30 months in jail for broken gun!

[coloradokevin]

When you find the lower limit he's espousing please let me know.

^^^What he said!


Anyway, more to the point:

This was a horribly biased piece of journalism on the part of whoever wrote it. I was appalled for about three seconds after I read it, until I got to the part where I thought "hmm... better look into this case more".

This guy violated federal law, argued the point, and was tried and convicted for it. If we don't like the law, we can work to change it. But, it wasn't like this guy was some well-intentioned gun owner who really had a malfunction in his weapon that got him in trouble.

Under current law: M-16 parts in an AR-15 is not allowed.

 

[JohnKSa]

Either he had a really crappy lawyer, or this obviously wasn't his first offense.

According to one source, he had two other weapons related convictions.

 

[ants]

For the record, the M-16 parts in the defendent's Olympic Arms AR-15 are the original parts installed by the manufacturer.

During the early 1990's, Olympic arms bought truckloads of M-16 parts cheaper than they could make AR-15 parts, and used them in semi-auto AR-15 rifles and carbines. ATF was well aware of it and lodged no objection.

The M-16 parts are not the issue.

 

[coloradokevin]

The M-16 parts are not the issue.

Poorly written response on my part. The parts are an issue when they make the weapon function in a fully automatic capacity (see "Conversion Kits" through the ATFE).

I apologize for the lack of clarity in my reply...

But, my point was this: The guy put M-16 parts in his gun, and it fired in a full-auto (burst) capacity. As such, his gun was illegal. From the sounds of it, he knew what he was doing, and now he is paying the price.

While I don't agree with every gun law, it doesn't change the fact that they are the laws... I follow the law, because I don't want to get in trouble myself. This guy chose not to.

 

[K3]

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

What the matter with China? They are a shining beacon of freedom and tolerance. I thought that was obvious.

 

[K3]

While I don't agree with every gun law, it doesn't change the fact that they are the laws... I follow the law, because I don't want to get in trouble myself. This guy chose not to.

I've asked before and now I'll ask you:

SKS parts compliance?

Registration of all firearms?

Mandatory turn in of above?

Where do YOU draw the line?

When do you stop just moving the line with little concessions like having to have x number of American made parts in an SKS if you want to put a pistol grip on it? Keep conceding things, and the line will be at a point where you CAN'T work to change anything.

 

[Blackcloud6]

When do you stop just moving the line with little concessions like having to have x number of American made parts in an SKS if you want to put a pistol grip on it? Keep conceding things, and the line will be at a point where you CAN'T work to change anything.

Well, you don't concede anything. You fight these laws from being made in the first place and once passed you fight to get them repealed. Howerve, once it is a law you don not violate it. It is not prudent to do so; nothing is helped nor gained by violating the law and you play into the anits' hands by becoming a law breaking gun nut.

 

[B.D. Turner]

If this AR15 contained ANY machine gun parts he was in violation of the law. Mixing parts is not allowed by law.

 

[ants]

Hiya, Kevin.

He didn't put machine gun parts in his gun, Olympic Arms did. They did that throughout the early 1990's. The parts aren't the question.

If we do a search and read the court finding in response to his motion to allow certain evidence at his trial, we understand more about the crime he was charged with. It wasn't putting M-16 machine gun parts in a gun.

The charge was knowingly transferring a gun capable of machine gun fire and stating that as a fact. It doesn't matter why it went full auto, malfunction or not. When he gave it to the other guy, he told him it would shoot full auto. And it did shoot full auto at the range, right in front of everybody.

He transferred it as a full auto, and it shoots full auto. It doesn't matter why it shoots full auto, the charge was transferring it as a full auto machine gun. Not converting it from a semi-auto to a full auto.

 

[Pigspitter]

K3, I'm sorry if my intentions were a little fuzzy. As is the case with 992r and many other firearms laws, I don't believe in them and really wish they were off the books. That being said, they still are the laws and we need to fight them with sensibility and votes, not by blatantly violating the laws. We need to show that a stark majority of gun owners are law abiding citizens and supporting those who jeopardize the RKBA doesn't seem like the best choice in my opinion.


P.S.- My feelings are a little hurt by the "anti" comment.

 

[mbt2001]

The one thing that gets me, is that since he is in the National Guard, and I believe the other person was also in the National Guard, the 2nd amendment does protect his right to the machine gun no matter what.

This case gets turned over on appeal because of that. Didn't some cops start buying machine guns recently for personal use and the ATF arrested them and the court dismissed the case, sighting the exception for police in the law??? I know I read that.

 

[K3]

K3, I'm sorry if my intentions were a little fuzzy. As is the case with 992r and many other firearms laws, I don't believe in them and really wish they were off the books. That being said, they still are the laws and we need to fight them with sensibility and votes, not by blatantly violating the laws. We need to show that a stark majority of gun owners are law abiding citizens and supporting those who jeopardize the RKBA doesn't seem like the best choice in my opinion.


P.S.- My feelings are a little hurt by the "anti" comment.

Pigspitter: I still hold my position that a line has to be drawn somewhere. The line can't continue to be moved to appease those who would outlaw civilian ownership of firearms if they could.

Unjust laws should be questioned and challenged, and I believe that any reasonable man can make the distinction between good laws and bad. Some here may not see it that way, but that's OK. Variety is the spice of life.

Sorry if I hurt your feelings. It wasn't meant to be personal - I still lurv ya!

 

[Pigspitter]

Sorry if I hurt your feelings. It wasn't meant to be personal - I still lurv ya!

That was a little strange, but I get the point.

 

[K3]

Well, you don't concede anything. You fight these laws from being made in the first place and once passed you fight to get them repealed. Howerve, once it is a law you don not violate it. It is not prudent to do so; nothing is helped nor gained by violating the law and you play into the anits' hands by becoming a law breaking gun nut.

Does this apply to registration and confiscation/turn-in?

 

[JohnBT]

"Unjust laws should be questioned and challenged"

Certainly, you just have to be ready to spend some time in jail while your lawyer challenges them.

John

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

This case gets turned over on appeal because of that. Didn't some cops start buying machine guns recently for personal use and the ATF arrested them and the court dismissed the case, sighting the exception for police in the law??? I know I read that."

i doubt it but if you close your eyes and click your heels 3 times.....
and i believe your memory of what you "know you read" is incorrect