During a campaign trip to South Carolina, Donald Trump took some time to visit the gun store that sold weapons to the racist Jacksonville, Florida, mass shooter.Trump visited Palmetto State Armory on Monday, where he admired a handgun engraved and decorated in his honor. He repeatedly said he wanted to buy a gun there—which would be a violation of federal law given his many indictments.A lot of the media has focused on whether Trump actually purchased a gun and violated the law, but less attenti
During a campaign trip to South Carolina, Donald Trump took some time to visit the gun store that sold weapons to the racist Jacksonville, Florida, mass shooter.
Trump visited Palmetto State Armory on Monday, where he admired a handgun engraved and decorated in his honor. He repeatedly said he wanted to buy a gun there—which would be a violation of federal law given his many indictments.
A lot of the media has focused on whether Trump actually purchased a gun and violated the law, but less attention has been paid to Trump’s decision to visit Palmetto State Armory, as opposed to any other gun store in South Carolina.
In late August, a white man opened fire in a Dollar General store in a predominantly Black Jacksonville neighborhood, killing three people, all of whom were Black. The shooter, who then killed himself, used a Glock handgun and an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle, at least one of which was painted with a swastika. Jacksonville Sheriff T.K. Waters said the shooter “hated Black people” and acted alone.
At least one of the guns came from Palmetto State Armory, a store in Summerville, South Carolina. The Jacksonville sheriff’s office shared photos of the firearms used in the attack on its Facebook page. One of the guns is clearly engraved with the Palmetto State Armory logo. The shooter had also drawn swastikas on the gun.
When the Jacksonville shooting happened, Trump did not issue any statement on the tragedy. But you could argue that this campaign stop is a kind of tacit statement. He put the spotlight on Palmetto State Armory, praised its inventory, and tried to offer it business.
Palmetto State Armory has openly embraced far-right ideology. In 2020, it began marketing its products using imagery and language associated with the “boogaloo,” slang for racist violence and even a call for full-on race war. It has also come to mean war to topple the government.
The Jacksonville shooter shouldn’t have been able to buy the guns in the first place. He was held in Florida state custody in 2017 for mental health issues, disqualifying him from owning a gun under a statute called the Baker Act.
With so many eyeballs on Trump, Palmetto State Armory would never have gotten away with selling him a gun. But as Philadephia Inquirer columnist Will Bunch pointed out, the store “could sell an AR-15 to a young, mentally troubled white supremacist.”
A district Court ruled that restricting the right of a citizen to purchase firearms purely due to indictments is unconstitutional, so it is not illegal for him to purchase a gun purely because of that. It’s very strange that nearly every media outlet is getting this wrong.
I feel like this comment misses how the article posted doesn’t care so much about whether he broke the law and more about the white supremacist leanings of the gun store he made a point to visit and talk about buying a gun.
It’s also illegal to buy. To purchase a firearm from a FFL holder you must fill out ATF form 4473. In which you state that you are not under indictment (among other things). If you lie, that’s perjury.
Edit: You also cannot purchase a firearm as an out of state resident. But you can pay for it, have it shipped to a FFL holder in your state, and then purchase it from them. But you still have to fill out the form there. So he probably did actually buy it, and now some Florida gun store owner is going to get to keep it.
Generally, district court opinions are not binding on other district courts or on courts of
appeals. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has made it clear, “A single district court
decision . . . has little precedential effect[, and i]t is not binding on . . . other district judges in the
same district.” Other circuits agree
As per the most recent 4473 (updated Aug 2023), which you must fill out to purchase a firearm for a dealer, still has the question:
Are you under indictment or information in any court for a felony, or any other crime for which the judge could imprison you for more
than one year, or are you a current member of the military who has been charged with violation(s) of the Uniform Code of Military
Justice and whose charge(s) have been referred to a general court-martial?
And if the person answers “yes” on that question, it will not be accepted. So, presently the ATF either doesn’t care, or is waiting on a supreme court ruling.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !politics@beehaw.org
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it’s a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
A district Court ruled that restricting the right of a citizen to purchase firearms purely due to indictments is unconstitutional, so it is not illegal for him to purchase a gun purely because of that. It’s very strange that nearly every media outlet is getting this wrong.
Source: https://www.reuters.com/legal/americans-under-felony-indictment-have-right-buy-guns-judge-rules-2022-09-20/
I feel like this comment misses how the article posted doesn’t care so much about whether he broke the law and more about the white supremacist leanings of the gun store he made a point to visit and talk about buying a gun.
While I agree. As someone who as been to South Carolina gun stores. PSA is probably one of the tamest.
They’re not getting it wrong. It’s illegal to SELL the guns if he’s indicted. Reread those sources to see the distinction for yourself.
It’s also illegal to buy. To purchase a firearm from a FFL holder you must fill out ATF form 4473. In which you state that you are not under indictment (among other things). If you lie, that’s perjury.
Edit: You also cannot purchase a firearm as an out of state resident. But you can pay for it, have it shipped to a FFL holder in your state, and then purchase it from them. But you still have to fill out the form there. So he probably did actually buy it, and now some Florida gun store owner is going to get to keep it.
The headline could be: “Florida store owner holding Trump’s dick”… /s²?
It may be, it’s also illegal for him to buy, though, based on people correcting me below.
District court decisions in Texas are not binding in South Carolina. They’re not even binding in their own district.
https://www.law.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Matthew-Schafer-FederalLawFederalCourtsandBindingandPersuasiveAuthority.pdf
Top of page 2:
As per the most recent 4473 (updated Aug 2023), which you must fill out to purchase a firearm for a dealer, still has the question:
And if the person answers “yes” on that question, it will not be accepted. So, presently the ATF either doesn’t care, or is waiting on a supreme court ruling.
That makes sense, thanks for the clarification!