slam fires and machine guns

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah Sound I think that loaning out your own rifle is a recipe for disaster. I would not do that.
 
If this happens to you here is the sure fire way that will better your odds:

USE A LAWYER!

It was almost universal that had he have used a lawyer and not represented himself he would have probably not have been in the kettle he is in now.
 
After annoying the court with a bunch of BS, he then used a public defender.

Bad news all the way around.
 
He didnt try to defend himself, he used a public defender. Thats a big legal no no. Public defenders are public defenders because they couldnt get hired anywhere else
Click to expand...

That’s not true. Lawyers do pro bono work when a judge asks them to. Someone has to do it and the lawyers I have known feel it is part of their civic duty.
 
He had NO Auto parts installed,
Click to expand...

That is absolutely NOT true according to the FTB report. He had an M16 hammer, disconnector, and selector in the gun. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if you have those parts installed, a slam fire with soft primers is entirely possible in the third position.

Machineguns fire full-auto 100% of the time.
Click to expand...

Perhaps in your mind, but not in the eyes of the law, or in the text of the statute. Despite what you may want to believe, the law defines a machinegun in a way that can be inclusive of far more than a complete functioning weapon. It can be just a receiver, a handful of parts, or even a single (non-receiver) part.

Don't misunderstand; I don't like the law, but I do know what the law is, and how BATFE interprets it. I also go to great lengths and expense to stay within the law so I don't have to worry that some bozo from BATFE with an IQ less than that of my dog is going to kick my door in. Nevertheless, I don't really care if anyone wants to convert their gun to full-auto. Hell, smoke a joint while you're at it, for all I care. Both should be perfectly legal...but they're not, and it doesn't look like thats going to change anytime soon. So either live within the law or take your lumps like a man when you get caught. If you want to challenge the law, file a form1, wait until its denied and then file suit so you don't have to risk a criminal conviction to make a challenge.
 
That is absolutely NOT true according to the FTB report.
Click to expand...

I don't believe the FTB for a minute; and neither should you. You and I know that the Agency has perjured themselves numerous times on the stand and this is well documented. (See "The Gang" DVD) That means they are LIARS. Can you trust a liar? The ATF has an amazing way of welding / attaching parts to a gun, behind closed doors, and making it an illegal weapon. You should not believe everything you read, sir.

The ATF set this guy up to justify the purported need for their agency. Government agencies have to get a bust so they will justify their job and receive government funding. That's all this was.

Conversely, a machine gun is NOT a gun that fires full-auto 'every once in a while.' And I could care less how the ATF defines it. Did you look into the Goon Agent Jody Keeku? She took the stand and could not answer fire-arms related questions. Your gonna trust her as a credible witness?
That's like saying if MGShaggy has a Corvette and he drives it 120 miles per hour, that instantly it becomes a sanctioned NASCAR competitor.
 
And I could care less how the ATF defines it.
Click to expand...

Obviously not since you still haven't bothered to look up the statute on the subject. Believe what you want regarding how the law defines a machinegun, but willful ignorance of the law is no defense.
 
Again.. and again...

That is absolutely NOT true according to the FTB report.
Click to expand...

I don't believe the FTB for a minute and neither should you. Do you know that the Agency has perjured themselves numerous times on the stand? This is well documented. (See "The Gang" DVD) That means they are LIARS. Can you trust a liar? The ATF has an amazing way of welding / attaching parts to a gun, behind closed doors, and making it an illegal weapon. You should not believe everything you read, sir.

The ATF set this guy up to justify the purported need for their agency. Government agencies have to get a bust so they will justify their job and receive government funding. That's all this was.

Conversely, a machine gun is NOT a gun that fires full-auto 'every once in a while.' And I could care less how the ATF defines it. Did you look into the Goon Agent Jody Keeku? She took the stand and could not answer simple firearms related questions. You're gonna trust her as a credible witness?

It takes people like you (us) to stand up against this baloney.

But I do agree he should have never lent out his weapon. What ever became of the friend who borrowed it? Was he an undercover BATman ala Randy Weaver?
 
He had an unfair trial and he was entrapped. They did not uphold any law. A slamfire does NOT make it a machine gun.
 
