Man detained after handing a gun to a janitor
 

This story makes two points.

A) Screen all the airport employees.
B) Once again, proving the TSA will beat its chest about anything in airport "security."

I'm not sure that it makes either of those points. The janitor turned it in so wasn't a threat. Also, there's nothing in the story about the TSA beating its chest.

I am curious, though, about the charge of selling the gun. It sounds like he didn't want to buy the case so he just gave the gun to someone who wasn't traveling. If, as stated, he gave it to the janitor for free, how do you charge someone with selling? Is it illegal to give someone a gun? As a gift? I honestly don't know and am interested to find out.

TSAers on this board tell us many times that we'd be surprised to see how many guns are caught at checkpoints....still, to this day. What makes this story so special?

TSA likes to keep everything quiet until it wants to beat its chest on its "security." THAT is the PR-side that I point out.

As for the janitor thing (screening airport employees). If you follow the events in the article closely, you'll read the guy didn't get through the checkpoint until dumping the gun.

He gave the gun to the janitor outside the "secure" area. It has been said in this forum before that janitors aren't even screened while entering the "secure" area. While we were fortunate in having a forthright janitor in this situation, it still calls for full airport employee screening.

This guy was an idiot. Give a gun to a stranger? That's what the main problem was.

His flight was SO important that he couldn't buy a case, and had to give the gun away?

You have to wonder about the judgement of someone like that.

With that said, it really didn't sound like he broke any specific laws. justhere has some very good points.

I don't see how federal charges could be placed, at least in regards to the transferring or "sale" of the weapon. He's stupid for giving away an expensive revolver like that. I'm assuming the .480 is a Redhawk. Those don't come cheap.

I'm not sure this is correct. If the janitor enters the terminal they are checked. If they don't they may not be. I think employees that are in the sterile area yet not entering the terminal generally aren't screened. If they enter through the terminal entrance they are screened. The problem would be those who enter somewhere else other than the terminal yet have access to the terminal via jetbridge doors.

Very interesting....

I can say that in the early 70's, I covered a trial in New York State where a man was convicted of selling drugs even though he had just given them away.

Nothing really, except that in this case the guy decided just to give his gun away.

I'm certainly not a defender of the TSA but the story is not about the TSA or its security. There's nothing in the story that even insinuates that this story came from the TSA.

So the checkpoint did what it's supposed to do??? Not sure what your point is here.

Well that's nothing new. I've stated before that the current screening is really only an incovenience to the good guys and gives some travelers "warm and fuzzies". There are several ways to get prohibited items into the secure area. There was nothing fortunate about this. If the janitor was a bad guy, he'd have brought something to work a long time ago.

Things that make you go "hmmmmmmmmmmm".

Probably made him feel like a dope for not taking money then. :D

As an illegal substance under virtually all conditions, selling or, more accurately distributing drugs is always illegal.

To the extent that there may be state or local laws prohibiting transfer of ownership of handgun without waiting period or registration, etc. then that may be the rationale for charging the fellow with something.

I see that the story says the the charge was "selling" but I wonder exactly how the offense is described in the statute.

One does not have to actually "sell" the gun to be guilty of the crime. The title they gave this crime is rather misleading. :eek:

Section 265.11 Criminal sale of a firearm in the third degree.
A person is guilty of criminal sale of a firearm in the third degree when such person is not authorized pursuant to law to possess a firearm and such person unlawfully either:
(1) sells, exchanges, gives or disposes of a firearm or large capacity ammunition feeding device to another person; or
(2) possesses a firearm with the intent to sell it.

Criminal sale of a firearm in the third degree is a class D felony.
http://wings.buffalo.edu/law/bclc/web/NewYork/ny3(b).htm