Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 34

Thread: Mobile gun store owner out of business pending federal charges

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Mobile, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    341

    Post imported post

    The feds claim he sold guns to a prohibited person. That sounds fishy to me, since Larry has a reputation for making requirements beyond minimum federal requirements. (For example, he will not sell modern high-capacity military style rifles to persons under 21, although the statutory minimum long gun age is only 18.) Guilty or not, the feds have put him out of business. As a requirement of his release, the feds say he must stay away from all guns until the trial is over.

    Mobile area OCers, take note of Larry's attorney, Robert Clark. He may be useful if ever needed for an OC case.

    Note the inaccurate article title.

    Gun shop owner banned from business

    MOBILE, Ala. - A well known local gun dealer is out of business, for now. Larry McCoy is facing felony charges, after authorities said he sold firearms illegally.

    It's a follow-up to a story FOX10 broke in August 2009.

    Since his arrest, McCoy's wife had been running the business on Pleasant Valley Road. A lot has changed in the past month.

    At one point Larry's Gun Shop was one of the busiest stores in Mobile. All that has changed, since Larry McCoy was indicted by a federal grand jury.

    "This is an attempt to close down gun shops," said McCoy's attorney, Robert Clark.

    Clark said the charges brought against his client are false. McCoy is accused of one count of transferring a firearm to a prohibited person, four counts of sale and delivery of firearms without making required records, and four counts of making a false entry in records.

    "It's not true. They've got videotapes of all the transactions they're complaining about. If you saw the tapes, you could make up your mind, and that's what the jury will be able to do," he added.

    Clark said as a condition of McCoy's release, he was ordered not to be around guns. In turn, his business took a big hit.

    "You can't be in the gun business if you can't order any guns. He can't order any, and his wife can't order any in his behalf. So it has basically put him out of business, when they said he couldn't operate the gun store," said Clark.

    Since the charges, McCoy has lined up another job outside of the gun business. Clark said McCoy's gun shop isn't the only store under investigation, and thinks it's the result of federal intimidation.

    McCoy pleaded not guilty, a plea Clark said will eventually be proven true in court. McCoy's trial could begin in November or December.

  2. #2
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    HungSquirrel wrote:
    Gun shop owner banned from business

    MOBILE, Ala. - A well known local gun dealer is out of business, for now. Larry McCoy is facing felony charges, after authorities said he sold firearms illegally.

    It's a follow-up to a story FOX10 broke in August 2009.

    Since his arrest, McCoy's wife had been running the business on Pleasant Valley Road. A lot has changed in the past month.

    At one point Larry's Gun Shop was one of the busiest stores in Mobile. All that has changed, since Larry McCoy was indicted by a federal grand jury.

    "This is an attempt to close down gun shops," said McCoy's attorney, Robert Clark.

    Clark said the charges brought against his client are false. McCoy is accused of one count of transferring a firearm to a prohibited person, four counts of sale and delivery of firearms without making required records, and four counts of making a false entry in records.

    "It's not true. They've got videotapes of all the transactions they're complaining about. If you saw the tapes, you could make up your mind, and that's what the jury will be able to do," he added.

    The feds claim he sold guns to a prohibited person. That sounds fishy to me, since Larry has a reputation for making requirements beyond minimum federal requirements. (For example, he will not sell modern high-capacity military style rifles to persons under 21, although the statutory minimum long gun age is only 18.) Guilty or not, the feds have put him out of business. As a requirement of his release, the feds say he must stay away from all guns until the trial is over.
    Why would it sound "fishy" to you? It's only one count of transferring a gun to a prohibited person. The other four counts seem to be bound book entry problems.

    If LGS sells a LOT of guns, thenit is at higher risk for making an error in procedure of some kind whichwould allow a prohibited person to get his hands on a gun he should not have transferred to him.

    I hopeLarry is innocent, but I have doubts that the feds would charge him for transferring one gunto aprohibited person if say, the person was not prohibited. That's pretty easy to check.

    If Larry transferred a gun without a 4473/NICS check, that's pretty easy to check.

    And if the transaction to the person involved is the primary charge in this case, wouldn't the feds have egg on their face if Larry had done everything correctly?