Keep in mind that he was chargd with illegally transferring a machine gun not making one. They would have charged him with making one if the could because it carries a heavier sentence. They knew that accidents cant be misconstrued as making a machine gun so they couldnt charge him with that
 
Taprack, I don't know your background, but I've had a good bit of experience dealing with BATFE, and the NFA branch in particular. I've been following the law regarding NFA weapons for over a decade now, including a lot of the caselaw, the advisory opinions and agency rulings. Have I seen some stunning examples of incompetence at BATFE? Absolutely. I also know they can come up with some fairly creative lawyering to fit things within the statutory definition of a machinegun (the shoestring and the Akins 1022 accelerator, for example). Most problems, however, aren't due to any sort of nefarious activity at BATFE, but rather people trying to get away with more than they should, or just not doing their due dilligence - the SOCOM beltfed M11 uppers immediately come to mind. Heck I even remember Ernie Wren boasting in an online forum he didn't need to get FTB approval for those uppers (unfortunately he was very wrong). Most of the time I am not shocked or suprised anymore because I've seen it happen all too often, and in almost every case the outcome was forseeable if you knew the law and recent advisories. I've been telling people for well over a decade not to have ANY M16 fire control parts if you also own an AR15, because as almost any reasonably knowledgable individual in the NFA community can tell you, the tech branch will test with soft primered ammo, and they will be able to get it to double once or twice. They've been testing that way for a long time and Olofson is not the first guy to get caught for it. The NFA Branch has even had prior advisories regarding possession of M16 parts in an Ar15 - its hardly a new issue.
 
If you are then what cases do you cite?
Click to expand...
Research the subject yourself. It's kinda hard to nail down cases in the manner you want them presented to you on a silver platter, which is exactly the point: the BATFE has long gotten away with keeping their "is it a MG?" testing methodology secret, and it involves hundreds/thousands of attempts using ultrasensitive primers to achieve a single doubling incident, and then presenting ONLY the results ("yup, it's a MG") to the jury. Research it yourself, and the results will scare you.
a slam fire with soft primers is entirely possible in the third position.
Click to expand...
The fact that there IS a third position on an AR would make a jury suspicious. Not grounds for conviction, but certainly raises questions that otherwise wouldn't be asked.

The ultimate problem is the federal definition of MG: it does NOT allow for malfunctions. That malfunctions are not grounds for conviction for possession has been established; that someone knows it tends to malfunction that way yet transfers it to someone else opens up legal problems. Sure the defendant got shafted by a corrupt gov't agency, but seems he made it easy for them.
 
You cannot trust Agencies that 'lie' repeatedly on the stand to tell you what really happened. The ATF is the king of perjury. They did not allow Olofson a neutral 3rd party to observe and record test firing the gun and disassembly of the weapon.

"But trust us.." WE will protect your 2nd Amendment rights.....

Nefarious is the best description I have heard yet.
 
He didnt try to defend himself, he used a public defender. Thats a big legal no no. Public defenders are public defenders because they couldnt get hired anywhere else
Click to expand...

I seem to recall the first judge withdrawing from the case after a few shenanigans?

ANY screwing around in federal court is a really bad idea.
They do NOT suffer fools gladly.

He 'reserved his rights' and some other junk.
I seem to remember jurisdiction games.

You mess around in federal court you can get screwed more ways than you can count.

Did he get screwed over?
It sounds like it.

Did he make some bad tactical errors?
Definite yes there also.
 
They did not allow Olofson a neutral 3rd party to observe and record test firing the gun and disassembly of the weapon.
Click to expand...

Gee, my copy of the Bill of Rights doesn't guarantee you the right to have the evidence examined by a neutral third party. Can you tell me which amendment that is? :rolleyes:

Olofson had every opportunity to hire his own expert witnesses to attempt to impeach the testimony of the government's experts, but he didn't...why?

I can't believe that so many people here are defending a guy who purposely built an AR that would double or triple when the M16 selector was in the automatic position and then was stupid enough to loan the weapon to a friend and tell him about it's neat little feature. A lot of people on our side are so blinded by their feelings that they can't accept the truth. Just like the ones on the other side that they hate so badly....

