Gun Sale conviction...how does this make sense?

BlueHaya

I'm outta here!!!!
Donating Member
Registered
FEDS CONVICT TEXAN FOR SELLING A GUN TO ILLEGAL ALIEN WITH TEXAS DRIVERS LICENSE

In Federal District Court on July 20, 2010, the ATF won a conviction from an Austin jury that defies logic and reason. In a trial before Federal Judge Sam Sparks, government lawyers conceded Texas resident Paul Copeland did not know his buyer was an illegal alien, but the jury they should convict him anyway because he "had reasonable cause to believe" he was selling to an illegal alien because the two men and a boy who were present at his table at the time of the sale: 1) were Hispanic, 2) spoke Spanish, and 3) wore cowboy clothing. And the jury did as asked. Assistant U.S. Attorney Jennifer Freel acted as lead prosecutor in the case.

The firearm transaction at issue occurred on January 16, 2010, at a gun show at the North Austin Events Center , at 10601 N. Lamar Blvd. , in Austin , Texas . Undercover ATF agents followed Mr. Huerta, his son, and another Hispanic male, Hipolito Aviles, around the "Texas Gun show" that day, and claimed to observe Huertas transaction. Austin P.D. used Copelands case as the reason to close down the gun show, leading to a protest by Austin residents in front of APD headquarters on January 25.

Mr. Copeland is a 56 year old Cedar Creek resident and Vietnam veteran who liked to buy, sell, and trade firearms as a hobby. On January 16, however, he had the misfortune to sell a handgun to Leonel Huerta Sr., who spoke both English and Spanish. Huerta Sr. negotiated his purchase from Copeland in English, showing Copeland his Texas Drivers License. At Copelands trial Huerta admitted on the witness stand, that he is in the country illegally, (Huerta Sr. had previously admitted this fact to Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) Special Agent Leo Buentello). ATF Agent Shawn Kang claimed he saw Huerta later hand off the gun to Aviles . Despite these admissions, Huerta Sr. was never arrested, charged, or deported. Instead, his presence at the gun show was used to entrap an American citizen into an unwitting violation of a federal gun control law. Huerta Sr., who is a resident of the City of Austin, appeared as a witness at the trial, admitted he was in the country illegally before federal prosecutors and a federal judge, yet he was allowed to leave the courtroom under his own power. To date Huerta Sr. has not been prosecuted for his purchase, possession, or disposition of the handgun he bought from Copeland, while Copeland is now a convicted felon.

"Instead of busting the illegal alien for buying, they bust the citizen for selling," commented Paul Velte, attorney and founder of Peaceable Texans for Firearms Rights, a gun-owners' rights advocacy group from Austin . Velte asked, "who was in a better position to know the buyers immigration status, the buyer or the seller?" He also said, "What happened to Paul Copeland should enrage all Americans. The Federal Government is using illegal aliens to entrap citizens lawfully exercising their right to sell firearms. The illegal alien walks free, but the citizen gets convicted. The same government charged with controlling immigration is the one using illegal immigrants to attack its own citizens. Does this make any sense? It makes no sense unless the purpose is to discourage attendance at gun shows and frighten citizens from selling their firearms to other citizens."

Velte pointed out that "There is no way for a citizen to know who is here legally or not. In fact, under Austins sanctuary city policy, not even the police officer at the door of the gun show was allowed to ask a persons immigration status, yet the average Texan inside the show is expected to assume that a person standing before them with a Texas drivers license is in the country illegally just because they look Mexican and speak Spanish." Velte noted that the federal governments lawsuit against Arizona was based on that very type of conduct: Concluding someone could be here illegally based on their looks or their language. Velte said gun owners in his group are outraged, and they want to know:

Why is the illegal alien who purchased the gun, Leonel Huerta Sr., still living in Austin ?
Why does he still have a Texas Drivers license?
Why is ATF using illegal aliens to set up and convict American citizens?
What has he been promised for his cooperation?
Why has he not been prosecuted? He committed three distinct crimes: he purchased a firearm knowing he was an illegal alien, he possessed the firearm, and he transferred the handgun to another illegal alien (Hippolito Aviles, who was convicted and given time served on June 30, 2010).
Why has Huerta Sr. not been deported?
Judge Sparks sentenced Copeland on August 27 to six months confinement and 24 months of probation, and called Copeland "a liar" for not admitting guilt. ATF confiscated Copelands entire gun collection and initiated forfeiture proceedings. Copeland was also fired from his job due to the indictment, and he would have lost his home to foreclosure, if not for his family stepping in to pay his mortgage while he serves his sentence.




More BS:rulez:
Gun show owner, police at odds over recommendations
 
I am finding nothing when searching for this case in any reputable sites. No legal dockets, no case information, no trial dates, nothing. Odd?
 
Last edited:
As is the case so often, there is more to the story than what was written above.

http://www.keepandshare.com/doc/221...rruled-pdf-september-5-2010-1-15-pm-599k?da=y

Page 2 should quell any concerns. He was an independent firearms dealer (unlicensed) that refused to obey a law that required all gun sales at this particular show to be run through a licensed firearms dealer so that they may issue a background check. He flaunted the law and sold the gun anyway, no background check.
 
In Tennessee, it's not illegal to sell a gun to another individual. If that's the law in TX and he was selling as a dealer, then the conviction stands. The part I want to know is, why was the buyer not prosecuted for fraud, gun laws and deported for being an illegal?
 
There is no Texas Law (that I am aware of) making it illegal for a person to sell a gun to another person. The "rule" was put in place by the promoter after pressure from APD and ATF....it is not a law.

They convicted him based on this....United States Code: Title 18,922. Unlawful acts | LII / Legal Information Institute

So any one selling a gun to another person in a court of law can be considered acting as a "dealer"?


The sale is what is done at many Gun Shows. They are not just for retailers.

If I have to pay an entrance fee.....is the area "public" or "private"?

This is itimidation.

Like Skydiver says.....what about the illegal?
 
Actually I'm not convinced that he wasn't. The court docket that I linked to would have no impact on the criminal proceedings of the buyer.

But yes, this law was enacted specifically due to the prevalence of individual sales to illegals at this particular venue. They simply created a law that said at this event, you cannot make such a sale. I do not believe this affected individual sales outside of the event location.
 
The seller was suppose to know the guys were "Illegal" based on them being hispanic and speaking spanish........

The APD and ATF have no power to enact laws.........
 
I stand corrected regarding the rule/law. However, according to the docket, the seller witnessed the buyer hand the gun to another individual. He then insisted that the original buyer retain the gun. To me, that warrants some sort of understanding that the gun was not being purchased legally. At some point you have to take responsibility for your actions.

Also, I never suggested that the ATF created a law, I assumed (incorrectly) that a legislative body created the law.
 
Last edited:
I wonder what the proceedings would be on a liquor sale to a person, with an underaged person standing next to them, who hands the beer to the underaged person as they walk out of a store? Would it be up to the clerk to chase them down and get the liquor back?.....or is that the task of law enforcement? Could they charge the clerk with sale to a minor?..or should the adult be charged with contributing?

just a hypothetical comparison...
 
The U.S. government is well aware of the illegal immigration problem. When will they take corporate responsibility for their failure to act and protect the American people. This whole situation stinks.:flush:

I stand corrected regarding the rule/law. However, according to the docket, the seller witnessed the buyer hand the gun to another individual. He then insisted that the original buyer retain the gun. To me, that warrants some sort of understanding that the gun was not being purchased legally. At some point you have to take responsibility for your actions.

Also, I never suggested that the ATF created a law, I assumed (incorrectly) that a legislative body created the law.
 
Back
Top