Florida Man Arrested for Constructive Possession of an SBR

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hang on a minute though. Isn't there a significant difference [diameter, locking lugs] between a AR pistol buffer tube and a AR rifle buffer tube? Did the pistol in question have a pistol or rifle BT? Because if it was a pistol BT then it wouldn't qualify as 'easily or readily convertible', correct?

Not an AR.

Difference between a SP-89 and a SP-89 with stock is removing two pins, swapping the backplate for a stock, and reinserting them. Total 30s of assembly time (and the required tax stamp and all that jazz, for the nitpickers that will appear if I don't add it).
 
It is the old "can't fight city hall" syndrome.
Whether the law is BS or not, whether it is correctly applied or not, if they come down on you, you get to pay the lawyers. Both sides, your taxes to the prosecutor, your life savings to the defense.
Best to be cautious and stay out of those gray areas unless you have the time, money, and inclination to "...push and push against these stupid make shift laws so others dont have to."
 
@ rfurtkamp

[facepalm]

Why? The SP-89 is *not* a AR-type weapon. The questions you asked are irrelevant.

The SP-89 (and the modern US-made clones) is, from a functional standpoint, *the* perfect case for constructive possession by design alone. The pistol endcap vs. stock is extremely clear-cut design-wise, and the MP5K/SP-89 pistol/SBR/SMG (depending on configuration) uses different rear attachment pin locations (an extra on the top half of the receiver) compared to the standard HK-94 rifle, so there's no claim that 'that piece was for something else.'

If they weren't willing to knock this one out of the park, then it says quite a bit about at least that local jurisdiction's lack of faith in the idea of constructive possession.

I should add that as a legal owner of a NFA-registered, mommy-tax paid SP-89-type conversion that the ease of doing it is one of the reasons the entire HK clone (and non-clone) market exists - you can swap registered sears back and forth so easily it's a wonderful modular weapon system for the $12k piece of sheet metal that powers it all.
 
rfurtkamp, I meant facepalm on my part, BECAUSE I asked an irrelevant question, forgetting the OP post so soon.
 
With firearms, you should be smart enough to know when you are in the gray area of law; then be smart enough to make that gray either balck or white.
 
I have a better suggestion for him, man up and accept responsibility for your actions. Why is it oh so common on gun forums to suggest obtaining an attorney and dodging responsibility for your actions?

Wow, so I guess Heller should have just accepted responsibility for breaking the law and taken his charges like a man, right? :rolleyes:
 
Illegal...yes Done purposely...doubt it but it's a crime none the less. When it's firearms and federal laws are in play, you just gotta know your do's, don'ts, can's and cannot's. If and when you screw up and get caught, don't blame everyone else but you, take responsabilty for your own actions no matter how idiotic they were.
No different than if you owned an un-taxed AR and had the 5 special parts to make it full auto.
 
I have a better suggestion for him, man up and accept responsibility for your actions. Why is it oh so common on gun forums to suggest obtaining an attorney and dodging responsibility for your actions?

Because some people that get falsely arrested and imprisoned still wish to own firearms when they are released. Did you honestly not suspect that you might get flak for this post? :scrutiny:
 
So to be clear we are talking about a guy who got arrested for possessing the items which if assembled would look like the pictured firearm below? A semi-auto, right? This is alleged to be a violation of Florida law.
hksp89.jpg
 
So to be clear we are talking about a guy who got arrested for possessing the items which if assembled would look like the pictured firearm below? A semi-auto, right?

Assuming the burst pack on the one you linked only has semi-auto components (legal and aok and all that), yes.

Here's the before and after with my SP-89 clone built by Vector in Utah a few years back.

v89k-pistol-left.jpg

mp5kpdw-rightfolded.jpg

No monkeys were harmed in the legal Form 1 making of this weapon. All taxes paid, yay. Other than the rear sight change (which I made while waiting for the F1 to come back approved), the fundamental difference between the two is a swap of the endplate/stock and the forearm, both held on by user-removable (toolless) pushpins.
 
Dear lord...

You should read the letters, it's unbelievable. They are out if you Google around for them.

First, they sent a letter saying that ALL 14 inch shoestrings were considered NFA items.

Then finally a couple of years later they realized what they had done and amended it that only if the 14 inch shoestring was attached to a gun was it considered a machine gun.

You can't make this kind of stuff up :)
 
Hang on a minute though. Isn't there a significant difference [diameter, locking lugs] between a AR pistol buffer tube and a AR rifle buffer tube? Did the pistol in question have a pistol or rifle BT? Because if it was a pistol BT then it wouldn't qualify as 'easily or readily convertible', correct?
well the buttplate on this pistol comes out with 2 pins and its easy to remove, the thing is this is just that a pistol not a modded rifle or a ar15 complete lower and a seperate pistol upper, in a case like that its nothing but a sbr but my gun is a pistol the fact that i had a stock for it does not mean jack SH*^. unless i put it on anyways, there is a buffer but its attached to the buttplate or stock.
 
Illegal...yes Done purposely...doubt it but it's a crime none the less. When it's firearms and federal laws are in play, you just gotta know your do's, don'ts, can's and cannot's. If and when you screw up and get caught, don't blame everyone else but you, take responsabilty for your own actions no matter how idiotic they were.
No different than if you owned an un-taxed AR and had the 5 special parts to make it full auto.
thats a little different, there is no legal way of making a full auto, therefore owning full auto parts on a title 2 weapon is nothing but intent to make a machinegun, or better yet by federal law if you have the parts to build one, you do own a machinegun there is no intent there they consider it a working weapon. I am sure they will even be nice enough to get it working for you before you go to court too.
 
I just read this entire thread for the first time...sure glad to hear the ending an you got your gun back. Isn't there some real crime out there for cops to do.....sounds like typical non-eduacated bully's with badges...an thats the sad part...as tax payers we deserve better, an I know there are good cops out there....somewhere.
Tell me about it, though it was a grey area case, if after the talk we had and they can obviously tell there was no intent to break the law they should have suspended it right then and there, but then again there is a reason why lee county is one of the counties in the country as well as naples or collier with the highest rate of reported police misconduct reports.
 
I have a better suggestion for him, man up and accept responsibility for your actions. Why is it oh so common on gun forums to suggest obtaining an attorney and dodging responsibility for your actions?
Because it's a life sentence with little possibility of getting your rights restored, and "your actions" might have been a simple oversight with absolutely zero criminal intent. In this case, it appears the guy thought possessing the parts in case he wanted to go the NFA route someday with a tax stamp was OK, and he was correct with regard to Federal law but wrong about Florida law.

I studied FL gun law quite a bit and read every section of it multiple times when I lived there, and I am not sure I would have been clear that possession of a stock, a foregrip, and a pistol (with no intent to construct an SBR or AOW outside of the NFA rules) would constitute a felony. I can see how one might overlook that.
 
So 14" shoestring attached to the gun is illegal.....I don't use a shoestring, ...but I would interpet this that to be legal, is to use a 13" shoestring, or 12", or 13.5".......my thinking is that a shorter one "used" would still be illegal, but a shorter one attached would make them mad, they could do nothing to arrest you if it was simply attached...there you go Jesus, check it out...your nest case....Man arrested with shoestring attached to semi-auto, but case dropped 3 wks. later when ATF discovered shoestring only measured 13.4" long......
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top