Surely there MUST be more to this story than we are hearing. This is bullsh*t.
Funny how different these stories appear when you have all of the facts.
Surely there MUST be more to this story than we are hearing. This is bullsh*t.
I don't see it as being psychic at all. 3 guys approach me and ask to buy a firearm; the main party that wants it has no ID and says so on multiple occasions. (There is a LENGTHY and HEATED thread on ID vs not to ID in this forum already Mr. Red and I came down on the sde of not ID'ing). However, Mr. Copeland did ask and therefore had a reasonable certainty of knowing the illegal wanted the firearm.
Mr. Copeland responded to the question of why he broke the gun show rules with a very flippant remark that I took to mean "You try to stop me." Guess what. They stopped him inafuckinghurry. He is now a convicted felon and will carry that with him.
I am a big fan of Constitutional Carry, but I am not gonna become roomates with Bubba and Tyrese in The Fed to prove a point. My butt says exit only and I intend it to stay that way. If this situation were to happen to me, there simply wouldn't have been a sale. My choice as the owner of the firearm. He made the wrong choice.
Steve
Did he confess that he knew it was a straw purchase? If not, how can it be proven he knew it was a straw purchase? Also, I was under the impression that a straw purchase is illegal for the person making the purchase and the person the purchase is for. Not for the person selling.He says he was convicted by a "jury of his peers", his words, for knowingly participating in a straw-purchase; that is, knowingly selling to a person not illegible under state and federal law to purchase or possess a firearm.
The Feds really screwed the pooch for an "example" prosecution case. The water is so muddy in this case that they will do nothing but stir up a hornets nest of public opinion. The legal gray area is proving the mental intent of the seller, the fact that he was not an FFL dealer and the fact of the validity of the ID presented to him by the Mexican national. Whether or not the Mexican national was arrested, or deported after the fact is legally irrelevant for Mr. Copeland's case.
Is there a legal defense fund established anywhere towards Mr. Copeland's appeal? Is there an appeal planned?
I wish there was a way I could share this thread on Facebook!
First, you spelled "eligible" as "illegible".
Signing such a document does not save you from 'straw purchases', which seems to be what the party involved in this thread did.
Thanks for the spelling, didn't see that.....so, how do we protect ourselves if we want to sell a firearm Face to Face?