Gun Trafficking and Straw Purchasing: Rational Choice Theory

Rational Choice Theory and Criminal Behavior

Rational choice theory is a framework for understanding criminal behavior that posits that when people commit illicit acts, they generally do so while considering their own self-interest. The theory holds that criminals are well aware of the illegality of what they are contemplating and that they weigh a number of factors before pursuing these actions. Such factors generally include what benefits they will incur — and to what degree they will profit — from criminal behavior, which is typically weighed against the likelihood of getting caught. Furthermore, the theory contends that people who commit crime are also cognizant of the nature and degree of the punishment they may face if apprehended. When people decide to commit a crime anyway because they believe there is more of a chance for them to gain than to suffer from an act, it is typically an example of rational choice theory in action.

There is a substantial body of evidence indicating that many of the people involved in the illegal straw running and trafficking of firearms into Mexico and other regions justify their behavior through rational choice theory. What is most interesting about this theory and the level of complicit involvement is that it can be found at several levels of criminality — not merely among the individuals who are caught and convicted of buying and supplying firearms to Mexico. There are numerous documented instances in which firearms dealers, law enforcement personnel, and even lobbyists and legislators may be culpable for the proliferation of guns into Mexico originating from the United States.

Straw Runners and Financial Incentives

At the primary level of this theory's application to the transportation of guns to cartels and individuals in Mexico, there are straw runners — frequently United States residents attempting to achieve financial gain through participation in this crime. In an article in the Washington Post, a young man named Ramos was able to organize a network in which he and nine of his associates purchased 112 firearms with a total value exceeding $100,000, which they then transported into Mexico. Rational choice theory applies clearly to this case. The amount of money involved is substantial; if Ramos was able to finance the procurement of over $100,000 worth of hardware, it can reasonably be inferred that he was not doing so without compensation.

It should also be noted that Ramos was only 22 years of age at the time of the article's publication. Whatever funds he was earning from his criminal activity would in all likelihood surpass wages from many legal occupations available to a young man of his background, including entry-level positions in the restaurant industry or similar fields. After being caught, he was sentenced to only four and a half years in prison — with good behavior, he could potentially be released in as little as three years. When that relatively modest period of incarceration is compared against the funds he was able to earn, and might continue to earn by re-engaging in the same trade after release, it becomes understandable how Ramos could rationalize his involvement in this crime.

Gun Dealers and Complicity in Trafficking

The financial incentives for gun store dealers to either sell to straw runners or make legal sales that ultimately end up connected to violence in Mexico are similarly rational. One of the most notorious gun dealers with a reputation for selling to straw runners and to those who transport illegal weapons across the border is known as Carter's Country. The company's history with straw running is well documented; accusations from a former employee that the company sold to straw runners were settled out of court. A man who killed a police officer in Houston — the top location in the country for straw runner purchases — claimed that his wife purchased the weapon for him. His wife made a pointed observation when she told reporters that the personnel at Carter's Country knew the firearm was not intended for her use, but rather for criminal purposes, and that the company chose to complete the sale — as most gun dealers do — for the straightforward reason of financial gain.

This sentiment was echoed by a dealer known as Iknadosian, who offered what amounts to a textbook example of straw purchase rationalization when he stated that so long as a customer's paperwork checks out, he does not care what they do with the weapon — even if they go on to commit a crime. The advantages of what is in fact an illegal act — selling to a straw runner — rationalize the commission of that crime when the financial reward is sufficiently large.

Conclusion: A Multi-Level Rational Choice Framework

It has been substantially demonstrated that rational choice theory can explain the criminal behavior and complicity of numerous parties operating at a variety of levels within the gun trafficking pipeline into Mexico. Straw purchasers face minimal prison time relative to the considerable financial gain available from the enterprise. Firearms dealers are shielded by a range of legislation — including a law that requires them to report the sale of two or more handguns within five days to ATF authorities yet imposes no equivalent requirement for long guns — and they have strong financial incentives to look the other way when customers display clear warning signs. Lobbyists such as the NRA and certain members of the criminal justice system also have money to be gained from gun sales and political support to be earned by declining to punish those who supply such weapons. Across all three levels, the same underlying logic applies: the anticipated gains outweigh the anticipated costs, and crime is the rational result.