arma virumque cano (et alia)
"A gun at home does not protect me. A gun at home makes me 3 times as likely to be murdered, 3-5 times as likely to commit suicide and 4 times as likely to cause my own accidental death. How many statistics do you need?" How truly hypocritical coming from someone who not only owns firearms, they got caught attempting a straw purchase of an AR-15. Fortunately the sale was stopped by one of those profit seeking FFLs who determined that he wasn't being truthful in filling out the paperwork. I guess you could even say that Cpt. Kelly now qualifies as one of Mike's "hidden criminals"
That's trumped up bullshit. He didn't get "caught attempting a straw purchase of an AR-15." I do see a bit of a problem with the claim that having a gun in the home makes things worse when it's a gun owner making the claim. These should be two separate gun control approaches. The one says no guns is better. The other says, like I do, that the qualifications need to be higher and the sanctions for misuse stricter.
Because it doesn't matter which camp is right. The key thing is to have as many people as possible convinced to support gun control--not to have them anywhere near being on the same page.
"He didn't get "caught attempting a straw purchase of an AR-15." You're likely right Mike. I believe that what really happened was that he went and started the purchase of a handgun and the AR. Then someone recognized him and quite legitimately took him to task for pushing for bans on assault weapons, yet buying one for himself. He then goes into damage control mode and pulls the "buying it for the Tuscon PD" explanation out of his fourth point of contact. However by making that claim, the purchase went from being a hypocrital, but perfectly legal individual purchase into an illegal straw purchase and him admitting publically that he lied on the 4473 where it asks if the purchaser if they are buying it for someone else. Ironically, to prevent the shame of his being caught purchasing something that at the time they were trying to ban, he admitted to committing an act that they are now saying (and saying it back then too) is a serious problem, namely straw purchases. Here is the sequence of events,"Breitbart News received a tip on this when Neil McCabe, editor of Guns & Patriots newsletter, contacted us on March 7 and said:Mark E. Kelly, made purchases which included an AR-15--sometimes described as an "assault rifle"--at 3:30 pm on the afternoon of March 5 at Diamondback Police Supply, 170 S. Kolb Street, Tucson, AZ.According to McCabe, witnesses to the purchases claimed Kelly purchased "high capacity" magazines as well.On March 6, McCabe contacted Kelly's gun control group--"Americans for Responsible Solutions"--and on March 8 they replied that his message had been passed on to colleagues who handle press requests. Breitbart News then began investigating the details surrounding the purchase, including visiting the gun store.Suddenly, Kelly announced on his Facebook page that he was not going to keep the AR-15, which he has yet to pick up from the store. Days after making the purchases, Kelly wrote on Facebook: I just had a background check a few days ago when I went to my local gun store to buy a .45. As I was leaving, I noticed a used AR-15. Bought that too. Even to buy an assault weapon, the background check only takes a matter of minutes. I don't have possession of it yet but I'll be turning it over to the Tucson PD when I do." http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/03/09/Gabby-Giffords-Husband-Buys-AR-15-Announces-He-s-Not-Keeping-It-After-News-Leaks-Out After hearing Cpt. Kelly's explanation, the FFL rightfully canceled the sale. Can we say oops?
I didn't remember it that way. I thought the explanation was that he was simply trying to demonstrate how easy it is to buy one.I imagine when he was recognized as the enemy, it got a little chaotic, but there was no hypocrisy and no straw purchasing. The "turning it over to the Tucson PD," is what people are supposed to do with guns they don't want. As I said, trumped up bullshit.
"The "turning it over to the Tucson PD," is what people are supposed to do with guns they don't want."I will agree with you to a point, but to buy something you don't want in the first place to immediately turn it over to the police is what the trumped up bullshit is here. This is where the charge of straw purchase is coming from. The police dept. doesn't need his help of weapons purchasing.He wasn't demonstrating anything, he just got caught in the act of being contradictive (do as I say, not as I do), being a hypocrite and tried some trumped up bullshit excuse which in the end made it worse for him. The FFL seen his statement and rightly cancelled the sale as there was no other way to see it as anything else other than a straw purchase, even for the police dept. The statement was made BEFORE he could take possession, the sale cancelled BEFORE he could take possession because of his statement. So in this case, how can you say he was going to turn it over because he didn't want it? There are other, better lawful methods of proving a point. Any one of which (if this was his intention) a lawyer could have helped him with to do so and not get in trouble. And if it was his intention to prove a point, WHO was he trying to prove it to?? The was no media, no interviewer, no recordings made, nothing made in advance to bring his point. What was he going to prove, that going thru all the legal steps gets you a gun?Simply going thru a background check doesn't need to mean a final sale of any firearm has been made. You must go thru the check in the first place just to purchase a firearm, but a sale doesn't have to be made, it just clears you for the purchase of such. His point could have been made there, right then and there. Instead he laid out the money for it, and there is the problem. Someone had recognized him and he tried to back pedal and the best excuse he had turned out to be bullshit and damn near got his ass in the slammer.It figures that you, Mike, would try to excuse a gun grabber for breaking the law, but you would excoriate anyone else for attempting this.Here is an example of you being hypocritical.Here is your sign.
Man, you twisted the shit out of that story. You should have stopped with "I agree with you...""He wasn't demonstrating anything, he just got caught in the act of being contradictive (do as I say, not as I do), being a hypocrite and tried some trumped up bullshit excuse which in the end made it worse for him."Are you saying he really wanted the gun for himself and lied about intending to turn it over to the police? That doesn't even make sense.The FFL guy didn't cancel the deal because it was a straw purchase, he cancelled it because this was a gun control guy trying to make gun sellers look bad. The bullshit accusation of straw purchasing was just an excuse."the was no media, no interviewer, no recordings made"Not true. There was a video recording of the whole transaction, which made it clear he was doing it to demonstrate how easy it is."damn near got his ass in the slammer"Nonsense. You made that shit up right now.
You really do hate the truth don't you.