Today is Tuesday, September 30, 2014rss RSS feed
Sig Sauer M400 5.56mm AR rifle

Sig Sauer M400 5.56mm AR rifle

AmmoLand Gun News

AmmoLand Gun News

Washington DC - -(Ammoland.com)- Why did Mark Kelly pick a rifle for which he has yet to do a background check?

Kelly, a gun regulation advocate and husband of former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, has explained that he bought an AR-15 rifle last week because he wanted to show how “easy” it was to buy an “assault weapon.”

Yet if that were really his purpose, why did he purchase a traded-in rifle for which he must wait 20 days–and for which he must still complete a background check? Why not purchase a new rifle he could have claimed immediately?

Kelly may have completed the background check process for the pistol he bought, but not for the AR-15. On March 12 2013, after Breitbart News contacted Diamondback Police Supply, the store where Kelly bought the weapons, the store’s owner Douglas MacKinlay provided the following statement to the media:

On March 5, 2013 Mr. Mark Kelly purchased a Sig Sauer 45 caliber pistol and a Sig Sauer M400 5.56 AR style rifle from my company, Diamondback Police Supply Co. in Tucson, AZ. The rifle, having been purchased in trade from another customer, cannot be released to Mr. Kelly or any other customer for a minimum of 20 days in accordance with local ordinances. Mr. Kelly did not ask for any modifications to the rifle, nor are we making any. Once the hold period is up, Mr. Kelly must then show proper identification, complete the Federal Firearms Transfer Record (Form 4473) and successfully complete the NICS background check prior to his taking physical possession of the firearm. [emphasis added]

The “local ordinances” that apply to the Sig Sauer M400 5.56mm AR-style rifle required that the AR-15 be placed on hold for 20 days because it was second-hand. If Kelly’s goal was to show how easy the background check system really is, why didn’t he buy a new “assault rifle” so he could take possession of it immediately, thereby allowing him to finish the background check on day he originally walked into the store–March 5th 2013?

When CNN’s Wolf Blitzer asked Kelly on Monday what it was like going into a gun store and “buying an AR-15.” Kelly said that for such a “deadly” weapon, “especially with the high capacity magazines, it’s a pretty easy thing to do, even with the background check.

He went on to say: “public access to these [weapons] is too easy, as I demonstrated the other day.”

Yet Kelly has not completed the process of taking possession of the AR-15.

Kelly has openly stated that his plan from the beginning was to buy such a firearm and hand it over to the police (even though, as Breitbart News reported, under pending legislation the police would likely have to sell the AR-15 rather than destroying it, returning it to the streets).

In that case, wouldn’t any AR-style rifle do?

Instead, he picked one that required a 20-day waiting period and extended the background check process for weeks.

Is there a chance Mark Kelly picked the AR-15 simply because he wanted it–at a discounted price?

About:
AWR Hawkins writes for all the BIG sites, for Pajamas Media, for RedCounty.com, for Townhall.com and now AmmoLand Shooting Sports News.

His southern drawl is frequently heard discussing his take on current events on radio shows like America’s Morning News, the G. Gordon Liddy Show, the Ken Pittman Show, and the NRA’s Cam & Company, among others. He was a Visiting Fellow at the Russell Kirk Center for Cultural Renewal (summer 2010), and he holds a PhD in military history from Texas Tech University.

If you have questions or comments, email him at awr@awrhawkins.com. You can find him on facebook at www.facebook.com/awr.hawkins.

  • 21 User comments to “Gun Shop Owner Says Mark Kelly Has Not Completed Background Check For New AR-15”

    1. [...] Read More… Share This! « NBC “Sources”: NRA won’t oppose background check deal – if Democrats cede tough records fight Search The Site [...]

    2. richard c on March 13, 2013 at 10:59 AM said:

      On the b/g check form – there is a yes/no question that asks if you are the primary buyer and keeper of the firearm; Is kelly’s intent is to be a straw-man buyer? But in the end, kelly is a domestic terrorists for promoting gun controls and confiscations- I will no longer spend my $$ with diamondback police supply who seems all too eager to support this progressive puke…..

    3. I find it rather comical that, when Kelly wanted to show how “easy” it was to purchase an AR, he went to a Police Supply store – an establishment where one would not expect the management to take any shortcuts nor cut anyone any slack – and where most of the patrons can be expected to be armed, wear badges and be extremely law-abiding. Tell me again – whose side is he on?

      I am sure the local PD can find a good use for the AR, though – since most LE agencies are trying to survive on tight budgets that don’t have any spare change set aside for equipping their officers with proper duty rifles. 8-D Congratulations, Tuscon PD – you can expect your gift in a few more weeks.

    4. [...] Yet, Diamondback Police Supply, the store where Kelly bought the weapons, the store’s owner Douglas MacKinlay provided the following statement to the media on Ammoland: [...]

    5. This Kelley piece of sh*t is a real piece of work. If I was Diamondback Police Supply I wouldn’t even deal with this loser.Kelley is trying to set them up for something,that I know for a fact. Send this scum back into orbit and blow off re-intry.HBH

    6. Tedomatic on March 14, 2013 at 12:00 PM said:

      Mark Kelly must have left his head in space after his last space shuttle trip.

    7. He was trying to be cheap and he wanted to have a gun and mags, before a ban, he did buy a .45 too, so he is acting just like the political elite.
      He should be investigated for an attempted straw purchase. I don’t know why he’s being so Cheap, when he is getting Paid good money for being anti 2nd Amendment.
      Diamondback police supply should refuse to complete the sale of the rifle, and sell it to someone that would be proud to own it.

