If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   With a straight face the owner of the gun store where Mark Kelly bought an assault rifle says he "questions the intent of the purchase", denies the sale   (foxnews.com) divider line 334
    More: Ironic, U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, assault rifles, firearms  
•       •       •

3971 clicks; posted to Politics » on 26 Mar 2013 at 7:07 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



334 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-26 06:00:00 AM
I don't even understand this stuff.  Everyone keeps biatching how quick the background checks are.  Isn't that a good thing?  It is like going to a DMV and getting pissed that it didn't take 2 hours or being mad that they are processing passports in 2 weeks instead of 2 months.

I'd have much more sympathy for the anti gun folks if they were discussing the short comings of the background check system instead of just a bunch of bs about how it is too easy and fast.  The system seems to work, wake me up when someone who no longer is supposed to own a gun gets one without doing anything illegal.  Until then we are just debating making certain crimes more illegal and inconviencing people who are doing nothing wrong.
 
2013-03-26 06:05:34 AM
Also the guy doesn't want his store used as a promotional piece against the very thing he sells.  That isn't exactly what subby is implying, but is reasonable.  If you went to your local Ford dealer and started getting them blasted in the media for doing nothing wrong, and were railing on how Mustangs were dangerous and should be outlawed, they'd probably tell you to go fark yourself and never come back to.
 
2013-03-26 06:18:53 AM

NickelP: Until then we are just debating making certain crimes more illegal and inconviencing people who are doing nothing wrong.


Why do you hate children?
 
2013-03-26 06:22:39 AM
Don't you know that 100% of shootings occur with guns?

100% of children with bullet wounds were shot by guns! ONE HUNDRED PERCENT! Clearly guns kill children. It's what they were designed to do. COLT: Children On Life supporT.

BAN GUNS NOW!
 
NFA
2013-03-26 06:27:50 AM
.
Actually the dealer did exactly what he is supposed to do according to law.   Purchasing an assault rifle, going through the background check yourself, when in fact the gun will not be used by you, is called a strawman purchase and is illegal.

By his own admission, Mark Kelly was breaking the law and should face criminal charges.  He was deliberately attempting to purchase the gun for other than personal use and to use the purchase as an example of how it can be done.
 
2013-03-26 07:16:54 AM
That's the most retarded story in the news lately.

"DURR, I CAN PASS A BACKGROUND CHECK BECAUSE I'M NOT A CRIMINAL! LOOK HOW EASY IT IS TO GET A GUN!"
 
2013-03-26 07:20:06 AM
I can't even tell who's trolling anymore.
 
2013-03-26 07:21:05 AM
something something wild pigs
 
2013-03-26 07:21:53 AM
So, you guys think the current system works?
 
2013-03-26 07:22:39 AM

doglover: 100% of children with bullet wounds were shot by guns! ONE HUNDRED PERCENT!


In my old neighborhood, we were so tough, we inserted the bullets manually.
 
2013-03-26 07:24:15 AM
Eh, he already exposed the anti-background check 8%ers as frauds and lunatics.
 
2013-03-26 07:26:36 AM
So let me get this straight. 20 days ago Mark Kelly was talking about how easy and fast it is to buy a gun. Today his purchase ultimately fails.

20 days is fast? I didn't pay a lot of attention to the original story, thought he had bought it and walked out with it that day or something.
 
2013-03-26 07:26:44 AM
Actually, this could be proof of what happens when just a little bit more scrutiny is placed on a background check.
 
2013-03-26 07:27:36 AM
Two out of the last three threads are gun threads?  WTF Fark?  It's only Tuesday, save something for later this week.
 
2013-03-26 07:28:56 AM
Second amendment shall not be infringed under any circumstances. Unless your a lib and we don't like you.
It dosent make any sense, y'all pro second amendment or anti liberal. I can't tell anymore.
 
2013-03-26 07:29:00 AM

NFA: By his own admission, Mark Kelly was breaking the law and should face criminal charges.


What law says you cannot turn guns over to the police?

He was deliberately attempting to purchase the gun for other than personal use and to use the purchase as an example of how it can be done.

Reads like a "personal use".
 
2013-03-26 07:29:33 AM

NFA: .
Actually the dealer did exactly what he is supposed to do according to law.   Purchasing an assault rifle, going through the background check yourself, when in fact the gun will not be used by you, is called a strawman purchase and is illegal.

