Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Florida Man Arrested for Constructive Possession of an SBR

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by cleetus03, Sep 1, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. cleetus03

    cleetus03 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Messages:
    302
    Location:
    Spuds, FL
    www.floridaguntrader.com is a ridiculous effective tool for buying and selling guns in my state and I've used its services before. As I browsed through the website today, I found the following post by a member Jesus Amador who had listed a gun on the site.

    Naturally, I googled Jesus Amador Lee County after reading his post. Here’s what I found;
    And here's the photo of the SP89 with all the accessories in a case that he used in the classified.;
    [​IMG]


    And here's the press release of his arrest from the Lee County Sheriff Office website (www.sheriffleefl.org);


    I never gave thought to Constructive Possession of a NFA firearm. Probably because I don't possess anything which comes close to blurring the lines. Do yall think the H&K SP89 that Amador sold was without a doubt constructive possession of a NFA firearm?
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2009
  2. Prince Yamato

    Prince Yamato Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2006
    Messages:
    4,410
    Location:
    Texas
    Yes. He's an idiot for selling this with those accessories. Should it be a crime? No, but it is and this guy basically committed a text-book case of constructive possession.
     
  3. kingpin008

    kingpin008 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    Messages:
    5,435
    Location:
    Howard County, Merry Land
    I've got a suggestion for him - erase that post, and shut up until he secures a lawyer. Other than that, I say go get 'em. If everything he says is true, he might have a shot. Either way it's going to cost him, unfortunately.
     
  4. panoz77

    panoz77 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2009
    Messages:
    69
    Location:
    NE Ohio
    Ignorance of the law is not a defense. This type of law applies to other arenas in the gun world as well. Some people do not WANT to learn the truth and suffer for it as a result. I have seen guys post pics of pistols with forward grips and just can't believe they just incriminated themselves so badly. Just like a guy recently posted a for sale ad for an AR with the "parts to make it FA" as he stated plainly in his ad on swapgiant. Check this guy out.

    [​IMG]
     
  5. freakshow10mm

    freakshow10mm member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2008
    Messages:
    1,951
    TC v US stated constructive possession is BS via Supreme Court.

    Kent in the 11th federal court said otherwise.

    Interesting to follow.
     
  6. Quiet

    Quiet Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,062
    Location:
    bouncing between the 909 & the 702
    Yes.
     
    Last edited: Sep 1, 2009
  7. freakshow10mm

    freakshow10mm member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2008
    Messages:
    1,951
    TC v US
     
  8. Quiet

    Quiet Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,062
    Location:
    bouncing between the 909 & the 702
    Federal law is not the issue.
    (reason why the BATFE is not involved)

    What's at issue is FL law, which outlaws the constructive possession of a SBR.
    (if you have a tax stamp, then you are exempt from this law)

    Which the defendant clearly violated.


    Florida Statue 790.221
    (1) It is unlawful for any person to own or to have in his or her care, custody, possession, or control any short-barreled rifle, short-barreled shotgun, or machine gun which is, or may readily be made, operable; but this section shall not apply to antique firearms.
    (2) A person who violates this section commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
    (3) Firearms in violation hereof which are lawfully owned and possessed under provisions of federal law are excepted.
     
  9. DHJenkins

    DHJenkins Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Messages:
    1,022
    Location:
    South Texas
    I could swear I saw that picture on gunbroker.

    I guess the lesson here is to never meet someone in person if you're selling a gun like this.

    Or at least, have someone video taping from a safe distance.


    Pretty dumb though to sell all that stuff in one auction. You'd probably get more for the individual parts, anyway.
     
  10. flrfh213

    flrfh213 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    275
    Location:
    sw Florida
    yep, i saw thet pic on 1 of the gun sales sites too....
    cant remember where, but i guess i need to keep an eye on this.... i live in same county he does... if he is in jail, he is down the street 12ish miles....
     
  11. rfurtkamp

    rfurtkamp Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2005
    Messages:
    718
    Location:
    SE Idaho
    It's sad, in this case a several thousand dollar gun and accessories is subject to enforcement for want of a $200 stamp.

    Not saying I agree with the extortion of the stamps in the first place, and god knows I've bought enough of them now over the years (including ironically my own MP5K-PDW SBR), but the true shame is the guy lives somewhere where he could have easily made that package unquestionably legal with little hassle.
     
  12. Shung

    Shung Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,682
    Location:
    Geneva, Switzerland
    now they did put a "real criminal" in jail.. you should all feel safer ! thx Mike Scott, you made florida citizens so much safer..
     
  13. danprkr

    danprkr Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,337
    Well, without know everything, and let's face it we can't, I can say this. Even if it is a technical violation of the law, and stupid on his part. It's a stupid law, and I hope he gets off.
     
