ISP trooper pleads guilty

[Soybomb]

Update to something we discussed in Feb:
Trooper pleads guilty in gun case
By Greg Jonsson
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
07/26/2006

One of three Illinois State Police officers charged this year with illegally possessing submachine guns pleaded guilty Tuesday, authorities said.

Senior Master Trooper Greg Mugge, 52, of Jerseyville, pleaded guilty to one charge of possession of an unregistered machine gun, according to federal prosecutors. Mugge, a 21-year veteran of the department who was assigned to District 18 in Litchfield, faces a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000. His sentencing is scheduled for Oct. 27.

Mugge could not be reached Tuesday, and an attorney representing the trooper declined to comment on the plea, made in the federal district court in East St. Louis.

Mugge and two Illinois State Police officers from District 11 in Collinsville were placed on paid leave after they were charged earlier this year with having submachine guns at their homes. As Illinois State Police officers, they are allowed to handle submachine guns legally for their jobs, but they could not have them at home, according to prosecutors. Submachine guns fire a steady stream of bullets with a single squeeze of the trigger.

Mugge and the others, Sgt. James V. Vest of O'Fallon and Special Agent John Yard of Collinsville, had pleaded not guilty earlier this year. Another man, Dr. Harold Griffiths, 69, of Spaulding, Ill., was charged with lending one of the weapons to Yard, who said he fired it and gave it back to Griffiths, who then lived in Glen Carbon.

The case was investigated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. The ATF interviewed the officers in late December. At that time, according to court documents, Mugge admitted on videotape to possessing a Colt rifle that had been converted to function in a fully automatic mode. Mugge told the ATF that he had obtained the submachine gun in the late 1970s or early 1980s from a licensed dealer who is now dead, according to the court documents.

Mugge and the others voluntarily turned guns over to the ATF.

Mugge's gun was not registered, and the Illinois State Police had not authorized Mugge to possess the gun, the ATF said in court filings. The guns are legal for those who pass a background check, pay a fee and submit the proper forms.

In an unusual move, 10 Metro East police chiefs issued a letter in February urging leniency for the accused officers. Two state senators and two county sheriffs also signed the letter. They said 10 years in prison would be excessive punishment for law enforcement officers who had worked to make citizens safer.

Belleville Police Chief David Ruebhausen drafted the letter and said Tuesday he stands by what the letter says.

"I did not nor do I now condone illegal activity," he said. "My point is that sentencing these guys to prison does not protect the public nor does it serve the public. It would serve no purpose

--------------------------------------------------
I wonder if the sheriffs, police chiefs, and senators would write a letter saying that Soybomb, the good law abiding citizens shouldn't be put in jail for 10 years because he harmed no one if I did the same thing.

 

[Ferrari308]

The police officers never should have been charged. They cooperated 100%, they told the truth, they did not lie, and they returned the weapons to the ATF. The police officers said they purchased the guns in the 70's and the original licensed dealer died, so who knows what the regulations were back then.

I'm against charging people with paper offenses. What I always want to know are the following- "Was anyone injured, did anyone suffer because of an act"? So far, I don't see one victim. Not one! These police officers risked their lives helping others. If I was a police officer, I might have some fear that a drug user I busted will come back to my house to attack me.

If these police officers used those machine guns to harm someone, I would have a different attitude about locking them up. But I don't want to pay money in taxes to keep good people in jail.

 

[Ferrari308]

I wonder if the sheriffs, police chiefs, and senators would write a letter saying that Soybomb, the good law abiding citizens shouldn't be put in jail for 10 years because he harmed no one if I did the same thing.

Hopefully the two state senators will introduce a bill which will lower the penalty. 10 years is a stupid sentance for a non-violent crime. I doubt the senators could repeal the law in Illinois, but maybe the senators could lower the punishment so there is no jail time IF the person who violated the law did not harm anyone.

 

[orangelo]

what the regulations were back then.

The regulations have been the same for the past 70 years. They broke the National Firearms Act of 1934, no excuses. As LAW ENFORCEMENT officers they should have known better.

Nice to see you support the police state. Care to bring back knights and nobility too? What about a king or emperor that is above the laws the rest of us peons have to follow?

The 2 state senators have no power to change the FEDERAL LAW passed by congress and signed by President Roosevelt in 1934.

 

[brufener]

The police officers never should have been charged. They cooperated 100%, they told the truth, they did not lie, and they returned the weapons to the ATF.

I gotta disagree with you on this. If anything, the police officers should be given a stricter penalty than the "ordinary" citizen would get. Police officers are entrusted with the public's confidence. Their job is to uphold the law. When police officers disregard the law, the public questions the importance of the laws and all officer's intent to "do whats right." Furthermore, it reinforces the idea that police are above the law.

As for not knowing that a fully automatic weapon needed special paperwork done, I find it hard to believe that a police officer would have no idea that it required registration. Sounds like willful ignorance at best. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

If you want to change the law thats fine, but apply it equally to everyone.

 

[cyanide]

The regulations have been the same for the past 70 years. They broke the National Firearms Act of 1934, no excuses. As LAW ENFORCEMENT officers they should have known better.

