You would think an astronaut would have some common sense but, in the case of Mark E. Kelly, husband of former congresswomn Gabby Giffords, you might very well be wrong. The following is one of those WTF? moments.
Mark E. Kelly, gun-control proponent and husband to former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, recently purchased an AR-15 (an "assault weapon," he called it)—which he now says he intended as an illustration of the need for more stringent gun laws...
Someone educate me. How does buying a firearm legally, illustrate the need for more stringent gun laws? Is Mr. Kelly a convicted criminal? Has he been adjudged a danger to himself or others? Has he ever been institutionalized for a mental disorder? Is he under a domestic restraining order? These facts are what would constitute denying Mr. Kelly or anyone else from legally buying a firearm in Arizona. So what exactly is Mr. Kelly trying to accomplish, other than the outright ban on all firearms?
Kelly reportedly bought the AR-15 and a 1911-style semi-automatic pistol at a gun store in Tucson, Arizona.
According to McCabe, witnesses to the purchases claimed Kelly purchased "high capacity" magazines as well...
Arizona has instant computerized background checks that take only a matter of minutes. In addition, Arizona has no holding period for firearms pickups. Usually the entire process of buying a firearm in Arizona takes about one hour, assuming that the background check comes back clean. The requried dealer record of sale takes longer to fill out than does the computerized background check. Those conditions are what the Arizona legislature enacted and they seem to be quite adequate for the citizens of Arizona. On the other hand mentally health checks and related records around the don't seem to always make it into the national computerized data bank. Is that the fault of legal gun owners or gun buyers?
Perhaps Mark E. Kelly might like to devote his energy to support more mental health checks on individuals who have expressed in actions or words, their possible mental instability, considering the guy that almost murdered his wife, was mentally disordered and people around him, knew it and did nothing. I would ask Mr. Kelly to answer the question in the photo below and then tell me with a straight face that it's a gun problem in America.
Kelly indicated that he had not taken possession of the AR 15 yet, but would donate it to the Tucson PD. How noble.
Kelly has not commented on whether he will also return the .45 caliber semi-automatic pistol he purchased...
What's with that? The point of this posting is to illustrate the failure of government to identify the real problems with guns and the failure of government to apply existing laws on gun controls. The most egregious failure of government is its failure to provide adequate community health services to include reporting of those people with known mental health issues in the national computer data base used for background checks. Is that the fault of gun owners and gun buyers? Only a fool or a liberal progressive would continue to assert that it is.
Straw purchase? So if Mark Kelly bought the AR15 with the intent of
ReplyDeletegiving it to the Tuscon police doesn't that qualify as a straw purchase
and isn't that illegal?
Your point is well taken since the purchase does fit the legal description of a straw purchase. I say cite Mark Kelly for perjury on the Dealer Record Of Sale document that all gun purchasers must sign and attest to as being true and correct. The DROS specifically questions whether the purchase is for the buyer or someone else (straw purchaser), which would make it an illegal purchase even for the Tucson PD.
ReplyDeleteOkay, I vented. The problem is that there are legal exceptions to the straw purchase issue and this one would probably fit into the exception of a legal transfer to a lawfully eligible recipient. I've seen businesses for advertising purposes buy a gun in order to award it to a legally eligible customer based upon a random drawing. It fits into the exception.
I still believe that Mark Kelly was just grandstanding. He should be devoting his energy toward improving mental health checks on people suspected of having dangerous mental health issues, thus preventing them from legally obtaining a firearm.