Can you be more specific? What's the problem with it?

Can we start with the fact that they're basing their "findings" on people who were Possibly prohibited persons?

And then extrapolating that 5% of 203 responses equates to 10% of all private sales being sold to criminals?

Then there's this:

Investigators then searched public court records in the geographic areas where each individual was known to have maintained a current or past address.

Ok these aren't people using the criminal records system otherwise why would they need to use searches for names through public court docs?

Any felony convictions, domestic violence misdemeanor convictions, bench warrants, or orders of protection that could be linked to the individual....

And how did they do this "linking" if they didn't have access to criminal databases?

were subjected to legal analysis By Who? What does this mean?

to determine if they prohibited possession of firearms under state or federal law.

How did they make this determination?

Prohibited persons are checked against the FBI criminal databases. If you're not in there, you're not a prohibited person. Any other methodology for "maybe, possibly, could be... the names match right?" invites all kinds of room for error.

Even after all that nonsense hoop jumping they did to obtain their "Data" gun crime continues to decline year over year...

So what's the point of this study? Their assertion is that criminals break the law using the internet to search for sales... the reality is that when that happens it is a fraction of the total sales..

They completely fail to make a case for enacting any legislation that would inhibit prohibited persons from obtaining guns via online searches while also not infringing on normal people looking to arrange 100% legal private sales of firearms.