Rob Pincus
New member
This is related to the current discussion in "too sensitive" thread, but I thought I'd give it a home of its own.
I hard a at time heated discussion with a fellow LEO at the department the other day.
Here's the circumstances:
Two drug dealers were arrested with body armor and a receipt for that body armor from a local dealer.
One of us is of the opion that gun dealers (or anyone else selling BA) have a moral obligation to "check out" who is going to have BA and why they want it. Since this FFL did not do taht, he should be boycotted by all LEO personnel ( a large portion of his business, BTW)
The other side of the argument is that there is no law governing the sale of BA (yet) and the dealer may not have sold the BA directly to those individuals (who looked like typical drug dealers).
What do you guys think? Does an FFL or police supply shop have a moral obligation to screen their customers and restict sales beyond the scope of the law?
Before you answer, please consdier this:
If you say "Yes, he does" then you are opening your mind up to the idea that YOU may also be refused the opportunity to purchase ammo or BA at some point, becuase of what you are wearing, how your hair is cut, or what tattoos are showing. "Jim Crow Sales Policy"
If you say "No, he does not", then you are taking the position that a known felon can walk out of a shop with a bag full of rifle/pistol ammo and a Level III vest.
"Middle ground" answers will undoubtedly be plentiful, so let's hear from some people who are not on the fence.
Also, note that we are not discussing the right of a business man to sell his product to whoever he wants, we are talking about an obligation to society.
Personally, I saw that he does not.
------------------
-Essayons
I hard a at time heated discussion with a fellow LEO at the department the other day.
Here's the circumstances:
Two drug dealers were arrested with body armor and a receipt for that body armor from a local dealer.
One of us is of the opion that gun dealers (or anyone else selling BA) have a moral obligation to "check out" who is going to have BA and why they want it. Since this FFL did not do taht, he should be boycotted by all LEO personnel ( a large portion of his business, BTW)
The other side of the argument is that there is no law governing the sale of BA (yet) and the dealer may not have sold the BA directly to those individuals (who looked like typical drug dealers).
What do you guys think? Does an FFL or police supply shop have a moral obligation to screen their customers and restict sales beyond the scope of the law?
Before you answer, please consdier this:
If you say "Yes, he does" then you are opening your mind up to the idea that YOU may also be refused the opportunity to purchase ammo or BA at some point, becuase of what you are wearing, how your hair is cut, or what tattoos are showing. "Jim Crow Sales Policy"
If you say "No, he does not", then you are taking the position that a known felon can walk out of a shop with a bag full of rifle/pistol ammo and a Level III vest.
"Middle ground" answers will undoubtedly be plentiful, so let's hear from some people who are not on the fence.
Also, note that we are not discussing the right of a business man to sell his product to whoever he wants, we are talking about an obligation to society.
Personally, I saw that he does not.
------------------
-Essayons