Nice to see you support the police state. Care to bring back knights and nobility too? What about a king or emperor that is above the laws the rest of us peons have to follow?

The 2 state senators have no power to change the FEDERAL LAW passed by congress and signed by President Roosevelt in 1934.

Very well said

we already have a classed society

the rich elite and everyone else

we sure don't need any more classifications.

 

[cordex]

Darn, orangelo beat me to it.

****

The police officers said they purchased the guns in the 70's and the original licensed dealer died, so who knows what the regulations were back then.

Anyone who has any desire to read up on them can do so. The regulations on machine guns have been in effect since the NFA of 1934 as amended by the Gun Control Act of 1968. The poison-pill in the 1986 Firearms Owners Protection Act would not have applied.

Except for the ban on new registrations of machine guns that came in 1986, the laws are essentially the same today as they were in the '70s and a licensed dealer or law enforcement officer would (or should) have known them.

And as we are all constantly reminded, ignorance of the law is not an excuse for violating it.

If I were caught with an unregistered machine gun under the same conditions that the officers in question were caught, I'd do some seriously hard time. I'm not sure why these officers should be handled differently.

It's sad, though. These guys have done nothing that I would consider wrong, and the chief was right when he said that imprisoning them would not serve anyone's best interests. That said, letting them walk when anyone else would do time wouldn't be just either.

Three new victories for a bad law.

 

[det.pat]

Does anybody think that these guys would publicly support leniency for any one of us that the b a t fuc@ks nabbed, if you do then you are a fool. illinois is a police state and they would cheerfully help stuff you into a cell. they should get the full penalty that we would get, after atf is just in the business of screwing law abiding citizens who don't shoot back, just like these guys.

these guys are despicable, and i hope they get what they earned. maybe then they will think twice about assisting atf in sticking it to another citizen.
pat

 

[HankB]

The police officers never should have been charged.

I believe the NFA '34 ought never have been enacted, but as long as it's on the books, I have to say that if I would be charged for an identical offense, they should be charged.

And, at a minimum, they should pay the same penalty that I would.

 

[Ferrari308]

If I were caught with an unregistered machine gun under the same conditions that the officers in question were caught, I'd do some seriously hard time. I'm not sure why these officers should be handled differently.

It's sad, though. These guys have done nothing that I would consider wrong, and the chief was right when he said that imprisoning them would not serve anyone's best interests. That said, letting them walk when anyone else would do time wouldn't be just either.

I don't think you should serve time either under the same circumstances.

The reason I disagree with punishing the officers is I can't see who the victim is? Were the firearms used in a crime? Was anyone shot at, or threatened? Did they use the firearms to protect a drug house?

I just don't understand what harm was done. If we can trust people with .50 calibur sniper rifles, then why can't we trust them with automatic guns?

I believe these police officers proved a point. They had the guns since the 1970's and they didn't use them in any criminal offense (except possessing them). That proves people should be trusted with automatic guns.

 

[rbernie]

That proves people should be trusted with automatic guns.

I think that everyone here would agree to this in general. The concern is that the police should not be exempted from the law of the land, regardless of how we may feel about that law.

I don't think you should serve time either under the same circumstances.

I would hope that you're on my jury. But I doubt that those ten police chiefs, two state senators, and two county sheriffs would be writing that same letter for me as they did for these officers.

 

[Soybomb]

these guys are despicable, and i hope they get what they earned.

Not at all, if this is the worst thing they've done they're fine guys that do a service for their community but mad some dumb choices. I'm with Ferarri in that this is a victimless crime. People will have their lives ruined and I will waste my tax dollars putting them in prison.

Where I differ from Ferarri is in thinking they should be given a get out of jail free card. If the laws are unjust you need to change the laws, not let leo's off the hook because of their occupation. Obviously in this case though the police chiefs, sheriffs, and senators think the state troopers are above the law. Thats the only thing thats despicable here.

 

[Cosmoline]

I wonder how many unregistered, illegal firearms the BATF has. Oh, I'm sorry. I forgot the King cannot break his own laws. Just like a husband can't rape his wife.

 

[Phetro]

No one should be charged or sentence for violating this "law." Any law repugnant to the Constitution is void, remember?

 

[FTF]

Submachine guns fire a steady stream of bullets with a single squeeze of the trigger.

At least they got this part right... usually all small semi-autos fall into the 'submachine gun' catagory according to todays media

I'm with most of you. Same time as anyone else would get. Being that they were police officers, or ran a homeless shelter or lived on the good side of the law for 80 years... then yes, that will bear some sentencing consideration. I'm sure there are rough sentencing guidelines for such a conviction, and I'm sure the circumstances of the crime and the previous conduct of the defendant figure into it... or one would hope.

I'm not saying hit them with 10 years or slap them on the wrist with a 5000$ fine... but they should get what others in similar circumstances have received... I wonder if there is a way to look up that kind of information?

Oh well, they're cops, they're probably still going to get paid even IF they go to jail.

 

[cordex]

I don't think you should serve time either under the same circumstances.

That's fantastic. Neither do I. Unfortunately, you and I have no control over the law.