By his own admission, Mark Kelly was breaking the law and should face criminal charges.  He was deliberately attempting to purchase the gun for other than personal use and to use the purchase as an example of how it can be done.


After reading around some, this appears to be untrue. He plans to gift the weapon to the Tucson police, apparently that is perfectly legal. It's only illegal if there is an actual other buyer you are fronting for.
 
2013-03-26 07:33:33 AM

Ring of Fire: Second amendment shall not be infringed under any circumstances. Unless your a lib and we don't like you.
It dosent make any sense, y'all pro second amendment or anti liberal. I can't tell anymore.


Those idiots in Louisiana shot themselves in the foot recently by making gun ownership a "fundamental right" in their constitution. A judge recently ruled that this means convicted felons have a right to own guns. Link: http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/2013/03/louisiana-judge-rules-law-bar r ing-felons-from-firearm-ownership-unconstitutional.html/

I don't think Louisianans thought through their clever plan. I'm sure they had no idea that doing this would also give "those people" the right to own a gun.
 
2013-03-26 07:33:58 AM
Yeah. This was an astronaut whose wife got shot by some lunatic who wanted attention. So he buys a gun to get attention. And the guy that sold it refuses to deliver to get attention.
The media gave them all what they wanted.
At some point we gotta stop feeding the trolls.
 
2013-03-26 07:34:53 AM

serial_crusher: So let me get this straight. 20 days ago Mark Kelly was talking about how easy and fast it is to buy a gun. Today his purchase ultimately fails.

20 days is fast? I didn't pay a lot of attention to the original story, thought he had bought it and walked out with it that day or something.


Tucson has a law that says any used gun that a dealer accepts must be held for 20 days by the dealer so that the police can determine if it was stolen, used in a crime, etc.

Mark Kelly saw the gun probably not very long after the dealer bought it from someone because AR-15s aren't exactly sitting on the shelves these days, and he basically "pre-purchased" it, paying for it and filling out the paperwork, but he couldn't pick it up until the clock ran out.
 
2013-03-26 07:35:01 AM

eiger: After reading around some, this appears to be untrue. He plans to gift the weapon to the Tucson police, apparently that is perfectly legal. It's only illegal if there is an actual other buyer you are fronting for.


It's kind of a poor attempt to make a point on the whole gun issue but we are seeing a lot of that lately.
 
2013-03-26 07:36:01 AM

HotWingConspiracy: Eh, he already exposed the anti-background check 8%ers as frauds and lunatics.


You mean those of us opposed to a ban on private transfers?  'Cause that's what "Universal Background Checks" are.
 
2013-03-26 07:37:09 AM

willfullyobscure: something something wild pigs


Feral hogs, please.
 
2013-03-26 07:37:38 AM
Our founding fathers would have supported the NRA. And they were right about everything, so. . . .
 
2013-03-26 07:38:34 AM
Do we really want to arm astronauts?
 
2013-03-26 07:39:10 AM
So a background check doesn't stop someone with a clean background? And stores can refuse service to customers?

This has truly been a thrilling expose.
 
2013-03-26 07:39:29 AM

dittybopper: HotWingConspiracy: Eh, he already exposed the anti-background check 8%ers as frauds and lunatics.

You mean those of us opposed to a ban on private transfers?  'Cause that's what "Universal Background Checks" are.


Oh you got the newest NRA pamphlet too.
 
2013-03-26 07:41:59 AM
But Kelly couldn't immediately take possession of the rifle because the shop had bought it from a customer. As a result, the store is required by a Tucson ordinance to hold the gun for 20 days to give the city enough time to make sure the weapon wasn't used in a crime.
TFA
Background check was on the rifle.
 
2013-03-26 07:42:10 AM

Maturin: Do we really want to arm astronauts?


Are YOU gonna defend us against the alien hordes?
 
2013-03-26 07:44:12 AM

Tomahawk513: Maturin: Do we really want to arm astronauts?

Are YOU gonna defend us against the alien hordes?


Well, back in the day I was awesome at Space Invaders.
 
2013-03-26 07:46:36 AM
The store owner is denying Mark Kelly his Second Amendment rights? Damn, Obama must've got to him.
 
2013-03-26 07:46:51 AM

odinsposse: So a background check doesn't stop someone with a clean background? And stores can refuse service to customers?

