Tuesday, March 26, 2013

Gabby Gifford's Hubby Denied Delivery of AR-15

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Tucson gun store owner cancels Mark Kelly's AR-15 purchase
The owner of a Tucson gun store where Mark Kelly recently purchased an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle canceled the transaction because Kelly did not plan to keep the rifle for his personal use.

Doug MacKinlay, owner of Diamondback Police Supply at 170 S. Kolb Road, posted on the store’s Facebook page Monday that he canceled the transaction March 21. A full refund was sent to Kelly via express mail, MacKinlay said.

“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 Form 4473 and NICS (National Instant Criminal Background Check System) required of Mr. Kelly before he could take possession of this firearm"... Kelly has said he purchased the AR-15 to show how easy it is to buy an assault weapon. He said he planned to turn it in to the Tucson Police Department.

So, Gabby Gifford's husband can't take possession of an AR-15 "assault" rifle, because the seller determined that the firearm was not for the personal use of the purchaser. In other words, current law is working.

A couple of questions I had concerned the federal forms involved. Would Mark Kelly have to perjure himself in order to take possession of a gun he had no intention of keeping? And perhaps more importantly, was his newly minted gun control advocacy group, Americans for Responsible Solutions going to reimburse him for the purchase? If ARS were to reimburse him for the purchase, Mark Kelly would have become the classic straw man purchaser of firearms, buying a gun on behalf of another, when you have no intention of keeping the gun yourself?

Did this gun store owner, perhaps, save Mark Kelly from himself?

Cross posted at LCR.


  1. You can go to the ATF web site and download the form 4473. I've filled two of them out and one of the questions is asking if the gun is for personal use.

    1. If he would have checked "no", he would have been denied the gun. If he checked "yes" and lied about it, it's a felony. I think the gun shop did him a big favor.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.