Welcome to LoudounTimes.com
Loudoun Times-Mirror

Manassas woman bought 31 handguns to resell for profit

A Manassas woman pleaded guilty Feb. 7 to purchasing 31 handguns from three Virginia gun shows to resell for profit.

Kimberly Yvette Dinkins, 44, pleaded guilty to dealing firearms without a license and faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison when she is sentenced May 3, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office.

The plea was accepted by U.S. District Judge Claude M. Hilton.

According to a statement of facts filed in court, Dinkins purchased 31 handguns on three consecutive weekends from Nov. 17 through Dec. 1, 2012. She purchased 13 handguns at a gun show in Chantilly, nine at a gun show in Richmond and nine at a gun show in Hampton. Dinkins was not a federally licensed dealer of firearms; however, she was unemployed and purchased the handguns with the intention of selling them for profit.

This investigation is being conducted by ATF’s Washington Field Division. Special Assistant U.S. Attorney L. Rush Atkinson and Virginia Assistant Attorney General and Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Marc J. Birnbaum are prosecuting the case on behalf of the United States.


Individuals buy and sell guns with little oversight from state and federal authorities.

Federally licensed firearms dealers are required to perform background checks on prospective buyers and keep detailed records, however, the federal law on gun purchases extends only to the first point of sale.

None of these restrictions apply under federal rules on private sales.  States design their own laws governing the secondary gun market, and the restrictions vary widely.  More than three-quarters of states do not require background checks or documentation for private sales!  You can dispute the percentages; I’ve heard 40, 50-75.  Regardless, if 3/4 states have no regulations it’s huge.

GOP pollster Frank Luntz recently reported that 74 percent of NRA members and 87 percent of non-NRA gun owners supported mandatory background checks for all gun purchases.  Is it any wonder that responsible gun owners are concerned about straw purchases and desire increased scrutiny through background checks?

“Love the folks posting here who fight expanding background checks to gunshots…and then claim there’s no need for a law…then shift over to “hey, we’re doing it already.” ... and then shift to…well, you get the point.”

Seriously…did you just post this drivel in an article where an individual was rightly arrested and tried by the law? Proving that there is an apparatus already in place for breaking the law?

As it should be?


Frank Jameso - How is what I said misleading their murder rate went up from 1998 to 2003 then started to decline. My point remains they only changed the tool of murder not the murder rate, is the goal less violence or less guns? They are not equal.

You are being misleading by not pointing out the UK murder rate is higher by almost double that of Germany’s murder rate. UK murder rate is 1.2 vs Germany at .8; just because guns were the weapon used more in Germany is meaningless to the over all safety of the people there.

Lets also mention the homicide rate in America has declined every year since 1994 and since 1991 it is down 60% in this nation and the fasted decline has been since 2003 when the so called assault weapons ban was sun set.

Also lets talk about the fact that America non gun homicide rate is 1.4 per 100k people, that alone gives up the title of most violent developed nation. It is not just guns that are a problem, its violent drug/gang/thug culture and most of the violence is concentrated in poor, under educated urban centers. My original point was like the UK if we bought back all the firearms (where would that money come from) it would likely not speed up the natural decline in our murder rate one body because most murders are one on one ambushes that can be beatings and stabbings instead as the UK proved in 1998-2003. You have to change society.

There is no link to gun levels in a nation and higher violence. Iceland is one of the top 7 gun owning nations in the world and has a lower murder rate than Japan the lowest gun ownership rate in the 1st world. Both rank in the top 5 lowest murder rate in the world period. Switzerland, Germany, Sweden, Iceland, France, and Norway are all gun owning nations and are much lower murder rates than the UK, in fact 14 other nations are lower than the UK for murder with far more guns. How many you ask, Norway 47 per 100, Switzerland 46 (private arms not militia arms), Iceland 39, UK 3 per 100 people, Japan .3 per 100. http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-perspective/011613-640869-more-guns-means-less-crime.htm?p=full

Now this is not to say in the current debate we could not talk about licensing and registration like all these other nations do, but the idea that a ban on firearms is the answer is bunk. Also since they have registration and licensing there is no need for background checks on private sales, you simply show your license and transfer title like a car.

Equity - Lets see you back that claim up, it smells like a pig farm from over here. Bloomberg’s claim of 40% of gun sales do not do a background check was given three Pinocchios by the Washington Post; here is why

Bloomberg’s office pointed us to a 1997 study by the National Institute of Justice on who owns guns and how they use them.The researchers estimated that about 40 percent of all firearm sales took place through people other than licensed dealers. They based their conclusion on data from a 1994 survey of more than 2,500 households. But it’s important to note that of the 2,568 households surveyed, only 251 people answered the question about the origin of their gun.

251 is not a large enough sample to make a real statistical analysis from, you need at least 1000.