This has truly been a thrilling expose.

 
2013-03-26 07:47:58 AM

eiger: Ring of Fire: Second amendment shall not be infringed under any circumstances. Unless your a lib and we don't like you.
It dosent make any sense, y'all pro second amendment or anti liberal. I can't tell anymore.

Those idiots in Louisiana shot themselves in the foot recently by making gun ownership a "fundamental right" in their constitution. A judge recently ruled that this means convicted felons have a right to own guns. Link: http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/2013/03/louisiana-judge-rules-law-bar r ing-felons-from-firearm-ownership-unconstitutional.html/

I don't think Louisianans thought through their clever plan. I'm sure they had no idea that doing this would also give "those people" the right to own a gun.


Why not?

Not all felonies are created equal.  Do you think it's right that someone like Martha Stewart can't have a gun?  Do you think she's a major threat?

Besides which, federal law still applies in Louisiana, and federal law doesn't permit even non-violent felons from owning guns, so don't worry, all those inside traders, people who've caused $50 in damage to a church, synagogue, or mosque, or hell, even hackers who've gained unauthorized access to a computer even if they didn't actually *DO* anything with it will still be prosecutable under federal law if they own a gun and were convicted.
 
2013-03-26 07:52:04 AM

Cucullen: Yeah. This was an astronaut whose wife got shot by some lunatic who wanted attention. So he buys a gun to get attention. And the guy that sold it refuses to deliver to get attention.
The media gave them all what they wanted.
At some point we gotta stop feeding the trolls.


You claim he was a lunatic?  Why? Because that is what the media tells you?  Sure, "look at him, he looks crazy", maybe he was.  People need to stop minimizing these actions and look into the true issues instead of pushing them aside.  People are fed up with our politicians,  they need to listen, instead of disarming.
 
2013-03-26 07:53:03 AM

dittybopper: eiger: Ring of Fire: Second amendment shall not be infringed under any circumstances. Unless your a lib and we don't like you.
It dosent make any sense, y'all pro second amendment or anti liberal. I can't tell anymore.

Those idiots in Louisiana shot themselves in the foot recently by making gun ownership a "fundamental right" in their constitution. A judge recently ruled that this means convicted felons have a right to own guns. Link: http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/2013/03/louisiana-judge-rules-law-bar r ing-felons-from-firearm-ownership-unconstitutional.html/

I don't think Louisianans thought through their clever plan. I'm sure they had no idea that doing this would also give "those people" the right to own a gun.

Why not?

Not all felonies are created equal.  Do you think it's right that someone like Martha Stewart can't have a gun?  Do you think she's a major threat?

Besides which, federal law still applies in Louisiana, and federal law doesn't permit even non-violent felons from owning guns, so don't worry, all those inside traders, people who've caused $50 in damage to a church, synagogue, or mosque, or hell, even hackers who've gained unauthorized access to a computer even if they didn't actually *DO* anything with it will still be prosecutable under federal law if they own a gun and were convicted.


Everyone keep this in mind next time they attempt to argue that the gun crowd and the NRA isn't actively engaged in to loosening gun laws to get them in to the hands of criminals. Criminals are customers too.
 
2013-03-26 07:53:42 AM

dittybopper: eiger: Ring of Fire: Second amendment shall not be infringed under any circumstances. Unless your a lib and we don't like you.
It dosent make any sense, y'all pro second amendment or anti liberal. I can't tell anymore.

Those idiots in Louisiana shot themselves in the foot recently by making gun ownership a "fundamental right" in their constitution. A judge recently ruled that this means convicted felons have a right to own guns. Link: http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/2013/03/louisiana-judge-rules-law-bar r ing-felons-from-firearm-ownership-unconstitutional.html/

I don't think Louisianans thought through their clever plan. I'm sure they had no idea that doing this would also give "those people" the right to own a gun.

Why not?

Not all felonies are created equal.  Do you think it's right that someone like Martha Stewart can't have a gun?  Do you think she's a major threat?

Besides which, federal law still applies in Louisiana, and federal law doesn't permit even non-violent felons from owning guns, so don't worry, all those inside traders, people who've caused $50 in damage to a church, synagogue, or mosque, or hell, even hackers who've gained unauthorized access to a computer even if they didn't actually *DO* anything with it will still be prosecutable under federal law if they own a gun and were convicted.