    OTOH, if Clark says he has video tapes of the transaction involving the prohibited person, what would it show? Ahhh, maybe it was a straw purchase situation?

    That's gotta be it.

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    The BATFE are not exactly reliable.

    http://www.thegangmovie.com/

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6pXhi8Q4JY

    Just google "Red's Trading Post" and follow the links.


    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Mobile, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    341

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    And if the transaction to the person involved is the primary charge in this case, wouldn't the feds have egg on their face if Larry had done everything correctly?
    When have the feds--or any prosecutor at any level--cared if one charge didn't stick? Prosecution MO in any such case is to rack up as many charges as possible and see what sticks in court.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    State Agitator for, New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    6

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    HungSquirrel wrote:

    "This is an attempt to close down gun shops," said McCoy's attorney, Robert Clark.

    Clark said the charges brought against his client are false. McCoy is accused of one count of transferring a firearm to a prohibited person, four counts of sale and delivery of firearms without making required records, and four counts of making a false entry in records.

    "It's not true. They've got videotapes of all the transactions they're complaining about. If you saw the tapes, you could make up your mind, and that's what the jury will be able to do," he added.

    The feds claim he sold guns to a prohibited person. That sounds fishy to me, since Larry has a reputation for making requirements beyond minimum federal requirements. (For example, he will not sell modern high-capacity military style rifles to persons under 21, although the statutory minimum long gun age is only 18.) Guilty or not, the feds have put him out of business. As a requirement of his release, the feds say he must stay away from all guns until the trial is over.
    Why would it sound "fishy" to you? It's only one count of transferring a gun to a prohibited person. The other four counts seem to be bound book entry problems.
    Is the motive of BATFE to prosecute bad gun dealers, or is it to intimidate them? RememberBATFE really wants gun dealers to use their electronic record keeper instead of the bound books. Seems like a really small potatoes case for so much hullabaloo.



  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    State Agitator for, New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    6

    Post imported post

    Lots of pro gun people in LA. I hope he beats the charges unless he knowingly sold to a felon.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Alabama, ,
    Posts
    1,338

    Post imported post

    If the feds use a straw man, and the dealer runs the real identity of the fed
    and it comes back clean, is it an illegal transfer? Don't you need to sell
    to a prohibited person, not someone claiming to be prohibited?


  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Plymouth, MN, ,
    Posts
    250

    Post imported post

    For a straw man purchase you would sell to a clean person whom you have reason to believe is making the purchase for a prohibited person.

  9. #9
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    HungSquirrel wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    And if the transaction to the person involved is the primary charge in this case, wouldn't the feds have egg on their face if Larry had done everything correctly?
    When have the feds--or any prosecutor at any level--cared if one charge didn't stick? Prosecution MO in any such case is to rack up as many charges as possible and see what sticks in court.
    So, then, you think that Larry McCoy is innocent?

    And you think the charge of selling to a prohibited person is a sham?

    Is that what your position is, HS?

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Mobile, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    341

    Post imported post

    I have no evidence upon which to base any position, other than my own encounters with the man. In my own encounters with Larry, he has shown himself to go beyond federal requirements[/i], rather than skirt them.

  11. #11
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    HungSquirrel wrote:
    I have no evidence upon which to base any position, other than my own encounters with the man. In my own encounters with Larry, he has shown himself to go beyond federal requirements[/i], rather than skirt them.
    That seems reasonable, that you don't have any information to take a position on his guilt or innocense in a particular case/sale.

    Yetyou said "The feds claim he sold guns to a prohibited person. That sounds fishy to me."

    I don't see how you can claim the fishiness factor....I just don't see that.

    Is Larry McCoy a great guy? I'll take your word that he is.

    Did Larry McCoy sell a gun to a prohibited person in violation of law? I don't know for sure, but I'd tend to guess....yes. Since this is not a court of law nor a jury proceeding, we can kick it around at the discussion forum level in a reasonable way.

    It'll shake out in court, no doubt. Even then, if Larry is found guilty, his supporters will probably still defend him and imply that he got railroaded...