I think you are being misleading, citing gun crime in the UK as rising in 2003. But you neglect to say that since then, gun crime has gone down. Here is a snippet from Wikipedia…
The United Kingdom has one of the lowest rates of gun homicides in the world with 0.07 recorded intentional homicides committed with a firearm per 100,000 inhabitants in 2009 compared to the United States’ 3.0 (over 40 times higher) and to Germany’s 0.21 (3 times higher).

Since no background checks are required by unlicensed sellers, and 50-75% of the vendors at most gun shows are unlicensed, it would seem that both local and online sales need to have more oversight.  Even the police force understands this.

mephisto - Actually murder and violent crime is down 60% since 1994 in America. Since them many old bad gun laws were removed from the books.

Also look at the UK they heavily restricted firearms in 1998 ans while their low firearms murder rate did cut in half in 1999 the murder rate nation wide went up until 2003. Most murders are one on one ambushes, here and in the UK, and most will just be replaces with beatings or stabbings if guns just went away (which they won’t). To really change the murder rate you have to change the people doing most of the killing.

There is no “gun-show loophole” what people are talking about with that term is private sales. Nothing requires that I do a background check to sell my firearms to another person.

What she did was buy firearms from individuals who were selling firearms at the gun shows; not from gun dealers. I can sell my guns on Craigslist if I want too, just happens some people wait for a show and go there with the firearm and put a flag on themselves to indicate they have a private firearm to sell.

What she did was buy up a bunch of firearms to resell on the streets which as we see is illegal. It is also rare, most criminals simply have a person they know straw buy a new firearm for them. Private sales are less than 1.6% of crime guns in the USA.

Love the folks posting here who fight expanding background checks to gunshots…and then claim there’s no need for a law…then shift over to “hey, we’re doing it already.” ... and then shift to…well, you get the point.

Until each person that buys a gun anywhere has to have a background check (and ideally a waiting period), this gun violence epidemic won’t be slowed.

A Straw man purchase/sale won’t stand up in court if she wasn’t selling everything she bought to the same person or a select few who knew she was making a purchase on their behalf.

Just as the article states, she is being charged with dealing firearms without a license.  There is a reason why people who sell a lot of firearms have an FFL.

“What law did she break>?”

She was a defacto firearms dealer without having a FFL. It is one thing to sell a few guns here or there or maybe clear out a bunch of guns you’ve owned for a while.  But when you buy a bunch of guns and then turn around and sell them, you’ve pretty much become a defacto dealer in the eyes of the ATF. She can tried to plead her case to the jury, but she’s got a slim chance of winning.

“Straw purchases can be illegal in the United States when made at a federally licensed firearm dealership. If the straw purchaser of the firearm lies about the identity of the ultimate possessor of the gun, he can be charged with making false statements on a federal Firearms Transaction Record. If a firearm is purchased as a gift, the purchaser must indicate the intended recipient on the transaction record. Straw purchases of used guns are not illegal, unless the gun is used in a crime with the prior knowledge of the straw purchaser.” Wiki

So maybe more straw purchasers will be thoroughly checked out in Chantilly this weekend?

Maybe there’s more to the story than LTM reports?

Sigh. Do any of you know what is meant by the misnomer “gunshow loophole”? it does not refer to the amount of firearms purchased. It refers to the sale of private property. You can buy and sell
private property anywhere and should not be restricted.

What law did she break>?

The article did not state if Ms. Dinkins went through background checks to purchase them in the first place.  She probably did because how else would the ATF know? 
I’ll bet Stachmo and waya have never been to a gun show.  Every time I’ve purchased a firearm at a gun show I had to have a background check.  The so called “gun-show loophole” is an exaggeration designed to foster the false impression that this is how the bad guys acquire firearms. 

How about looking into Fast-and-Furious where our own Gov’t fostered straw purchases and allow guns to flow into the hands of criminals. 

By The Way, The Nation’s Largest Gun Show is this weekend in Chantilly.  Perhaps I’ll see you there?????

@waya & @Satchmo

Why not? There is no way even remotely feasible that she could possibly use those guns all at the same time. Having 31 guns doesn’t make you any more dangerous than having 2. Also, this isn’t about any ‘loophole’. It’s very likely that she purchased many of these from dealers (which there are way more of at gun shows than private sellers) legally and underwent the required background check for each firearm.

Well there ya go…and folks argue there isn’t a gun show loop hole. 


This is why the gun show loop hole needs to end.  No one should be able to buy this many guns!

Post a comment

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Comments express only the views of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of this website or any associated person or entity. Any user who believes a message is objectionable can contact us at ltmeditor@loudountimes.com.

More News

The Loudoun Times-Mirror

is an interactive, digital replica
of the printed newspaper.
Click here for all e-editions.