Mark Kelly Canceled

[Mockstar]

Gun store owner cancels sale to Mark Kelly. No straw purchases here thank you!

Rejected: Gun Store Cancels AR-15 Purchase by Gabby Giffords’ Husband | TheBlaze.com

Diamondback’s owner/president Douglas MacKinley:

“While I support and respect Mark Kelly’s 2nd Amendment rights to purchase, possess, and use firearms in a safe and responsible manner, his recent statements to the media made it clear that his intent in purchasing the Sig Sauer M400 5.56mm rifle from us was for reasons other then for his personal use. In light of this fact, 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 From 4473 and NICS background check required of Mr. Kelly before he could take possession this firearm. A full refund was sent to Mr. Kelly, via express mail, on Thursday of last week.”

 

[hotrodpc]

I seen that story on another sight. I agree, and hats off to that seller. Good Job. Not just to be an ass to Mark Kelly, but admitadly, MKelly did admit, he DID NOT purchase for personal use. If you're not buying it for personal use, then it's technically an illegal purchase and the seller knowing it's NOT for personal use, SHOULD reject and refuse to sell it. That's kinda part of the problem MKelly is talking about. In short, this was going to be a straw purchase in a roundabout way. Mark was buying for someone other than himself. Is that not a straw purchase???

So tell us Mark, how easy is it to buy a SEMI AUTOMATIC rifle. Even your ass got denied !!!

 

[ninja man]

i think its bullshit. is the general population that stupid to think that he really wanted to give the gun away? i think that he bought it for his own personal use, but when word got out that he was buying a gun, he came up with that lame excuse to try to cover his ass. dont people know that to become an astronaut the background check is far more detailed then to buy a gun? of course any astronaut can buy a gun, they already have been cleared by the government. stupid idiot should admit the truth.

 

[hotrodpc]

i think its bullshit. is the general population that stupid to think that he really wanted to give the gun away? i think that he bought it for his own personal use, but when word got out that he was buying a gun, he came up with that lame excuse to try to cover his ass. dont people know that to become an astronaut the background check is far more detailed then to buy a gun? of course any astronaut can buy a gun, they already have been cleared by the government. stupid idiot should admit the truth.

Totally agree !!! :flipthebird: But that's OK. He got a refund and got made a fool of, and I think 90% of the average level headed American knows the truth too.

 

[oppo]

I seen that story on another sight. I agree, and hats off to that seller. Good Job. Not just to be an ass to Mark Kelly, but admitadly, MKelly did admit, he DID NOT purchase for personal use. If you're not buying it for personal use, then it's technically an illegal purchase and the seller knowing it's NOT for personal use, SHOULD reject and refuse to sell it. That's kinda part of the problem MKelly is talking about. In short, this was going to be a straw purchase in a roundabout way. Mark was buying for someone other than himself. Is that not a straw purchase???

So tell us Mark, how easy is it to buy a SEMI AUTOMATIC rifle. Even your ass got denied !!!

Actually, it isn't. If you buy it with your own money and give it to someone as a gift, that is not astraw purchase and you are the actual buyer.

 

[hotrodpc]

Actually, it isn't. If you buy it with your own money and give it to someone as a gift, that is not astraw purchase and you are the actual buyer.

True, that makes sense. Bottom Line, I guess straw purchase is when you're making a purchase for someone else who legally couldn't buy one theirself.

I've bought guns before for a relative. He lived in CA, I lived in OK. They were also guns that would be legal in CA, and they never went to CA anyway. They stayed here in my care, but i was reimbursed for them. Now that he lives here, he has them. We had a Sporting Goods store go out of biz and they had a closeout on the last remaining guns, that were 60% off of retail price. That's why the purchase was made.

 

[ViperJeff]

Question, if Mr Kelly lied (alleged) on the 4473 question 11a, is that reportable to the ATFE and would that prevent future purchases because he lied (alleged) on the 4473

 

[oppo]

True, that makes sense. Bottom Line, I guess straw purchase is when you're making a purchase for someone else who legally couldn't buy one theirself.

I've bought guns before for a relative. He lived in CA, I lived in OK. They were also guns that would be legal in CA, and they never went to CA anyway. They stayed here in my care, but i was reimbursed for them. Now that he lives here, he has them. We had a Sporting Goods store go out of biz and they had a closeout on the last remaining guns, that were 60% off of retail price. That's why the purchase was made.

The person being able to purchase them themselves is irrelevant to it being a straw purchase. You actually comitted a straw purchase since he reimbursed you. That made him the actual buyer. It wasn't wrong but it was illegal.

 

[Mockstar]

Question, if Mr Kelly lied (alleged) on the 4473 question 11a, is that reportable to the ATFE and would that prevent future purchases because he lied (alleged) on the 4473

That's where it gets complicated. yes he lied stating the purchase was for him originally. but then claiming to have bought it for himself then donating it to the PD is not exactly a straw sale. If someone else (not able to purchase a firearm) had given him the $$, and he purchased it for that individual, then that is an illegal act.

 

[oppo]

Question, if Mr Kelly lied (alleged) on the 4473 question 11a, is that reportable to the ATFE and would that prevent future purchases because he lied (alleged) on the 4473

It all comes down to whether or not he was actually spending his own money without being reimbursed. If so, he is allowed to give it away. If not, he would be guilty of a straw purchase. Straw purchases are not a felony.

 

[oppo]

That's where it gets complicated. yes he lied stating the purchase was for him originally. but then claiming to have bought it for himself then donating it to the PD is not exactly a straw sale. If someone else (not able to purchase a firearm) had given him the $$, and he purchased it for that individual, then that is an illegal act.

Even if that person is able, it would still be a straw purchase.

 

[kwo51]

This is perfect they had lunch on the beach.
Mark Kelly's daughter's dog kills sea lion

 

[Mockstar]

LOL I seen that story on my home page the other day. Not just A sealion....A BABY sealion!! Ban all dogs on the beach!

 

[hotrodpc]

This is perfect they had lunch on the beach.
Mark Kelly's daughter's dog kills sea lion

Yep, Now ban all Pit Bulls and Kill them all !!!


Shit Happens, but she should have been able to the control the dog, OR not been able to have it there. Leash or not, does no good if you can't control it. Looks like Mark Controlled it even after the fact. What if it would have been someone wiener dog? That's BS, you can't control your dog, leave it at home and don't give Pit Bulls a bad name.

We have that shit here about killing Pit Bulls and they are so deadly. I don't have a Pit Bull, but I've seen many that are lap dogs and wouldn't chase a cat or another dog.

 

[oppo]

http://m.cbsnews.com/postwatch.rbml?pageType=video&cbsID=50143614

Did nothing wrong my ass. They failed to train and control their dog and the moment the dog "broke loose", it was no longer on a leash. The bottom line is that they are absolutely responsible for the dogs actions.

 

[Mockstar]

I bet that wouldn't have happened if that bulldog only had two legs. I propose no more 4 legged bulldogs!! :deal:

 

[hotrodpc]

http://m.cbsnews.com/postwatch.rbml?pageType=video&cbsID=50143614

Did nothing wrong my ass. They failed to train and control their dog and the moment the dog "broke loose", it was no longer on a leash. The bottom line is that they are absolutely responsible for the dogs actions.

That's a fact. And I still don't blame the dog. All dogs, don't care what breed they are, have their personalities. They should have known their dog would chase other animals #1. #2, if you can't control your dog, then leave it at home. I know my Husky, he's buddies with about all dogs no matter what. My female boxer, outside in the front yard, she's fine with other dogs. Another dog come in my house or backyard, it's a dead dog and not much I can do about it. She'll have it by it's neck and jerk it to the point of a broken neck before I can do a damn thing. I know this. So all friends and family are warned, DO NOT bring your pets to my house. 2 of my neighbors dogs have gotten in my backyard. Sorry Neighbor, your dog got in my back yard. She get's birds, squirrels and cats too. Great with kids and a real sweetheart, but come in her territory, and it's on.

 

[hotrodpc]

I bet that wouldn't have happened if that bulldog only had two legs. I propose no more 4 legged bulldogs!! :deal:

Yep, if a pistol grip makes a rifle scarey and illegal, then pit pulls with 4 legs should be illegal. If we can limit handgun mags to 10 rds, then we can limit Pit Bulls to 2 legs.