Posted on 03/27/2013 6:57:08 AM PDT by OzarkSailor
“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 [sic] for his personal use,” Douglas MacKinlay, owner of Diamondback Police Supply, said in the post.
(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.nbcnews.com ...
He was the “actual buyer.” No one gave him money to purchase the forearm, as far as we know.
He should be charged!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Straw buy. That’s a felony here.
From what I read the other day, he hadn’t completed that form.
If this guy had any decency he would not have let his brain damaged wife be used as a pawn for a political party. Would you?
He would have let her resign so someone could fill her seat and allow her district proper representation.
And he would have not let her aides vote for her on important bills that she is in no way able to evaluate on her own.
Mark is truly one of the most disgusting human beings on this planet.
Nope. Not a straw buy. Right there on the ATF Form 4473 in the instructions it specifically states you can buy a firearm as a gift for someone else, and when you do so, you answer "Yes" to the question (11.a.) if you are the buyer/transferee.
So is Mark Kelly going to get prosecuted,
***********
Did he fill 4473?
Not a straw buy. He's using his own funds, and the form specifically states in the instructions (Page 4 for question 11.a.) that if you are buying the firearm as a gift for someone else (not if you've been given money by someone else to buy for them), then you answer "Yes" to that question when it asks if you are the buyer/transferee.
Read the form itself, I've linked to it in my post 8, above. The instructions say to answer yes to 11.a if you are buying it as a gift, same as if you intended to keep it/use it. Not a straw purchase. Let's go after him for being a hypocrite, but the gift issue is a non-starter.
Kelly swore on his form 4473 that the forearm was for his personal use. The form is a sworn document , sworn under the penalty of perjury.
Kelly had no ontend to use the forearm, he purchased it for another purpose, a political one designed to destroy the very 2nd amendment right he relied on when he completed the sworn document.
Kelly is therefore gulty of perjury, and it is likely felony perjury pursuant to federal statute.
Kelly should be prosecuted as a felon, and subsequently barred from ever purchasing another firearm as a convicted felon.
This story needs to be posted some more on FR.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3000863/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3000845/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3000842/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2997086/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2996934/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2996826/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2996486/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2996387/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2996376/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2996273/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2995941/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2995524/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2995341/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2995269/posts
And probably others as well.
why do they need to know the race, ethnicity?
No, the form specifically as this question: 11.a "Are you the actual transferee/buyer of the firearm(s) listed on this form?" There is a warning about buying on behalf of someone else (taking their money and buying the gun for them).
The instructions on the form specifically state that you are to answer "Yes" to this question if you are the actual transferee/buyer or if you are buying the firearm as a gift, and gives a specific scenario on this, as well. As stated in his story, his answer on this form would be "Yes" regardless of whether he was really gifting it, or keeping it for himself.
No.
No.
No.
No.
As much as I hate Kelly, he wouldn’t have done anything wrong answering yes to 11a/12a on form 4473.
Why this keeps coming up is beyond me. It’s right there on the form. It tells you to answer yes.
However, Kelly never filled out the form at all. He had to wait 20 days before completing the purchase because the gun was used.
So all this talk about prosecuting Kelly is ridiculous.
Not sure for the specifics, but if there are two John J. Johnsons out there, and one is white, the other black, then it would help in the background check.
I'm not a FFL dealer, I just have done a few transactions recently, and have read the form thoroughly.
Kelly is a perfect example of an ass hat.
Why is it rediculous? I would prosecute Kelly for just breathing. LOL.
The form is usually completed before the back ground check is made. The form would have been completed before he paid for the weapon, and then placed in a customer file by the Seller. The 20 day wait would begin and the federal check performed by telephone , taking just a few minutes,just before the firearm was delivered.
The form is a sworn document. Perjury is perjury.
Prosecute Kelly, and then CRUCIFY HIM! LOL.
Or is it one law for liberals and another law for conservatives? ( Thats the way things are BTW, we have two systems of law now, depending on whether you are liberal or conservative, whether you are white or a person of color, but then few people even know that yet. They will soon, very soon.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.