GOOD
 
2013-03-26 07:54:36 AM

doglover: NickelP: Until then we are just debating making certain crimes more illegal and inconviencing people who are doing nothing wrong.

Why do you hate children?


Because they're loud, they're obnoxious and they smell funny.
 
2013-03-26 07:55:11 AM
...

Kind of like guidos, I guess.
 
2013-03-26 07:56:53 AM

Crunch61: NFA: By his own admission, Mark Kelly was breaking the law and should face criminal charges.

What law says you cannot turn guns over to the police?

He was deliberately attempting to purchase the gun for other than personal use and to use the purchase as an example of how it can be done.

Reads like a "personal use".




He's also showing an example of how the law can complicate things.
Its a fine line between buying something as a gift and making a straw purchase.

He gave some weak story about how he was buying these weapons to make a political point, and that he was going to donate this particular gun to The Police.
The store owner has every right to question Kelly's purchase with intent to gift it, and while I'm sure Gordon Sumner is a nice bloke he's not even a US citizen.

Kelly should thank the store for saving him from committing a felony.
 
2013-03-26 07:57:33 AM

clong17: Cucullen: Yeah. This was an astronaut whose wife got shot by some lunatic who wanted attention. So he buys a gun to get attention. And the guy that sold it refuses to deliver to get attention.
The media gave them all what they wanted.
At some point we gotta stop feeding the trolls.

You claim he was a lunatic?  Why? Because that is what the media tells you?  Sure, "look at him, he looks crazy", maybe he was.  People need to stop minimizing these actions and look into the true issues instead of pushing them aside.  People are fed up with our politicians,  they need to listen, instead of disarming.


WOW!  Are you real?
 
2013-03-26 07:58:19 AM
You know, if you make it hard for a specific person to get a gun for the express reason that he's trying to get a gun to prove how easy it is, you're kind of proving his point. Strong work.
 
2013-03-26 08:00:22 AM

eiger: NFA: .
Actually the dealer did exactly what he is supposed to do according to law.   Purchasing an assault rifle, going through the background check yourself, when in fact the gun will not be used by you, is called a strawman purchase and is illegal.

By his own admission, Mark Kelly was breaking the law and should face criminal charges.  He was deliberately attempting to purchase the gun for other than personal use and to use the purchase as an example of how it can be done.

After reading around some, this appears to be untrue. He plans to gift the weapon to the Tucson police, apparently that is perfectly legal. It's only illegal if there is an actual other buyer you are fronting for.


This. Once he purchases it (with his own money) he can do as he wishes with his new personal property. He can gift it to anyone he likes as long as they are not a felon or mentally unstable. the fun part is he doesn't even have to ask.
 
2013-03-26 08:00:59 AM

HotWingConspiracy: dittybopper: HotWingConspiracy: Eh, he already exposed the anti-background check 8%ers as frauds and lunatics.

You mean those of us opposed to a ban on private transfers?  'Cause that's what "Universal Background Checks" are.

Oh you got the newest NRA pamphlet too.


Nope.

Actually, I haven't been a member of the NRA since the mid 1990's, and even then it was for just 2 or 3 years.  They haven't even bothered to call me or mail stuff to me for over a decade.

What I do have is a brain.  And anyone with a brain can see that by requiring all firearms transactions other than those between immediate family to go through a licensed dealer, with a federal background check AND the filling out of a Form 4473, as the background check proposal in Congress requires*,

1 ''(t)(1) Beginning on the date that is 180 days after 
2 the date of enactment of this subsection, it shall be unlaw-
3 ful for any person who is not licensed under this chapter 
4 to transfer a firearm to any other person who is not li-
5 censed under this chapter, unless a licensed importer, li-
6 censed manufacturer, or licensed dealer has first taken 
7 possession of the firearm for the purpose of complying 
8 with subsection (s). Upon taking possession of the firearm, 
9 the licensee shall comply with all requirements of this 
10 chapter as if the licensee were transferring the firearm 
11 from the licensee's inventory to the unlicensed transferee.


That part I bolded means the licensee (the FFL) must run the background check, enter the gun into their bound book, and have the purchaser fill out a Form 4473.

