Mark Kelly Denied 2nd Amendment Right

SmarterthanYou said:
what stories are you babbling about? all i've seen are stories of guns flying off the shelves with no mention about who is buying for who.

so you're making this shit up as you go.
Click to expand...

And of course, when it's advantageous, out comes the clueless rube..."I don't know what you're a talkin about..."

ONE EXAMPLE would be DY on here weeks ago talking about how he was going to buy all his grandkids guns before the new regulations went into effect.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
And of course, when it's advantageous, out comes the clueless rube..."I don't know what you're a talkin about..."

ONE EXAMPLE would be DY on here weeks ago talking about how he was going to buy all his grandkids guns before the new regulations went into effect.
Click to expand...

talking about it is not a crime. if he lied on the form about who was going to be the recipient, THAT would be a crime. maybe YOU should learn more about gun laws before you try to debate about them.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
Not according to the gun store owner:

“I determined that it was in my company’s best interest to terminate this transaction prior to his returning to my store to complete the Federal Form 4473 and NICS (National Instant Criminal Background Check System) required of Mr. Kelly before he could take possession of this firearm,”
Click to expand...

No....he paid for an item that he said was not for him. That's intent and actions to carry out said intent. If he did not make a purchase or attempt one, he could not be denied.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
And how many other stories have wee seen in the news lately about fathers buying their whole family guns before "Obammy takes them away"?

Straw purchases each and everyone...but nary a pee from out two-faced, gun nut posters.
Click to expand...

Criminals! Lock them up!
 
SmarterthanYou said:
talking about it is not a crime. if he lied on the form about who was going to be the recipient, THAT would be a crime. maybe YOU should learn more about gun laws before you try to debate about them.
Click to expand...

You just shot yourself in the foot on that one (tee hee).

He was honest from the beginning about who he intended to buy the gun for, so once again no law has been broken.
 
Howey said:
You just shot yourself in the foot on that one (tee hee).

He was honest from the beginning about who he intended to buy the gun for, so once again no law has been broken.
Click to expand...
he was? he told the gun store owner he intended to give it to law enforcement somewhere? please show that bit of evidence.
 
Jarod said:
He did not buy a gun...
Click to expand...

According to his own press, he bought one to give to another person. Because of laws about those types of weapons, it is illegal to purchase one of those with the express intent to deliver it to a third party. What he was doing was illegal, he couldn't buy the weapon because he was breaking the law, a law that he propounds as good.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
he was? he told the gun store owner he intended to give it to law enforcement somewhere? please show that bit of evidence.
Click to expand...

He did not, in order to pass the background check he had to fill out and sign, under "penalty of perjury", a document that said he was not buying it for a third party. It was later that he made it clear he was planning on breaking the law and supposedly was purchasing it with the sole intent of illegally delivering it to a third party. Since the retailer found this out it made it so the sale was illegal, in order to follow the laws that he (the purchaser) propounds to believe in, the retailer had to cancel the illegal sale.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
I haven't seen any proof he was refunded anything.
Click to expand...

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/201...owner-cancels-mark-kellys-ar-15-purchase?lite

It's in the first sentence: "An Arizona gun store owner says he will not sell Mark Kelly the AR-15 rifle that the vocal advocate for tighter gun control bought earlier this month."

"The store was required to hold the rifle purchased by Kelly for 20 days, MacKinlay told the Associated Press after Kelly purchased the firearm."

Took all of half a second on Google.
 
Lucius Cornelius Sulla said:
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/201...owner-cancels-mark-kellys-ar-15-purchase?lite

It's in the first sentence: "An Arizona gun store owner says he will not sell Mark Kelly the AR-15 rifle that the vocal advocate for tighter gun control bought earlier this month."

"The store was required to hold the rifle purchased by Kelly for 20 days, MacKinlay told the Associated Press after Kelly purchased the firearm."

Took all of half a second on Google.
Click to expand...


Tell me about the 20 day hold Arizona has on firearm sales...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top