The reason I disagree with punishing the officers is I can't see who the victim is? Were the firearms used in a crime? Was anyone shot at, or threatened? Did they use the firearms to protect a drug house?

Sure, sure, I'm with you. These guys aren't bad guys and they don't deserve for bad things to happen to them. I doubt you deserve bad things to happen to you, and (unless you have some powerful political connections) you most certainly would do hard time if you were caught with an unregistered machine gun. I don't understand why these officers (from the sounds of it, good men all) should be treated differently for this violation of the law.

These guys are cops, but according to the law, they're also criminals. Their crime is a violation (perhaps even a small technical violation - I don't know all the details) of Federal law that I don't agree with, but granting them a special exemption simply because they're cops is unjust.

I just don't understand what harm was done. If we can trust people with .50 calibur sniper rifles, then why can't we trust them with automatic guns?

Gun laws and regulations aren't about making sense or protecting folks. They never have been. As is often repeated, gun control is all about control.

No one should be charged or sentence for violating this "law." Any law repugnant to the Constitution is void, remember?

The NFA has been upheld in the Supreme Court to be constitutional. Whether you or I think it is repugnant to the Constitution is utterly and totally immaterial until and unless the Supreme Court reverses itself.

 

[Father Knows Best]

The NFA has been upheld in the Supreme Court to be constitutional.

Has the constitutionality of the NFA been addressed by SCOTUS anywhere other than in Miller v. United States? In the Miller case, the defendant was convicted with possessing of a sawed-off shotgun in violation of the NFA. One of his claims on appeal was that the NFA violated the 2nd Amendment. SCOTUS dismissed that argument, commenting that it was not within the judicial notice of the court that sawed-off shotguns were military in nature, and therefore were not entitled to protection.

At most, Miller stands for the proposition that the NFA's restrictions on short-barrel shotguns do not violate the 2nd Amendment. Miller says nothing about machine guns and submachine guns. In fact, one could make a plausible argument that the stated rationale used by the Miller court implies that the restrictions on machine guns are UNConstitutional because machine guns have well-established military use. Of course, that rationale is dicta and non-binding.

In addition, by the time the case reached SCOTUS, the appeal had effectively been abandoned, to the best of my recollection. I don't know that anyone even appeared for the defendant. That makes its precedential value weak, at best, because it was not a truly contested case.

I'm not familiar with other cases that directly address the Constitutionality of the NFA. Are you?

 

[Car Knocker]

Just like a husband can't rape his wife.

At the risk of thread drift, I don't believe that holds true any longer, at least in many states.

 

[HerrWolfe]

It looks rather obvious. Illinois has no provision for open or concealed carry by citizens, so the cops just wanted the full autos to even them up with the general citizenery. This really smells bad. The state officials know it will hit the fan sometime, and they want to be prepared; wonder how many full autos they have squirreled away? Maybe the FBI should take a peek.

 

[Optical Serenity]

Ok, they made stupid mistakes, and probably should be charged...And yes, the law certainly needs to be changed.

Don't be so quick though to jump on this bandwagon of "They should be treated worse than you or I would..." Thats b.s., because should you or anyone else be treated worse for anything? No!

Why should the wealthy man get a higher fine than one who isn't so wealthy?

Stupid laws...10 years is insane.

 

[MechAg94]

I agree that no one should be charged or serve time, but the law is what it is. It should be applied equally to all people.

 

[Ferrari308]

This reminds me of something that happened a few years ago.

Does anyone remember the two guys in full body armor who tried to rob a bank in California? The bad guys had fully automatic AK-47's and the police couldn't do a dang thing to stop them. Some of the police officers went to gun shops and "borrowed" stronger firearms which the police did not have.

If the law is written that posessing fully auto weapons is illegal, shouldn't those police officers have been charged too? I doubt they could get approval that quickly. I wonder how they got off? Can a chief of police approve automatic weapons instantly, or does it take approval from the ATF?

I'm just trying to point out the foolishness of the law. The bad guys have whatever they can get, while the rest of us don't.

 

[Car Knocker]

They didn't borrow full-autos - they borrowed run-of-the-mill semi-auto AR15s.

 

[Overman]

My thought process:

Q: Is the law unjust?
A: Yes

Therefore: Let 'em go. To advocate otherwise is to advocate jailing people unjustly.

 

[mp510]

I don't believe in the law, and I hope that someday (the sooner the better) full autos will be more readily available to civilians in this country without paperwork hassles. However, given that the law is as it is, I am glad that these LEO's are recieving the same treatment that any other individual would recieve. Remember that if any of us did the same, we would be getting used to orange pretty quick.

The police officers never should have been charged. They cooperated 100%, they told the truth, they did not lie, and they returned the weapons to the ATF. The police officers said they purchased the guns in the 70's and the original licensed dealer died, so who knows what the regulations were back then.

The NFA took effect in 1934, which was many years before the 1970's. Even if you do legally own a machine gun, you can not transfer it to others without going through the paperwork process (IIRC). However, you do bring up a valid point, that the ATF does periodically loose documentation, and iot is always good to keep track of your tax stamps, and keep copies of them too.