  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Auburn, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    797

    Post imported post

    He was kind of an ass in that news article a few years back about the guy OCing a rifle in mobile. Saying how 'kids' shouldn't have 'assault weapons' or something like that.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Mobile, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    341

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    I don't see how you can claim the fishiness factor....I just don't see that.
    I claimed I have known Larry to be a stickler for the rules...even inventing more rules to further cover his ass. It's my knowledge of how he has conducted business in the past vs. the current charges that doesn't add up.


    Is Larry McCoy a great guy? I'll take your word that he is.
    That's not my word at all. He has spoken in the media against OCers (as Kurt recalls).* He's even a little racist. He is friendly to his customers, though, I'll give him that.


    It'll shake out in court, no doubt. Even then, if Larry is found guilty, his supporters will probably still defend him and imply that he got railroaded...
    I'm not a Larry proponent...I am a fed opponent. That is what is prejudicing my opinion slightly in this case.

    He may be "guilty" as sin. I'm one of those loonies who thinks failing to have a few pieces of paper in the correct order should not be a crime, as I am one of those loonies who thinks there are no crimes but those incidents wherein life, liberty, or property are harmed. In this incident, the feds harmed the liberty and property of Larry by running him out of business over charges that have yet to be proven in court. Guilty or not guilty, the feds got what they wanted, which makes them criminals under the Millian definition.

  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Daddyo wrote:
    For a straw man purchase you would sell to a clean person whom you have reason to believe is making the purchase for a prohibited person.
    This I've heard, too. I'd be interested in reading it for myself.

    Can you cite the law or maybe posta link?
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  15. #15
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    HungSquirrel wrote:
    It'll shake out in court, no doubt. Even then, if Larry is found guilty, his supporters will probably still defend him and imply that he got railroaded...
    I'm not a Larry proponent...I am a fed opponent. That is what is prejudicing my opinion slightly in this case.
    Well, that's pretty clear. But it makes your points less than persuasive, is all. If you say something like, "I'm a fed opponent and any charge they make looks 'fishy' to me," that doesn't provide any helpful information to anyone--it's value-less.



    HungSquirrel wrote:
    He may be "guilty" as sin. I'm one of those loonies who thinks failing to have a few pieces of paper in the correct order should not be a crime, as I am one of those loonies who thinks there are no crimes but those incidents wherein life, liberty, or property are harmed. In this incident, the feds harmed the liberty and property of Larry by running him out of business over charges that have yet to be proven in court. Guilty or not guilty, the feds got what they wanted, which makes them criminals under the Millian definition.
    This is a little scrambled, I think. Hard to make sense of it.

    I do see, however,a possibleclue about the strength of the feds' case against McCoy in that they were able to get him to agree to "stay away from all guns," effectively putting him out of business until the trial. I don't think that happens with all gun sale charges...



  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Mobile, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    341

    Post imported post

    If it's scrambled, let me break it down for you:

    The Millian definition of crime--The Harm Principle--is any activity which causes harm to the life, liberty, or property of another person.

    The feds allege Larry's paperwork was incorrect, and that he sold an inanimate object to a person who was ineligible to purchase it. Legal or not, neither activity caused harm to the life, liberty, or property of another person.

    The feds jailed Larry, only releasing him under the condition that he give up his RKBA. Furthermore, they rescinded his right (which they treat as a privilege, as they aren't Millians) to sell firearms, thus running his thriving gun store out of business. These are both crimes, as his liberty and property were both harmed.

    Larry may potentially have committed non-crimes, whereas the feds most certainly have committed crimes. Jail the feds.

    I do see, however, a possible clue about the strength of the feds' case against McCoy in that they were able to get him to agree to "stay away from all guns," effectively putting him out of business until the trial. I don't think that happens with all gun sale charges...
    You (and I) have speculated before in this thread. What's stopping you now? Tell us what you suspect!

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Plymouth, MN, ,
    Posts
    250

    Post imported post

    The law is the Gun Control Act of 1968.

    Here is a good run down of it from the National Shooting Sports Foundation
    http://www.opposingviews.com/article...-purchase-hype

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Stratford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    646

    Post imported post

    I'd sooner trust the word of a hard working gun dealer than a JBT from the BATFE.

  19. #19
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    GoldCoaster wrote:
    I'd sooner trust the word of a hard working gun dealer than a JBT from the BATFE.
    So, do you think that Larry McCoy is innocent, then?

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Stratford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    646

    Post imported post

    Did I say that?

    I have read extensively about Red's Trading post and what happened to him disgusts me.

    The BATFE is a militarized force not to regulate the sale of booze/tobacco/firearms/explosives but to justify their existence by jamming up sellers. They are in the forfeiture business - as a team builder they had a whole bunch of leathermen made up with ATF on it - and words to the effect of Always Think Forfeiture - here check this out http://boingboing.net/2008/06/09/atf...rman-tool.html - so if that's the underlying motivation behind this agency what do you think? They are on the side of honest sellers or just motivated by whatever they can get away with.

    I'd give Larry the benefit of the doubt before an ATF agent.

  21. #21
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    GoldCoaster wrote:
    I'd sooner trust the word of a hard working gun dealer than a JBT from the BATFE.
    GoldCoaster wrote:
    I'd give Larry the benefit of the doubt before an ATF agent.
    One interesting and major question in this thread is whether Larry McCoy is innocent or guilty or not guilty.

    Your trusting his word as a gun dealer or your giving him the benefit of the doubt doesn't inform on what your opinion is on whether he is innocent/guilty/not guilty.

    It just says you don't like ATF.

    GC, if you don't think that McCoy is innocent, is your opinion thathe is guilty (but that you hate the ATF)?



    P.S. How many FFLs are there in the U.S.Anybody know?

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Stratford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    646

    Post imported post

    I don't know Hank, and because I don't know, I can't render an opinion on whether he's guilty or innocent. I do however believe that the ATF is an out of control agency who go out of their way to persecute (not just prosecute) FFL's. Why they do this I have no idea.

    It would be like the FAA going after all the commercial carriers and shutting them down one by one. I guess that would make the skies safer if all the carriers were shut down but it sure would make travel harder.

  23. #23
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    GoldCoaster wrote:
    I don't know Hank, and because I don't know, I can't render an opinion on whether he's guilty or innocent. I do however believe that the ATF is an out of control agency who go out of their way to persecute (not just prosecute) FFL's. Why they do this I have no idea.
    I don't know if McCoy is guilty/innocent/not guilty either. I would kind of lean toward the guilty option based on the spare details that have been posted here. Since this is only a discussion forum, and not a court of law, it's OK to state an an opinion such as that.

    I can lean toward thinking McCoy is guilty and hate the ATF at the same time for its past transgressions against the law and law abiding citizens. Actually, it's useful to be able to do that.



    GoldCoaster wrote:
    It would be like the FAA going after all the commercial carriers and shutting them down one by one. I guess that would make the skies safer if all the carriers were shut down but it sure would make travel harder.
    No. It's not like that at all. Not at all.

    Anyone know how many FFLs are out there now? Perhaps a better question is how many legitimate firearms dealers there are. Those are the ones that the ATF is really after, eh?

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Mobile, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    341

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    One interesting and major question in this thread is whether Larry McCoy is innocent or guilty or not guilty.
    The question assumes activities in which no harm is done constitute "crimes". If no one was harmed, there is no guilt to be had.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,510

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    GoldCoaster wrote:
    I'd sooner trust the word of a hard working gun dealer than a JBT from the BATFE.
    GoldCoaster wrote:
    I'd give Larry the benefit of the doubt before an ATF agent.
    One interesting and major question in this thread is whether Larry McCoy is innocent or guilty or not guilty.
    You're the only one in this thread asking that question, but you seem dissatisfied with the replies, which consistently say, "I don't know." Which, by the bye, is what you yourself say.

    Here's my answer: I don't know whether he's actually guilty or not. But unlike you, I do believe that he is innocent until proven guilty. Unlike you, I don't take press reports (which are little more than re-written government press releases), and presume that he's "probably guilty".


    Anyone know how many FFLs are out there now?
    According to this article, in 2007 there were 109,000 FFLs. That is not the number of dealers, because it's the total of all classes of licensees.


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •