendment right to be secure from the federal exercise of power not delegated: The federal government is not delegated the authority to require permission or any of the rest of this crap to exercise a right. Indeed, the federal government doesn’t even have the authority to license firearm dealers.
    The point is, government thinks if you waive all these rights, you won’t have any left to claim when government revokes the permission it gave you, which it intends to do very, very soon.
    I recommend you all think about what you are going to do when that knock comes on your door.

  17. Brian Sullivan says

    In his article he quoted a “neighbor” as saying her brother had 100 guns because he was “afraid of other people with guns”.
    I wonder how well his Editor fact-checked THAT statement. My gut tells me that his “facts” and “quotes” are as trustworthy as Billly-boy Clinton alone with an intern.

    • SidneyGlick says

      If I had 100 guns, I would not be afraid of anybody. Regretfully, I only have 38 in my collection.
      Which BTW the Media would call an “Arsenal”!

    • Babylonandon says

      Not to mention THAT particular BROTHER probably had one or two guns because he was afraid of other people with guns … and 98 because he loved the beauty of well-made guns instead of collector’s plates with pictures of Elvis or 5 million dollar pieces of crap that call themselves “abstract art”.

  18. Supermom815 says

    “I reject your reality and substitute my own!” Am I the only one that remembers when they started denying firearms to anyone with a domestic violence conviction (including those who accepted a lesser conviction to avoid jail time) which included those convictions EX POST FACTO? (Which is unconstitutional but they did it anyway.) Does anyone remember some of the people that could no longer carry a gun? Law enforcement. It applied to them, twinkle toes, it applies to a liberal rag puke like you, too.

  19. icono1 says

    I’ve known of a few people that ‘got denied’ because of past domestic violence offences. So suck it up paper boy and welcome to the world that the rest of us live in.

        • Kook of the East says

          No it does not.
          FFL dealers are required to have you fill one out before transfer.
          If you were to find a private citizen there willing to sell you one, maybe. I know where I reside, ALL eligible transactions inside the show require the check.
          I can’t ever in 20 years of going to shows remember seeing a truly “private” individual with a table.

  20. AR_Libertarian says

    I must admit, I don’t agree with a misdemeanor domestic violence conviction (yes, I read the article, his was only a charge no conviction) invalidating one’s ability to purchase a firearm. A Felony conviction should be the standard. If you can’t buy a gun after a domestic violence conviction, then why are you still allowed to vote? One right is just as important as another. A felony assault would be reason. I’ve seen too many domestic violence cases where there was little to nothing there, but it still strips someone of their rights. (No, not me. My wife is to bad ass for me to screw with. Besides, she’s got her own gun. ;P)

    • anne says

      You made some good points.

      I read the article to mean that the gun shop had made the decision not to sell him the gun. Am I not reading this correctly? Kind of like the shop refusing to sell body armor to the Orlando shooter. Are you saying gun shops should not have the discretion?

      I’m late to this topic….sorry!

  21. says

    This dumb ass idiot. The gun store is honorable and he still blame games left and right and tries to spin it the “anti-gun leftist nut bag” way. Typical. Self righteous “journalist” hacking “news” story for chump change is actually a drunk, wife beater… of COURSE they think any other American is even worse. Sorry sack of filth.

  22. Cornbread_Noah says

    The only kind of gun that clown needs…is the one that some thug will pistol whip him with. Wimps and panty wearers shouldn’t be allowed to own firearms.

  23. TimeHasCome says

    As a writer for the Jewish Journal he spills gallons of ink over the Holocaust but yet can’t wait to yank the guns from our citizenry. Is he mad or just plain stupid?

  24. Cornbread_Noah says

    A not-so-quick check shows that 36 states use “domestic violence” as a disqualifier for purchasing a firearm…convicted or not.

    This guy looks like he could also use a healthy bowel movement.

  25. Hatetheignorant says

    Example of the Chicago Sun-Times being the bastion of misogynistic white male entitlement. It is obvious they knew, covered it up, and cared so little they did not think it would be an issue. They thought he was important enough that his wife should think his beatings were a gift from such a great journalist. People, the same rules do not apply to those who are part of the Chicago Obama Machine.

  26. BurmaShave2 says

    H/T to This Ain’t Hell, who suspects that the rag intentionally sent their violent reporter to do this job because they could turn around and scream “LOOK HOW IT EASY IT WAS FOR A KNOWN WIFE BEATER AND ALCOHOLIC TO GET A DEATH MACHINE!”

    EXCELLENT POINT! Fifty thumbs up

  27. Perplexed says

    Priceless! Alcohol abuse and domestic violence may be a resume enhancer for a democrat politician but it’s a bad thing when buying an assault weapon.

  28. SidneyGlick says

    I stand corrected.=============
    He didn’t lie on his application which asks if he was “convicted of a domestic violence misdemeanor” since he wasn’t convicted because he wiggled his way out of it. He also didn’t pop up on the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) check because he doesn’t have a conviction.

  29. moparjer says

    Neil Steinberg: I’m The The Victim Here

    “I am, after all, the most famous drunk in Chicago now,” he says. His claim to being the city’s most famous drunk stems from an incident in September 2005. It all happened so quickly, and yet it had been building to that moment for a long time. Late at night, Steinberg was arrested on a domestic-battery charge for striking his wife—for slapping her because she said she was afraid of him and she started to call 911. He was also charged with interfering with the reporting of a domestic battery—that happened when he ripped his kitchen phone off the wall and hurled it across the room. Steinberg was immediately placed on leave from his job.

  30. Rustynail says

    A writer with a drinking problem? Shirley you’re mistaken! A Leftist that always spews The Narrative; regardless of the facts? No way! A documented domestic abuser is virulently anti-gun? You got me on that one!

Leave a Reply