Will they prosecute??

Discussion in 'Politics and Religion' started by squirrelhunter, Mar 13, 2013.

Tags: Add Tags
  1. oldbrass

    oldbrass Well-Known Member

    1,362
    0
    He`s there poster boy....Uncle Joe will get him off
     

  2. SWO1

    SWO1 Well-Known Member Lifetime Supporting

    2,866
    41
    Read the explaniation on the ATF FORM for question 11.a on the back. I would find it hard to believe he commited any crime by answering YES. He did not intend (and did not) transfer the firearm to a person who was not eligable to purchase it him/herself.

    I have done this on several occasions, most reciently on the purchase of the Taurus .38 special. I fully intended to give it to my daughter who is NOT PROHIBITED from firearm purchases, and has done so. In my case and his the instructions DIRECT to answer YES ON 11.a.

    The author of this article, or anyone else may not agree with him on his actions.....BUT LETS NOT GRASP AT STRAWS. He has the RIGHT like the rest of us to do with it as he pleases...LAWFULLY. He can bust it up with a BFH if thats his desire.
     
  3. oldbrass

    oldbrass Well-Known Member

    1,362
    0
    Why is there all the talk about him committing a crime..or is it just more blow-hard media ??
     
  4. SWO1

    SWO1 Well-Known Member Lifetime Supporting

    2,866
    41
    It's that 10% oldbrass. The percentage holds true for both sides of the issue.
     
  5. FOUR4D4

    FOUR4D4 Moderator Moderator

    7,886
    63
    I dont even think its him filling out the paper work
     
  6. SWO1

    SWO1 Well-Known Member Lifetime Supporting

    2,866
    41
    He does have the photo posted on his facebook page along with the story behind it. Just another American excersing his righs under a numer of items in the Bill Of Rights. I really dont see why anyone would have a problem with him doing this. He also says he purchased a .45. SO WHAT !!!

    The media company that posted this article is mostly a large critizier of the Goverment. But they also have that right under the 1st Admendment, just as the Supporters of it do. And they didn't bring up the legality of the purchase, they just posted a comment by someone else on a public forum.

    In reading a lot of the comments on the opinions under that story it AMAZES me how many people do not comprehend or understand the ATF form and how the questions should be answered. It's about 6-8 pages long with clarifications on every item that must be answered. I wonder how many have READ IT...??? I think for most who have purchased more than 1 or 2 all they know is Yes to No. 11 a., NO to the rest on page 1, turn to page 2 and sign/date at the top.
     
  7. hombre243

    hombre243 Well-Known Member

    1,815
    3
    Clear as a bell to me....now.

    Thanks SW. I admit I was on the side that saw this as illegal until you brought up the legality issue concerning who would receive the gun after the purchase. I saw it as a straw purchase too. However your explanation turned me around. As long as the one who receives the guns can legally have a gun in his or her possession, and/or can actually purchase one legally, then it is ok to buy a firearm as a gift and give it to that person.

    Thanks
     
  8. greyhawk50

    greyhawk50 Well-Known Member

    1,970
    0
    I have to agree with SWO1.
    I've kept quiet on this because my opinion plus $1.55 will get you a medium coffee at Tim Horton's. Along with that, it won't change anything by causing friction on this extremely friendly forum.
    I consider myself a constitutional patriot and I totally support the traditional translation of the 2nd. amendment.
    But; to the best of my knowledge, it is legal to purchase a firearm with the intent of presenting it as a gift, providing the recipient can legally possess said firearm. I have done it myself more than once. However, I've been informed that purchasing a firearm as a gift for an underage grandchild is illegal unless you are the legal guardian. The gifted firearm must go through the parent/guardian.
    With all that said, Kelly has the constitutional right to express his opinion, even if I don't agree with his point of view.
    And, assuming that he qualifies, he also has the constitutional right to buy a firearm.
    We can't restrict his constitutional rights just because we disagree with his political point of view.
    I don't mean to offend but that is my humble opinion.
     
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2013
  9. Spoon

    Spoon Well-Known Member

    560
    0
    Agree with SWO1. This is just a recoil effect to lash out against an ally of the Enemy of the People, aka, Barry, Dianne, Harry et.al.

    Most of adults would be "guilty" under this style of thought process since many parents and grandparents bought us our first shoot'n iron!

    He did what he did, partly out of support for his spouse, some for his self-motivated "pity" he probably feels and because he truly isn't a firearms enthusiast, shooter or hunter. That's why it doubly important to MARK YOUR CALENDAR/SAVE THE DATE of 15 June 2013 and take family members to task at a range or a muddy bank or sand dune and join in the Nation-wide "Take your Family to the Range Day" that you may have seen me post info on before. Get going NOW to find other RKBA supporters and even organize an event. Still have 3 months to make things happen. We'll have ages 5 through 66 covered at our family's event. I suggest everyone consider the same. Maybe even drag in the "NO GUNS IN THIS HOUSE" neighbor of some and make a convert!

    As for "Mr. Gabby"...that's fodder for the media and what they don't have to say about something actual...they'll make up anyway.
    Spoon
     
  10. FOUR4D4

    FOUR4D4 Moderator Moderator

    7,886
    63
    Its all to stir the pot like the picture of Obummer and the shotgun. real but just there to strike the nerve of the public and belivers in the 2nd admendment