  14. 627PCFan

    627PCFan Member

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2007
    Messages:
    2,001
    Location:
    Sterling, VA
    Define readily made.....? Does that include a clip on attachments, or bar stock that needs to be milled, tapped, and bolted on? Seems like the prosecution would have to clarify that and get the judge to buy it
     
  15. NC-Mike

    NC-Mike Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2007
    Messages:
    1,227
    We don't know he isn't a bad guy, neither do the police before they arrest him make the decision to prosecute or not.

    What should the police do, just say ahh, forget about it, he's probably OK and just don't know the law... :)
     
  16. Shung

    Shung Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,682
    Location:
    Geneva, Switzerland
    wanna bet ? ;)
     
  17. rino451

    rino451 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    545
    Fixed it for you. And yes, I do not like those kinds of laws.
     
  18. 9mm+

    9mm+ Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    856
    Location:
    Cary, NC
    I used to live in Florida (now live in North Carolina), and while I don't like a lot of these inane laws, ignorance of them and/or failure to comply are never a good idea.

    I am a bit surprised of how the arrest was made, but since the cops knew the suspect was armed beforehand, they certainly didn't want to take any chances.
     
  19. chuckusaret

    chuckusaret member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2008
    Messages:
    1,606
    Location:
    West Palm Beach Florida
    This guy made a big mistake and was an easy catch for the LE guys. They jumped on him with both feet and of course made sure all the newspapers, both local and national, got a copy of the news release on the arrest and their outstanding investigative techniques in capturing the bad guys. Yep, they have gotten another very dangerous criminal off the streets.
     
  20. longdayjake

    longdayjake Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2008
    Messages:
    2,607
    Location:
    Genesee, ID
    I agree that the whole issue in this case that will be debated is the definition of "Readily Made." Every rifle I own is a SBR depending on how you define that one phrase. I bet I could saw off the barrel on my gun faster than you could put a stock on that pistol. A lawyer could get a policeman/professional to put the stock on and see how long it would take. If nothing else that law should be void for vagueness.
     
  21. rino451

    rino451 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    545
    I believe that past precedent has shown that "they" are loathe to define "readily made."
     
  22. Jamyatunes

    Jamyatunes Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2008
    Messages:
    33
    The problem with this "readily made" stipulation is that anyone who owns both a regular AR-15 rifle and an AR-15 style pistol could in a matter of seconds swap the lowers and have an illegal SBR. Do they now have the right to go through every Florida resident's gun safes to ensure that this is not the case?
     
  23. MisterMike

    MisterMike Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    758
    Location:
    Midwest USA
    Though I'm a lawyer, I'm not going to even pretend to know how the state's courts have interepreted this provision of the law:

    But the clear language of the statute indicates to me that the question is not, as suggested by someone above, whether a prohibited weapon could be "readily made" from the parts one has one hand, but, rather, whether if one has such a weapon in hand, it could "readily be made operable." Depending on how this law is construed, this makes a huge difference.

    Nonetheless, in every state that I know of, the state is held to a pretty stringent and narrow reading of any criminal statute. Here, the criminality of the conduct described by the OP is not readily apparent from the plain language of the statute . . . at least not to me. :D However, regardless of how this turns out, combining those items in a single sale offering was probably not prudent.
     
  24. Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow

    Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Messages:
    13,146
    Hugh Downs is selling full-auto kits now?

    As freakshow said, it's a gray area as to whether it violates federal law, so no, NOT without a doubt illegal as to federal law.

    As to FL state law, I do not think that Quiet is correct at all when he says that the Defendant "clearly violated" state law. Let's look at the statute you posted again:

    In fact, paragraph #3 specifically states that "if it's legal as to Federal law, it's legal as to this FL state law" - so we're clearly and unambiguously BACK to Federal law (which is unclear and ambiguous - look at what freakshow10mm said above).

    In addition, EVEN if paragraph #3 were not in there, as MisterMike points out, there's still no constructive possession in paragraph #1 - true, it's "operable or readily made to be operable" - no question about that. But that's only one of two requirements. It's also must be either an SBR or SBS or machinegun, to be illegal. So we're back to the definition of "what is an SBR?" which doesn't *necessarily* include this so-called "constructive possession".

    So no, it's not clear at ALL to me yet that he committed any crime, either federal or state.
     
  25. mgregg85

    mgregg85 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2007
    Messages:
    2,008
    Location:
    Midland, MI
    I own a vertical grip, its for my SUB-2000, but its not always attached to it(sometimes it sits on top of my gun safe). I also own an XD45 that the vertical grip could be attached to. Now according to that sentence that I quoted, that would be constructive possession of an AOW?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page