    8. John Clausen on March 14, 2013 at 2:34 PM said:

      Why do these people keep trying to deny Law Abiding Citizens of there 2nd Amendment rights. JC

    9. Jeffrey on March 14, 2013 at 2:04 PM said:

      Mark Kelly is a BALD HEADED political puppet !! What a s$%it bag!!! The Supply store should tell him to pound sand !!!
      Hes a lying POS dumb ass no better than any of the Jag Off’s trying to ban the guns !!
      He swore an oath to defend the Constitution the GD TRAITOR!!!!

    10. Kelly is a Zero.Diamondback should deny his request to purchase.Let him go cry to gabby.Poor Gabby.

    11. So, he bought it legally to hand it over to the police. What the hell would that prove. They already knew he could buy it. That makes absolutely no sense at all. He is going to spend thousands of dollars to hand it to them. I’m sure he would leave them scratching their heads but happy for the free gift that the one he handed it to, will take straight home with him. Damn, Christmas really came early this year. I had already thought up the new staring roles for a new “Dumb & Dumber” movie to be taken by Biden and Bloomberg, but this Kelly kind of throws a monkey wrench in it. I guess he and “Frankenstein” could star in a later movie!

    12. Bill Baker on March 14, 2013 at 3:45 PM said:

      But if he bought it to hand over to someone else, wouldn’t that be a straw purchase…

    13. He bought a legal firearm the legal way. The system works. If he wants to give any more away, I’d be willing to take them. A Les Baer 45 would be nice.

    14. So Kelly lied to Blitzer and gave him the impression he had the AR-15 in his possession. Just shows gun grabbers are liars and you can’t believe anything that comes out of their mouths. The only way they will tell the truth is when a lie won’t do.

    15. Hope Kelly had to give Diamondback money up front, because if I were them, I would keep his money and AR-15 for lying to Blitzer and the media about the “easy” sale. Just walked in and out with it, huh? He also lied about Diamondback making an illegal sale to him. Law suit sounds like it is in order for Diamondback against Kelly.

    16. I understand why most of you here are so upset about all this. I certainly am more than tired of the duplicity and hypocrisy of the gun grabbers, ALL of them. I am NOT happy with some of the obscene comments toward Mark Kelly, I do believe that the message can be delivered without the obscenities. This reflects badly on those of us in the so-called “gun advocate” groups. I am more than certain that Kelly and Giffords should have expected the criticism and backlash. If there has been a violation of Federal and/or State of AZ law, I believe it should be prosecuted to the full extent. They, after all, have said many times they want US prosecuted for the most minor of transgressions, and to result in forfeiture of all of our guns even before trial and conviction. The same goes for David Gregory, and mayor bloomberg. All of these people have violated Federal gun laws that the rest of us are careful not to violate.
      All I am asking is for commenters to watch the language because you can get the message across without bad language. Of course that also assumes the objects of criticism are capable of understanding.

    17. VT Patriot on March 14, 2013 at 5:02 PM said:

      Hmm, would seem to me that if Kelly was planning on buying a used AR style (referred to by the ‘low info voters as an assault weapon) to give it to someone else, then Diamondback should refuse the sale, and have the local LEO’s present when he comes to pick it up. Bingo, instant prison time and fine…

    18. Straw buyer, yes. He must be held accountable. What is more, he lives in Houston. He has a Texas drivers license. It is illegal to sell a fire arm to him anyway. If he does live here, what other laws is he breaking?? Is he paying state income tax? Where is his car registered?
      And why can he not buy American?? A couple of Sigs??

    19. Uh, it’s easy, because he’s not a convicted felon. I presume so, because the pistol transfer went through; I don’t really know him. That’s the way it should be. Had it been that easy to buy an M2 machinegun, or an RPG or something, eh, maybe too easy, if it worked like that. Otherwise, who cares? I don’t.

    20. Mark Kelly should have been lost in space with his brain. It’s obviously not in his skull here on Earth! His misleading statements lead the public to believe that he had purchased those firearms as easily as one can buy a candy bar at a stop-and-rob! He can’t even purchase an ar in a way that would have served his case in a “somewhat” better light? This guy is an astronaut? Seriously? Nah. No way!

    21. Tom Miller on April 4, 2013 at 12:40 PM said:

      I like Mark Kelley and have since he became noted as Gabriell’s ‘husband’. I would imagine he is in a tough position and isn’t really sure where he stands on bearing arms. I can understand that, after his wife’s senseless shooting, he would be in turmoil about it. Hey, at least he doesn’t present his case sounding like a rabid dog, as do most of these anti-gun idiots!

    Leave a Comment

    • Sign up Ammoland for your Inbox

      Daily Digest

      Monthly Newsletter

    • Recent Comments

      • JohntheDeerking: funny how there has been no news about Boxer’s antigun stance lately. She has been keeping a...
      • Winston Smith: “I would prefer a dangerous freedom to a peacefull slavery” Thomas Jefferson . Well put...
      • Mike: I support Krogers and shop there now because they support the 2nd Amendment. If they turn their back on the 2nd...
      • Idadho: We need to see more faux carry going on. A full cover holster (empty) and a guitar case with gun decals and a...
      • Mike: “We the People” need to stand-up and stop this injustice across our Nation! The 2nd Amendment is...
    • Social Activity

    • Most Popular Posts

    • AmmoLand Poll

    Copyright 2014 AmmoLand.com Shooting Sports News | Sitemap | Μολὼν λαβέ
    14352712
    14954360