That means, that other than some exceptions for immediate family members, all private transfers will be banned outright.  Even temporary transfers will be a felony:  If I want to lend my neighbor a rifle for him to use on a hunting trip, *BAM*, instant felony unless we transfer it through an FFL, and then do the exact same thing when he gets back.  All for a fee, of course.

That's not some NRA talking point, that is the direct consequence of what you advocate.
 
2013-03-26 08:02:01 AM

clong17: You claim he was a lunatic?  Why? Because that is what the media tells you?


People like to think that their view of the world is a rational one so when someone does something that doesn't fit into their world view it's easiest just to call them crazy even though their actions are perfectly rational but based on a different set of beliefs about how the world works.

For example, I might tell you that the world is ruled by demons and that I am in daily communication with them. By performing the proper rites I can get the demons to do my bidding and perform miracles to improve my financial position and love life. Crazy, right? But given this set of beliefs, the performance of the rites and supplications necessary to get the demons to do my bidding makes perfect sense and I'd be a fool not to especially since so many other people are profiting from the dominion of these demons.

/global_replace("demons", "God");
 
2013-03-26 08:03:25 AM
dittybopper:
That part I bolded means the licensee (the FFL) must run the background check, enter the gun into their bound book, and have the purchaser fill out a Form 4473.
That means, that other than some exceptions for immediate family members, all private transfers will be banned outright.  Even temporary transfers will be a felony:  If I want to lend my neighbor a rifle for him to use on a hunting trip, *BAM*, instant felony unless we transfer it through an FFL, and then do the exact same thing when he gets back.  All for a fee, of course.
That's not some NRA talking point, that is the direct consequence of what you advocate.


Its almost as if youwant to lend your friend a long range projectile weapon and not a DVD box set
 
2013-03-26 08:06:01 AM

HotWingConspiracy: Everyone keep this in mind next time they attempt to argue that the gun crowd and the NRA isn't actively engaged in to loosening gun laws to get them in to the hands of criminals. Criminals are customers too.


Why shouldn't they be?  What's wrong with people who haven't been convicted of a violent crime being allowed to defend themselves?

What do you have against Martha Stewart?
 
2013-03-26 08:07:24 AM

dittybopper: That means, that other than some exceptions for immediate family members, all private transfers will be banned outright. Even temporary transfers will be a felony: If I want to lend my neighbor a rifle for him to use on a hunting trip, *BAM*, instant felony unless we transfer it through an FFL, and then do the exact same thing when he gets back. All for a fee, of course.


Oh no tyrannies.

Universal checks are coming, the industry has already bought in.
 
2013-03-26 08:09:02 AM

dittybopper: HotWingConspiracy: Everyone keep this in mind next time they attempt to argue that the gun crowd and the NRA isn't actively engaged in to loosening gun laws to get them in to the hands of criminals. Criminals are customers too.

Why shouldn't they be?  What's wrong with people who haven't been convicted of a violent crime being allowed to defend themselves?

What do you have against Martha Stewart?


Her horrible kitchen appliances and utensils.

For real: I don't blame the NRA for advocating unrestricted firearm access, that's their schtick.  I just vehemently disagree with them.
 
2013-03-26 08:09:31 AM

dittybopper: HotWingConspiracy: Everyone keep this in mind next time they attempt to argue that the gun crowd and the NRA isn't actively engaged in to loosening gun laws to get them in to the hands of criminals. Criminals are customers too.

Why shouldn't they be?  What's wrong with people who haven't been convicted of a violent crime being allowed to defend themselves?

What do you have against Martha Stewart?


She's greedy. God knows what she would take if armed.
 
2013-03-26 08:10:41 AM

Tomahawk513: clong17: Cucullen: Yeah. This was an astronaut whose wife got shot by some lunatic who wanted attention. So he buys a gun to get attention. And the guy that sold it refuses to deliver to get attention.
The media gave them all what they wanted.
At some point we gotta stop feeding the trolls.

You claim he was a lunatic?  Why? Because that is what the media tells you?  Sure, "look at him, he looks crazy", maybe he was.  People need to stop minimizing these actions and look into the true issues instead of pushing them aside.  People are fed up with our politicians,  they need to listen, instead of disarming.

WOW!  Are you real?


Completely for real.  I'm not stating he is or is not fit to be in public, I am simply asking a completely valid question.  However, I guess you have completely solved the mysteries of the mind.
 
Displayed 50 of 334 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report