Arizona Gun Shop Owner Faces Criticism Over Cooperation With FBI in Nancy Guthrie Case

I confess that I haven’t been closely following the investigation into the disappearance of Nancy Guthrie, the mother of Today show host Savannah Guthrie. I hope she’s found safe and unharmed, but I suspect her disappearance wouldn’t be generating nearly as much attention if it weren’t for the fact that Nancy Guthrie is the mom of a high-profile member of the media herself. 

One story, though, did catch my eye this week: the criticism that a Tucson, Arizona gun store owner has received for assisting the FBI in its investigation. 

Phillip Martin, Co-Owner and Manager of Armor Bearer Arms, says an FBI agent visited his gun shop on the Southside last week.

He’s now having to defend helping the FBI in the Nancy Guthrie abduction, after facing criticism over privacy concerns.

An FBI agent recently came to his gun shop with a list of possible suspects.

Martin says the agent gave him a list of names and asked if anyone on the list had been a recent customer of his.

“Well, to be honest, the FBI got no information from me. We gave no information. We provided no documents, we provided no names, less than 20 people were given to us,” Martin said. “And just said, hey, have any of these people been into your shop in the last year? I checked. I said no, slided them the paperwork back, and told them have a good day. No information was provided.”

Martin says it’s “ridiculous” that any self-professed “patriotic Americans” are calling out his actions, arguing that if it were their family member who was missing, “I’m sure that they would want that gun shop owner to help.”

I’m sure he’s right, but what would have happened if Martin had discovered that one or more people on the FBI’s list had purchased a gun from him within the past year? Those gun owners may not be connected to Guthrie’s disappearance in any way, but they still could have been subject to being detained and questioned, their homes searched, and their lawfully-possessed firearms seized. 

If the FBI had a warrant, that would be one thing. But the idea that a law enforcement agency can walk into a gun shop with a list of names, ask the gun owner if any of them are customers, and get the cooperation from the FFL is going to rub some people the wrong way. 

Would Martin have been as compliant and helpful if the FBI wasn’t looking for Nancy Guthrie’s kidnappers, but were instead trying to find someone connected to a gang-related shooting? What about a road rage incident? What about a purely possessory crime, like someone possessing a gun after a felony conviction? 

I do get where Martin is coming from, and I’m sure he doesn’t see his actions as a violation of his customers’ privacy, especially since none of the names on the FBI’s list turned up in his records. I also, however, understand the concerns of gun owners, who don’t want law enforcement to be able to go on fishing expeditions at gun shops that could result in armed agents of the state raiding their home under the erroneous assumption that they’re connected to a violent crime. 

Ultimately, I think the correct response would have been for Martin to politely explain to the FBI agent that, as much as he wants to help, his customers have an expectation of privacy and to come back with a warrant if there’s any evidence pointing to a suspect in the Guthrie case purchasing a firearm at his shop. That might not endear Martin to the FBI, but it would reassure his customers that he not only values their business but their privacy as well.  

Editor’s Note: The radical left will stop at nothing to enact their radical gun control agenda and strip us of our Second Amendment rights.

Help us continue to report on and expose the Democrats’ gun control policies and schemes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership.