• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Reporter tries to buy AR15, gets denied for being violent, blames everybody else

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
MongGrel said:
I'm a Democratic Marine with many guns, some of you people on the forums sound like complete idiots to be honest.

There are too many "patriotic" right wingers in the world that haven't done a thing in their life in regards to actually doing government service that think owning an AR15 makes them automatically patriotic for some stupid reason.
Click to expand...
So its up to you to conclude this (after pulling it out of your ass who served and who didn't) and decide they don't deserve their AR-15s or whatever other guns, right?

You don't exactly sound too bright. But thanks for serving your country.
 
Artdeco said:
Am guessing here, but it sounds as if he volunteered the info, likely while filling out the form. I notice they didn't print the gun store's response...

Alcohol abuse is a red flag as is domestic violence...

NCIS just comes back as proceed, deny or delay.
Click to expand...

Then he lied on his documentation which is a federal crime:

With respect to him filling out the paper work:

A federal form asking, was I an illegal alien? No. Was I a fugitive? Again no. Had I ever been convicted on charges of domestic abuse? No. Handed over my credit card: $842.50. Another $40 for the instructor to acquaint me with the gun the next day.
Click to expand...
 
PokerGuy said:
Good stuff. Of course it's the evil gun industry that had it in for him (last part of article). Of course you delusional lefty, of course. 😀

I've said it many times, guns are to the lefties what abortion is the evangelical right: they abandon all logic, lose all perspective, lose their minds and go through all sorts of gyrations to deal with the cognitive dissonance. They will try anything to get around pesky constitutional hurdles and get to their ultimate goal of banning.
Click to expand...

The only reason it's funny to you is because he's on the other team.

If they denied a sale to a real American would you feel the same?
 
Spungo said:
Well the guy was yelling allahu ackbar while wearing sandals and dressed like a wizard, but we can't refuse to sell him a gun just because we suspect he'll do something we disagree with. That would be discrimination. We should be forced to sell guns to people even if they're openly talking about what they plan to do with the gun.
Click to expand...

Way to co-sign an inane false equivalence troll post... Congrats.
 
agent00f said:
I'm confused, are people still saying he lied on the form? I didn't see anything about a conviction via google.
Click to expand...

From what I read he was not denied by the background check, but the dealer decided they didn't want to sell to him because of his past. I initially wondered how they found out about his history, from the police? Then Artdeco suggested his form may reveal something, but I found that he said no to domestic assault convictions. So if he was convicted then he lied. The article alluded to him having issues with alcohol and domestic violence. Finally we found out about his own memoir, so that easily explains how the gun shop found out about his past. Its available through a google search.

So it looks like the gun shop searched him and then denied based on their own volition even though he passed the background, which is their right to do.

At least that is how I understand it.
 
Subyman said:
From what I read he was not denied by the background check, but the dealer decided they didn't want to sell to him because of his past. I initially wondered how they found out about his history, from the police? Then Artdeco suggested his form may reveal something, but I found that he said no to domestic assault convictions. So if he was convicted then he lied. The article alluded to him having issues with alcohol and domestic violence. Finally we found out about his own memoir, so that easily explains how the gun shop found out about his past. Its available through a google search.

So it looks like the gun shop searched him and then denied based on their own volition even though he passed the background, which is their right to do.

At least that is how I understand it.
Click to expand...

We don't know for sure, but yours is a reasonable explanation. He did tell them his purpose and intent to give it to local law enforcement, he did say enough so they considered buying it back from him, and it was discussed, they were probably suspicious after meeting him and talking to him. No reason to make the shop look bad, just deny the sale, as is/was their right.
 
Gonad the Barbarian said:
The store just decided not to sell to him. All else fails he'll get one at a gun show.
Click to expand...

Not in Illinois he won't. His FOID was already revoked which is why he failed the background check. Now if he tries to use the revoked FOID he's going to be facing some serious music at the hands of a state government that won't care that he's a reporter.
 
SlowSpyder said:
Interesting. They treated it just like a firearm. If it matters, it was a ~1000FPS gun, so more powerful than a Red Ryder BB gun, CO2 gun, etc. Not sure if that mattered. At any rate, I ran up to Gander Mountain a few miles up I94 and got what I wanted. 🙂
Click to expand...

yeah. I got a .22 caliber pellet gun. fucker was accurate at 100yards. I loved that gun . granted that was 20ish years ago. possible they changed it over the years.

I have also got 2 red ryder's (kids love them!) about a year ago.

BTW if you near rockford they got a Gander Mountain now! woot.


Artdeco said:
What about balsamic vinegar, waggy?
Click to expand...

ROFL. all clear on that too.
 
Artdeco said:
We don't know for sure, but yours is a reasonable explanation. He did tell them his purpose and intent to give it to local law enforcement, he did say enough so they considered buying it back from him, and it was discussed, they were probably suspicious after meeting him and talking to him. No reason to make the shop look bad, just deny the sale, as is/was their right.
Click to expand...

So, they basically denied him because he was a reporter. This thread is becoming even more trollier. And I'm confused. We have this constitutionally guaranteed 2nd amendment right, yet individuals can arbitrarily decide whether we can exercise it or not? Why isn't the pro gun right crowd in a tizzy over this?
 
Last edited:
Zaap said:
So its up to you to conclude this (after pulling it out of your ass who served and who didn't) and decide they don't deserve their AR-15s or whatever other guns, right?

You don't exactly sound too bright. But thanks for serving your country.
Click to expand...

You're right, I'm pretty fucking stupid.

I'll go back to my usual policy of not responding to anything you post in the future, as it is usually drivel to begin with.
 
emperus said:
So, they basically denied him because he was a reporter. This thread is becoming even more trollier. And I'm confused. We have this constitutionally guaranteed 2nd amendment right, yet individuals can arbitrarily decide whether we can exercise it or not? Why isn't the pro gun right crowd in a tizzy over this?
Click to expand...

Had he gone to the gun store and not played the fool, and kept his mouth shut, it likely wouldn't have been an issue, I like my FFL guy, why in the world would anyone in their right mind open themselves up to this guy's BS?

It's like a resturaunt, they can refuse to sell to anyone, particularly with someone who's been involuntarily committed to alcohol treatment and been charged with spousal abuse.

Being a FFL holder doesn't mean you're a public service and have to do anything except follow the law.
 
Last edited:
Artdeco said:
We don't know for sure, but yours is a reasonable explanation. He did tell them his purpose and intent to give it to local law enforcement, he did say enough so they considered buying it back from him, and it was discussed, they were probably suspicious after meeting him and talking to him. No reason to make the shop look bad, just deny the sale, as is/was their right.
Click to expand...

I believe the articles says the shop contacted the media and said they found out about his past.

A few hours later, Maxon sent the newspaper a lengthy statement, the key part being: “it was uncovered that Mr. Steinberg has an admitted history of alcohol abuse, and a charge for domestic battery involving his wife.”
Click to expand...

So they denied on their own volition due to his past and even let the press know directly. Seems like the store did have a bit of a vendetta. I don't blame them haha
 
It possibly didn't help that he said he was going to buy the gun and then give it to the police. I do believe that is considered being a straw buyer.
 
Londo_Jowo said:
It possibly didn't help that he said he was going to buy the gun and then give it to the police. I do believe that is considered being a straw buyer.
Click to expand...

Haha, you'd a reporter doing a story would at least familiarize himself with the basic facts of what they are reporting. The guy even said he was surprised that his state had a 24hr cool down while buying the gun...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top