Gun Store Cancels Mark Kelly's AR-15 Purchase

Status
Not open for further replies.
I wouldn't let MY business be used as a political pawn. If I knew what he planned to do, and I thought it would put my business in a negative light, for his own ends, I would not allow it. He can exercise his 2A rights somewhere else.

The right to swing your fist ends at the beginning of my nose. Your right to make a political statement ends when they put MY interests in jeopardy.
 
Seems a bit hypocritical, as we clamor for politicians to keep their hands off of our 2nd Amendment Rights, to deny someone who still has a legal right to purchase a firearm of their right.
 
Diamondback Police Supply has the legal right to not allow themselves to become pawns in a blatantly obvious political move that has the potential to put them in a bad light.
 
Tough position to be in, PR-wise, but the transaction appears to be perfectly legal. All Mr. Kelly did was make a legitimate purchase in a completely normal way, proving that the process works as it is designed to work.

It is an owner's prerogative to choose with whom he or she does business, but a contract is a contract. If I were the owner I'd allow the purchase to go through, but I would seriously consider banning Mr. Kelly from my store henceforth.
 
Gifting is still perfectly legal. So, why shouldn't Mr. Kelly be allowed to purchase a AR15?

I never said that gifting wasn't legal. However now that the FFL knows he is not planning on keeping it, he may question his intent and refuse the sale. Is someone planning to have the press show up when comes to pick it up or something else that's even worse? Question 11a of the 4473 (if I recall) comes to mind. The FFL is just looking out for his best interests when he has concerns about his 4473 responses and refuses the sale.

chuck
 
So 'gifting' should be grounds to deny a sale? I am sure that if the government made gifting firearms illegal, we as a community would be, excuse the pun, up in arms about it.
 
Nobody is denying Kelly's rights. He can still buy a gun he just can't buy one from Diamondback Police Supply. DPS has rights too and one of them is the right to refuse service to scum like Kelly who wanted to shower bad publicity on them and use them to harm their own industry.

Kudos DPS!
 
I don`t see any other point there than
grown men on both sides playing 6 year olds.
 
Kelly, a former astronaut, said he intended to eventually hand in the rifle to Tucson police but planned to keep the handgun.

So, he wanted to keep the kind of gun that nearly killed his wife, while turning in to the police a gun that had nothing whatsoever to do with it. I thought you had to be smart to be an astronaut. Apparently not.

The owner of that store deserves to lose his business license.
He made a deal.
Now stick to it.

Yeah. Private business owners shouldn't have any say so in who they do business with. If they begin under false pretenses, you should just let them use you to basically attempt to destroy your business. :rolleyes:
 
Nobody is denying Kelly's rights. He can still buy a gun he just can't buy one from Diamondback Police Supply. DPS has rights too and one of them is the right to refuse service to scum like Kelly who wanted to shower bad publicity on them and use them to harm their own industry.

Kudos DPS!
This.
 
I never said that gifting wasn't legal. However now that the FFL knows he is not planning on keeping it, he may question his intent and refuse the sale. Is someone planning to have the press show up when comes to pick it up or something else that's even worse? Question 11a of the 4473 (if I recall) comes to mind. The FFL is just looking out for his best interests when he has concerns about his 4473 responses and refuses the sale.

chuck

This is what I thought of as well but it appears that Kelly would still be ok under 11a since his intended purchase was as gift to the police department.

I'm ok with Diamondback Police Supply selling to whomever they choose. Planning to send an order their way today.
 
As soon as this happened we would read in the news that Mark Kelly purchased this firearm to make a statement from DIAMONDBACK POLICE SUPPLY and all you guys saying its his right to would probably be saying to boycott DPS. His store would be front and center as the store helping the anti's promote their agenda. Some of you people are unbelievable. This is the mentality that's destroying the country. The innocent guy just trying to protect himself gets bashed while the perpetrator conniving against is given support and just wants to exercise his right with the sole purpose of hurting the innocent bystander just doing his job and hurt the entire RKBA. The KKK are just exercising their rights too. Would you let them hold a rally in your front yard? If you say yes then and only then do you have the right to speak against DPS for protecting their "front yard", livelihood, and actually putting their morals and beliefs over a $.
 
As soon as this happened we would read in the news that Mark Kelly purchased this firearm to make a statement from DIAMONDBACK POLICE SUPPLY and all you guys saying its his right to would probably be saying to boycott DPS. His store would be front and center as the store helping the anti's promote their agenda. Some of you people are unbelievable. This is the mentality that's destroying the country. The innocent guy just trying to protect himself gets bashed while the perpetrator conniving against is given support and just wants to exercise his right with the sole purpose of hurting the innocent bystander just doing his job and hurt the entire RKBA. The KKK are just exercising their rights too. Would you let them hold a rally in your front yard? If you say yes then and only then do you have the right to speak against DPS for protecting their "front yard", livelihood, and actually putting their morals and beliefs over a $.

Can I get an AMEN!
 
Gun Dealer Refuses to be Used for Political Purposes by Gabby Giffords' Husband

Diamondback Police Supply, the gun dealership that was to sell the AR-15 type rifle to Mark Kelly, Gabby Gifford's Husband, has returned his money now that it has learned that he did not intend the rifle for personal use.

Here is the statement:
Statement of Douglas MacKinlay, Owner/President, Diamondback Police Supply Co., Inc.

“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 for his personal use. In light of this fact, I determined that it was in my company’s best interest to terminate this transaction prior to his returning to my store to complete the Federal From 4473 and NICS background check required of Mr. Kelly before he could take possession this firearm. A full refund was sent to Mr. Kelly, via express mail, on Thursday of last week.

The Sig Sauer rifle will be donated to the Arizona Tactical Officers Association where it will be raffled off to generate funds the association can use to purchase much needed tactical equipment for the organization’s members. The A.T.O. A. represents the SWAT and Special Response officers of the state’s law enforcement community who regularly place their lives on the line to protect the residents of this state.

Additionally, Diamondback Police Supply will make a $1295.00 contribution (the selling price of the M400 rifle) to the Eddie Eagle GunSafe Program that teaches children, in pre-K through 3rd grade, four important steps to take if they find a gun. The emphasis of the program is on child safety, something that is important to all of us and at the core of the current debate on gun control,” stated Douglas MacKinlay, Owner/President, Diamondback Police Supply Co., Inc.
It is nice to see a gun dealer stand on principle and refuse to be a pawn in political games designed to infringe on our Second Amendment rights.

It is an added bonus that a contribution will be made to teach children gun safety.

Kudos to Diamondback Police Supply for their defense of our Constitutional rights.

Link to facebook Statement of Douglas MacKinlay

Dean Weingarten

http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2013/03/gun-dealer-refuses-to-be-used-for.html
 
It's hardly hypocritical to deny the sale of a firearm to someone who wants to BAN that firearm. They are simply helping him stick to his principles.
 
On Facebook, Kelly said he planned to turn the weapon over to the police.

"I don't have possession yet but I'll be turning it over to the Tucson PD when I do," Kelly wrote. "Scary to think of people buying guns like these without a background check at a gun show or the Internet. We really need to close the gun show and private seller loop hole."

If this is what Kelly thinks he is to stupid to have that gun.

FFLs at gun shows run checks.
 
The reason he and his wife had licenses to carry was exactly for the situation that happened to her. To protect themselves from a bad guy "or mad man" with a gun, what changed, other than not having their guns on them when this finally did happen. Maybe someone would have been able to shoot the guy before he got off more than 1 or 2 rounds.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top