30 months in jail for broken gun!

Status
Not open for further replies.
However much the GAC of 1984 rips my knickers, he did knowingly convert his AR15 to fire three round bursts. He broke the law and therefore deserves the prison sentence he earned. As a shooting community, I think that we should support his sentence to show that we respect the firearms laws in place and distance ourselves from the people who would jeopardize our rights by breaking those laws.
 
However much the GAC of 1984 rips my knickers, he did knowingly convert his AR15 to fire three round bursts. He broke the law and therefore deserves the prison sentence he earned. As a shooting community, I think that we should support his sentence to show that we respect the firearms laws in place and distance ourselves from the people who would jeopardize our rights by breaking those laws.
Click to expand...

Do you respect 922r? The one about having x number of domestic parts if you tweak something like an SKS? I think it's 'r'...

Would you respect mandatory registration of all firearms?

How about a law requiring them to be all turned in?

Where does a man draw the line?

I see what you're saying about the guy breaking the law, but don't you think that many of the laws in place are horsepuckey? When people make statements like you do about 'distancing', I get a little suspicious. More often than not, people making those statements are eager to throw others under the bus to hold on to their own niche just a little longer. Kind of like Fudds and their attitudes about walnut/blued vs EBRs.
 
K3 wrote:
Do you respect 922r? The one about having x number of domestic parts if you tweak something like an SKS? I think it's 'r'...

Would you respect mandatory registration of all firearms?

How about a law requiring them to be all turned in?

Where does a man draw the line?

I see what you're saying about the guy breaking the law, but don't you think that many of the laws in place are horsepuckey?
Click to expand...

K3, of course I respect the law. Every law-abiding American has to respect and obey every law. Otherwise, you're a criminal.

Besides, laws never get passed unless a majority of people firmly believe they should be passed. And this majority, meaning "political might," always makes right.

That's the beauty of democracy. Do you want to live in China or something?

-Sans Authoritas
 
I would want to know more before passing final judgment. If indeed this guy was working on a "secret 3rd position" to fire burst, then well, he's guilty of breaking the law. If it was a simple malfunction, then "what the hell?!" I recall the ATF pulling a similar stunt with a NG Drill Sargent who handed a M9 to a recruit, that then proceeded to go full auto because of a very obvious part breakage. According to the MK 0 brain that was a couple of years ago.
 
30 months for this?

Either he had a really crappy lawyer, or this obviously wasn't his first offense.
 
Besides, laws never get passed unless a majority of people firmly believe they should be passed. And this majority, meaning "political might," always makes right.

That's the beauty of democracy. Do you want to live in China or something?
Click to expand...

*mutters something about tyranny of the majority and the BoR*
 
I have to imagine an appeals court will overturn this.

That's like charging somebody who accidentally left the gas stove on and blew up their own house for manufacturing an explosive device.
 
Sans Autoritas said:
Quote:
Besides, laws never get passed unless a majority of people firmly believe they should be passed. And this majority, meaning "political might," always makes right.

That's the beauty of democracy. Do you want to live in China or something?
Click to expand...

siglite said:
*mutters something about tyranny of the majority and the BoR*
Click to expand...

Sig, when reading posts by Sans Autoritas, always begin by imagining his tongue planted firmly in his cheek. Sarcasm is a vicious weapon and Sans wields it with vigor. You are on the same side. ;)
 
"I have to imagine an appeals court will overturn this."

imagine real hard. if he had maintained the gee i don't know what happened story he had a chance his own words are gonna hang him or rather the words of the guy he let use the gun. i wonder if the dimwit wasn't "flexing " at the range with the burst fire
 
he said and did some moronic things - I agree.

However, for the court to classify this gun as a machine gun sets a horrible precedent.

I'm not sure what to do about the guy himself. I'm more concerned about the precedent the decision sets.

If somebody says, "I know how to build a bomb." and adds a timed ignition system to a 4th of July sparkler - it makes the person an idiot, but it doesn't make a sparkler a bomb, even if by some fluke the sparkler blew up.

In that example, it seems that what the court did just classified all sparklers as bombs.

(maybe a bad analogy)
 
I don't believe this is about malfunctioning weapons.

Clearly 1911Tuner's comments are exactly right on.

It doesn't matter that you can't make a machine gun from those parts in an unmodified AR-15.
It only mattered that he told investigators that he certainly did have the capability to do so, reliable witnesses saw his AR-15 go full auto, and the shooter told the investigators that it did indeed go full auto when he set the selector in the position where the defendent told him it would go full auto. That series of events constitutes transfer of a machine gun in the eyes of the law. An effective defense could be mustered, but it wasn't.

The bottom line:
If he had 1911Tuner as an expert witness, he might not be convicted. But the defendent, his attorney and his expert witness appear to have done a lousy job of defense.

Two lessons:
1. Don't say stupid things to an investigator.
2. If you ignore Lesson 1, you better make sure your defense will prevail.


P.S. Sans Authoritas is shown to be a member in good standing. I vote that we drop it and move on. Thanks, friends.
 
No doubt mistakes were made in the defense. They're always made. But the sentence and the underlying regulations are outrageously vague. With no standard, it's left to the good graces of the agency to decide if you're a felon or not.

Hopefully this will be sorted out on appeal, but in the mean time remember GET A LAWYER. Don't shoot your mouth off to the feds.
 
this is a decent example of 2 fools hurting the rtkba shame too cause fools get more press than the thousand other guys who act responsibly
 
Head light out, busted tail light, licencplate light inop, Brakes Bad,

No bodys going to jail for them, and they cause more deaths..
 
they have been after him since the 80's when he got some bogus MG & Explosives charges they tried to pin on him with unfounded info from a snitch of theirs.

they even once tried to nail him for Open Carry claiming it was Illegal Concealed carry since his holster covered part of the gun.

All charges were thrown out.
Click to expand...

Not exactly true. :scrutiny:
 
Just to set the facts straight.. ANY M16 parts inside an AR-15 lower, aside from the Bolt Carrier(Colt supplied AR-15's this way), are considered a MG by ATF
Click to expand...

While that may be true, it a bit funny to note that what the ATF "considers" is directly contrary to that little pesky thing called the LAW. The LAW states that a machine gun is "one which fires more than once with one pull of the trigger." Nothing more or less. That's exactly what they had to prove in court, and did prove. It's a strict liability statute, with no mens rea requirement (not bad intent required) - at least that is the government's position. So what the ATF FEELS about adding parts to the gun which do NOT make it "fire more than once with one pull of the trigger" are real interesting and all for them to circle jerk each other and harass citizens, but they have nothing to do with what's legal and what's illegal. And what's more, the law is unconstitutional as directly violative of our 2A rights. At the very least, a mens rea requirement should be inferred into the law, to make it a malum in se crime, rather than a malum prohibitum crime. Hopefully he will win on appeal. The problem is, due to his stupid admission statements, the trier of fact can indeed fairly infer that he had an improper mens rea. After all, he said that he knew how to make it go full auto by doing x, y, and z, and relying on wear to take it from there. Then the gun did in FACT go full auto. Thus, even though his stated belief may be generally untrue, it is fair to infer that that was his intent in replacing the parts. So the government has a pretty good case, seems to me (unfortunately). He faces a real uphill battle on appeal, most likely. But it would be nice, even if he loses his appeal, for the appellate court to at least specifically say, for purpose of future cases, that the statute does contain an implicit mens rea requirement. If he were to win on appeal, his best argument is probably waiting for Heller, and relying on a direct 2A infringement appeal. The tax is exhorbitant and prohibitive, and more importantly, the 86 moratorium has driven prices of the guns sky-high, which is a de facto ban to the poor, which is clearly an "infringement" to the vast majority of the population, seems to me.

Agree wholeheartedly with jrfoxx and sans authoritas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

F
  • Locked
Owner of broken rifle surrenders for 30-month sentence
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Replies
211
Views
10K
Don Gwinn
D
D
  • Locked
My 1187 Double Shot..now I'm A FELON
Replies
1
Views
658
Larry Ashcraft
Larry Ashcraft
T
  • Locked
Where is the NRA when you need them?
Replies
18
Views
697
Jeff White
J
H
  • Locked
Recent Federal Case (Merged with " Rifle malfunction= prosecution?")
2 3 4 5 6 7
Replies
164
Views
13K
alan
A
Z
  • Locked
US v Olofson - Cliff Notes Version
2 3
Replies
64
Views
10K
DenaliPark
D
Back
Top