Jeff
 
Lets face it, the BATFE will always have the upper hand against us in court. Thats a fact. The only thing we can do is do what we can to make sure we never end up in court.
1. Dont lend you guns to anyone. EVER. If they committ a murder with youre gun, your accountable.
2. Never put any sort of military parts in your guns. Theres no need for them, unless youre in 3 Gun competition, and if you are then I would only use that AR in competition.
3. If your going to reload your own ammo, dont shoot your semi's on a private or public range where there are lots of people. Shoot your reloaded ammo at a public range where there arent many people. State forests usually have these.

Yes its sort of annoying to do these things, but if it saves your a$$ from jail time or a court case its worth it.
 
Soundtrackzz,

Don't panic. It's perfectly legal to use an M16 bolt carrier in an AR15. Several manufacturers are now shipping their carbines with M16 carriers. A search of the this forum and the Rifle Country forum will turn up a copy of the letter from the BATFE Firearms Technology Branch stating it's legal. What you can't do is put in a combination of parts that would make the weapon fire full auto.

What Olofson did was build his AR with M16 internals in a deliberate attempt to make it slam fire when the M16 selector was in the auto position.

You must have an M16 bolt carrier, trigger, hammer, disconnector, selector and autosear in order to convert an AR 15 to reliable full auto operation. If you put all of those parts except for the autosear into and AR, there is a good chance that the weapon will slam fire when the selector is in the auto position. That prevents the nose of the disconnector from engaging the lower hammer hook and the hammer will follow the bolt home and the rifle will double. It may triple or even fire more because without the autosear to catch the hammer it is going to follow the bolt home after every round is fired.

There is no such thing as an M4 chamber, military weapons and all Colt, Bravo Company, LMT and other barrels have a 5.56mm chamber not a commercial .223 chamber. M4 feed ramps have nothing to do with firing full auto either.

Jeff
 
I am somewhat freaking out. but i would rather be prepared. This bring up another issue. I own an AK47 and a CETME, they are of course military rifles imported by Century Arms. Since they have military parts in them could the ATF pull the same BS with either of those rifles. Or are the rifles that importers modify to be civillian compliant exempt from this kind of ATF vendetta?
 
Don't panic. It's perfectly legal to use an M16 bolt carrier in an AR15. Several manufacturers are now shipping their carbines with M16 carriers.
Click to expand...
It is legal, but if you end up in court, with a case against you, the prosecutor saying you have installed parts from a full auto firearm to jury members that do not understand firearms can have an effect. Especialy if the case involves accusations or charges involving the firearm firing more than once per trigger pull illegaly.

That those parts in no way change the operation of the firearm only rings true if you understand how the firearm works. If the jury has no such experience or understanding of firearms, mentioning someone installed parts from a full auto firearm sounds worse than it is.

It is not always a battle of facts as much as a battle of perspectives in a court on issues the jury does not comply understand. That information can be one more fact tossed into the prosecutors case that causes the jury to believe the other nonsense that accompanies it.
 
I can't believe that so many people here are defending a guy who purposely built an AR that would double or triple when the M16 selector was in the automatic position
Click to expand...

But did he? My understanding is that his rifle was built that way by Century, and not modified.
 
Response

Gee, my copy of the Bill of Rights doesn't guarantee you the right to have the evidence examined by a neutral third party. Can you tell me which amendment that is?
Click to expand...

Better yet, Jeff why don't you show me where you can have evidence brought against you and not be shown how it was developed? Why don't I put an 'expert' ATF witness against you who knows absolutely nothing about guns or how they work and commits perjury? And why would you trust an agency whose whole goal is to disarm the public, piecemeal? After all, agents were given 'motivations' with ATF slogans like 'Assets Through Forfeiture.' But trust them, Jeff...

"A gun that slam fires every 500 rounds is NOT a machine gun."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

C
  • Locked
To Be Or Not To Be ... A Machine Gun?
Replies
6
Views
575
SDC
S
S
  • Locked
US v Olofson Update 1/22/09 (AR-15 malfunction = MG case)
Replies
4
Views
1K
Jeff White
J
A
  • Locked
Slam Firing
Replies
12
Views
732
Slamfire
Slamfire
T
  • Locked
Question about machine guns.
Replies
16
Views
915
saltydog
saltydog
H
  • Locked
Recent Federal Case (Merged with " Rifle malfunction= prosecution?")
2 3 4 5 6 7
Replies
164
Views
13K
alan
A
Back
Top