I'm trying to decide why you think that's relevant.Olofson wasn't the individual who was caught firing the rifle in "full auto" mode aka malfunction.
1. No one here said he did.
2. He wasn't prosecuted for firing the gun in full auto. He was prosecuted for illegally modifying the gun and illegally transferring it to someone else.
No, it sounds like you're the one who is sketchy on the details of the situation. I followed Olofson's thread on arfcom. He never said he was innocent. His whole strategy was that he was going to tell the judge that the feds had no jurisdiction and get his case dismissed.Sounds like you are kind of sketchy on his case details. We could go in depth into his railroading...
In other words, he didn't dispute what he had done, he just claimed that the laws against it didn't apply to him. Not surprising. His track record made it plain this wasn't the first time that he had made the decision to break a law because he didn't think it applied to him. He even discussed some of his previous court "experiences" on the thread over at arfcom.
Initially you started by complaining because the NRA didn't step in. Now you're saying that you're surprised that they didn't because they're so incompetent it would make sense for them to take on such an ill-advised challenge. Basically agreeing with me that it would have been ridiculous for them to try to help Olofson.With their stellar track record I'm surprised they didn't jump all over it.
The bottom line is obvious. You're going to be unhappy with the NRA no matter what they do or don't do. You're unhappy that they didn't help Olofson even though you obviously agree it would have been a really bad waste of funds/resources if they had.
Last edited: