• You are using the old Black Responsive theme. We have installed a new dark theme for you, called UI.X. This will work better with the new upgrade of our software. You can select it at the bottom of any page.

FFL Dealer Sentenced to 121 Months Imprisonment

Status
Not open for further replies.
Umh, maybe I missed something in the indictment but didn't Rumble allegedly threaten to murder a federal agent? And allegedly entered false statements concerning the identity of a transferee (or two, or more)? Whether or not MJ use by him and others got him in hot water, sure seems like the guy was pushing the envelope. Threatening the life of a federal agent, geez, that's gonna get 'em riled up for certain.
 
didn't Rumble allegedly threaten to murder a federal agent?

Getting raided clearly makes some people angry enough to say foolish things.
Everyone should keep a calm cool demeanor and certainly not imply anything that could be taken as threatening.


And allegedly entered false statements concerning the identity of a transferee
That is what sounded like straw purchases. If someone, say a girlfriend of a criminal, makes a straw purchase, then when asked if they assisted in providing in illegally providing a firearm they say no, then clearly someone is lying.
Someone so inclined (such as an investigator) can say it is the FFL doing the lying, and they wrote the girlfriend's name when she didn't buy it or that he should have known it was the boyfriend that was actually buying it and the girlfriend just pretending to.
That is falsifying records to enable a straw purchase.
Straw purchases likely happen at some points at most FFLs, so the only thing necessary to make the ATF inclined to claim they were intentional and prosecute for them is an investigation and desire to prosecute them for something else as well.

A lot of these federal prosecutors have a habit of stacking many charges together, including some they know are exaggerations but add to the criminal perception of the individual, in order to encourage conviction on a portion of the charges by the jury.
It increases the perception of guilt or wrongdoing of the accused without a need for much in the way of evidence. It then allows the jury to feel like they 'compromised' when they only find them guilty of the ones the prosecutor actually wanted all along and did provide more of a case for, and as a bonus sometimes the jury even convicts on those exaggerations too.
It is a game.
 
Last edited:
Wasn't it only three weeks ago the NYPD was busted for planting drugs on innocent people so they could keep their quota up to some acceptable level?? It is hard to know what actually goes down sometimes unless you are there and see with your own eyes.
NYDailynews
A former NYPD narcotics detective snared in a corruption scandal testified it was common practice to fabricate drug charges against innocent people to meet arrest quotas. The bombshell testimony from Stephen Anderson is the first public account of the twisted culture behind the false arrests in the Brooklyn South and Queens narc squads, which led to the arrests of eight cops and a massive shakeup. Anderson, testifying under a cooperation agreement with prosecutors, was busted for planting cocaine, a practice known as "flaking," on four men in a Queens bar in 2008 to help out fellow cop..........

If the above is true;.....it is wrong on so many levels. Like cockroaches, for every one seen there are some thousand more undetected

http://news.yahoo.com/second-scandal-week-rocks-york-cops-031931031.html
 
Last edited:
it was common practice to fabricate drug charges against innocent people

It was fairly common around LA in the 90s. They didn't typically do it to meet quotas but instead to bust gang members and others they didn't like that were slick enough to avoid getting caught, but they knew were up to no good.
If they couldn't bust them legitimately or get them off the streets long enough they would eventually plant drugs on them and take them down for that. It was typically cocaine as well.

Some of them were so good at it they could palm the drugs and drop them while patting someone down or going through their pockets, making it appear it came from the clothing of the suspect even to bystanders or others nearby. It would probably even fool a dash cam today.
But as far as I know they typically only did such things to people they knew were scumbags, a type of corrupt vigilante conduct they felt was justified.
 
But as far as I know they typically only did such things to people they knew were scumbags, a type of corrupt vigilante conduct they felt was justified.

Yep I understand the feeling and the end justifiies the means etc etc..

Problem is that is not how the law is supposed to work. The police have a hard enough job without losing the respect and support of the population that pays them through their taxes to uphold the law; not to break it.
 
Not being papered properly is itself a crime.
No, paperwork errors are most often administrative violations, and could result in the revocation of the FFL, if there is a pattern of violations, but are paperwork errors, in and of themselves, are very rarely criminal violations.
Most of the biggest raids and prosecutions involve FFLs.
That's simply not true. Anyone who cares to read the press releases from the US Attorney's Offices around the country, regarding cases investigated by ATF, can see that criminal prosecutions of FFLs are quite rare, and ATF is frequently investigating much "bigger" cases.

Here's a few examples, from New York, where this case was prosecuted:
http://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2...eteering-murder-and-narcotics-trafficking.pdf

http://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2...ith-distributing-heroin-and-crack-cocaine.pdf

http://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2...court-with-robbery-and-firearms-offenses.html

All of which are much "bigger" cases than any FFL case done recently.
Even infamous cases like the Waco Siege started because they had an FFL which is what brought certain things to their attention.
Actually no. Delivery men were suspicious of packages they delivered and reported it to the local Sheriff's Office. The SO called the FBI who ignored the information. After more suspicious packages were reported by delivery men, the SO called the ATF. A call from local LE for help on what was suspected hand grenade manufacturing was what got the attention of ATF.
 
I'm no judge, but I'd bet the specific sentence length may have an affect on where he can serve it. For example where I grew up if it was two years or more you had to go to the big prison, so a lot of sentences were "two years less a day".

Perhaps you if its "ten years or less" there's a specific outcome, so they slapped on an extra month.

Even infamous cases like the Waco Siege started because they had an FFL which is what brought certain things to their attention.

Hmmm... that sounds awfully paranoid. I'd bet there are thousands upon thousands of law-abiding folks with FFLs that never get a second glance.
 
No, paperwork errors are most often administrative violations, and could result in the revocation of the FFL, if there is a pattern of violations, but are paperwork errors, in and of themselves, are very rarely criminal violations.
I know of one case involving a local FFL/SOT where his paperwork was so bad he was told to either give up his license or be prosecuted. It's really bad when there are machine guns on your books and you can't produce them during your compliance inspection.
 
DMF you are correct in that my statements regarding the ATF were a bit off.
I recall when a lot of their time was spent investigating the so called kitchen table FFLs back in the day, before they went through a phase that put an end to the majority of them.

What they focus on changes with the political administrations and political climate.
 
I recall when a lot of their time was spent investigating the so called kitchen table FFLs back in the day, before they went through a phase that put an end to the majority of them.
Again, here you are talking about regulatory matters related to the licensing, not criminal investigations. FFLs are required to comply with all state and local laws regarding the conduct of their business. This includes zoning laws. When it was discovered that many FFLs were operating out of their homes, and their homes were not in areas zoned for the business they were told to either comply with the local laws, by either getting approved for running the business or by moving the business to some other physical location where they would be in compliance with the local law, or their license would be revoked for failing to comply with local law as required. That is a regulatory matter, NOT a criminal matter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top