• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Mobile gun store owner out of business pending federal charges

HungSquirrel

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Messages
341
Location
Mobile, Alabama, USA
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.
 

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
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.
 

HungSquirrel

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Messages
341
Location
Mobile, Alabama, USA
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.
 

PayMeNow

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2008
Messages
21
Location
, ,
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.
 

PayMeNow

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2008
Messages
21
Location
, ,
imported post

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

SlackwareRobert

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2008
Messages
1,338
Location
Alabama, ,
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?
 

Daddyo

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2008
Messages
250
Location
Plymouth, MN, ,
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.
 

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
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?
 

HungSquirrel

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Messages
341
Location
Mobile, Alabama, USA
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.
 

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
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...
 

kurtmax_0

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
794
Location
Auburn, Alabama, USA
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.
 

HungSquirrel

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Messages
341
Location
Mobile, Alabama, USA
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.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
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?
 

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
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...
 

HungSquirrel

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Messages
341
Location
Mobile, Alabama, USA
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! ;)
 

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
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?
 

GoldCoaster

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2008
Messages
646
Location
Stratford, Connecticut, USA
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-leatherman-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.
 
Top