Mark Kelly denied AR-15 purchase

While I think it should be no surprise that someone of Mr. Kelley's experience should pass a background check, I commend the owners of the gun shop for refusing the sale, once it became obvious that Mr. Kelley was committing a straw-purchase. He LIED on his 4473, by saying that he would be the intended owner of the rifle, or he LIED saying that he was going to turn the weapon over all along.

I wonder if he will be prosecuted for attempting a straw purchase?
 
I wonder if he will be prosecuted for attempting a straw purchase?
Click to expand...
It wasn't a straw purchase. He paid for the gun with his own money, with the intent of basically gifting it to a local police department. They didn't give him the money.
 
Tom Servo said:
It wasn't a straw purchase. He paid for the gun with his own money, with the intent of basically gifting it to a local police department. They didn't give him the money.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I didn't think of it that way. I know buying a weapon as a gift is kinda grey area for asnwering the question of "buying a gun for someone else."
 
I suppose the gun store owner doesn't have to sell to someone if he chooses not to, but he said his reason was that he found out Mr. Kelly didn't intend to keep the rifle for his own personal use. This seems a bit weak, given that there's nothing at all wrong with buying a rifle with the intent of making a gift of it to another party -- that isn't really a "gray area."

If the store owner had come out and said he wasn't willing to be used as a political patsy, that would have been a much stronger stance.
 
I agree. I think it would have been more to the point to say that since Mr Kelly is making the purchase as political theater the shop chooses not to participate in the transaction. Plus, there is a risk he is using money from another party, and later on that could come to light and the shop could be blamed.

Good for the gun shop! Now Mr. Kelly has no gun to hold up at a press conference if that was his hard-to-believe intent, nor an evil black "assault rifle with Kid Killing Klips" to protect his home, if that was his hope-to-keep-it-secret intent.
 
I think Mark really wanted a AR-15 and was caught on camera then he had to
make up a story since he has become an anti gun poster child. It seems he
wanted a used Sig and I believe there is a twenty day waiting period for a used
gun In Arizona so why pick a gun that you have a long waiting period if you
want to illustrate the ease of purchase?
 
I'm not sure I'm with the LGS owner and for the reasons he gave . I'm of the thought that If you can legally own a firearm then you should be able to do anything with that firearm that is legal . If he wants to by a gun and use it as a prop for the anti's . No one should tell him he can't . Thats the kind of thing we are fighting for here . I'm a law abiding citizen so leave my guns and I alone . He did not break any laws so we should leave him alone . Again if he wants to buy a gun and use it as a propaganda tool , that is his right .

I would how ever have supported the store owner if he said " I'm not selling Kelly the firearms because I don't want to be linked to his propaganda story and anti gun agenda "
 
I think gun stores should (and can) refuse business to our wonderful gun grabbers.

Mark Kelly should be turned away from every gun store in this country, brick and mortar or internet.

He shouldn't even be able to buy a box of WWB at Wal Mart.
 
Well...I guess Kelly will have to make do and just be armed with only his lowly 1911.

I would hope that he takes the time to get proper training with his new 1911 as every responsible gun owner should do.

Wonder if he has enrolled in any safety, shooting or SD course's yet?
Something I just know he feels one should surely do as a responsible owner of a new firearm.

Anyone heard?
 
cheezhed said:
I think Mark really wanted a AR-15 and was caught on camera then he had to make up a story since he has become an anti gun poster child.
Click to expand...
I think that's pretty clear, but it's only my opinion.

On the other hand, Kelly's version doesn't pass the smell test. He says he wanted to show how easy it is to buy an "assault weapon," but why should it NOT be easy for a citizen with a squeaky clean background to purchase something he has a constitutional right to own? And an AR-15 isn't really an assault rifle, anyway, which is something a former military officer should know. But Kelly spent most of his career as an astronaut, so any resemblance between him and a real military officer is only coincidental.
 
Isn't that a STRAW Purchase ?
Click to expand...

Covered earlier in the thread. Buying a gun with your own money to give to someone else is NOT a straw purchase. In fact, it's explicitly listed on the Form 4473 as being okay.
 
Lot of issues here. Does the owner of a private business have the right to choose who he wishes to do business with? Answer: No. If he had refused to sell the gun to a man who is a minority that would be a law violation under the civil rights act. It is an interesting conundrum.
 
Political theatre or not, he gets to feel a little frustrated, like many of us!
I hope many more gun grabbers feel it, too. AN officer, a gentleman, and a gun grabber, has the oath changed that much?
 
Does the owner of a private business have the right to choose who he wishes to do business with? Answer: No. If he had refused to sell the gun to a man who is a minority that would be a law violation under the civil rights act. It is an interesting conundrum.
Click to expand...

Not really that interesting or unusual. It's different when the customer is being denied *because he is a member of a protected class*.

A business owner can deny business to a customer who's a minority, as long as he's not doing it BECAUSE the customer is a minority.

But in this case "people who want to purchase a rifle" aren't a protected class to begin with, so the business owner is within his rights on that point.
 
Was it a straw purchase? No. As far as I have been able to tell, he was purchasing it with his own money. Buying a gun as a gift for someone else (even to give to a police department) is entirely legal.

Did the owner have the right to refuse service? Yes. As long as the denial was not for a legally prohibited reason, including but not limited to race or gender, the shop owner was within his rights to decline to make the sale.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top