ISP trooper pleads guilty

[Car Knocker]

Overman,

There's a problem with that approach - no laws would be enforced because some group, somewhere would hold that a particular law is unjust. If a law is deemed to be unjust by a particular group, then the effort needs to be made to repeal that law.

Selective enforcement is not the answer.

 

[Otherguy Overby]

Maxing it out.

As far as I am concerned ANY LEO caught doing something wrong should serve the maximum time and also pay the maximum fine.

After all, when they've got you cuffed & stuffed in the back of their cruiser and you mention "constitutional rights" about the first thing they mention is: If you don't like the law, why don't you vote to change it? Of course felons often can no longer vote...

I've NO sympathy for officials doing anything wrong. They have no mercy for me, or any other citizen caught up in a stupid law. Pay back is a bitch. They can twist in the wind...

 

[Ferrari308]

I've NO sympathy for officials doing anything wrong. They have no mercy for me, or any other citizen caught up in a stupid law. Pay back is a bitch. They can twist in the wind...

Were the police officers corrupt? Did they benifit somehow from owning those guns? Was there corruption?

This is worlds apart from some city official who gets his brother in law contract work for city at the exclusion of everyone else. There were no bribes. There were no under the table deals. It was some police officers who made a purchase from a licensed dealer. I would hold the dealer more accountable for the sale than the buyers. He is the one who should know the law better! Why did the dealer make the sale?

People have to remember there is the letter of the law, and then there is the spirit of the law. Even if these police officers violated the letter of the law, I highly doubt they violated the spirit of the law.

 

[lacoochee]

I think this should be appealed all the way to SCOTUS

This is the case, this one could destroy the NFA, if it were appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. Three otherwise law abiding police officers (whom according to the left have jedi mind powers over firearms) possessing military style weapons (the exact weapons covered by the second amendment according to SCOTUS) capable of firing multiple rounds with one pull of the trigger, would be the perfect opportunity to get rid of the NFA. They are going to jail no matter what if they lose, so they should go for broke in my opinion. Before anyone else says it again, I know if it were one of us they would just toss us in jail and lock the door for ten years, but this really is a good opportunity.

 

[Ferrari308]

This is the case, this one could destroy the NFA, if it were appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. Three otherwise law abiding police officers (whom according to the left have jedi mind powers over firearms) possessing military style weapons (the exact weapons covered by the second amendment according to SCOTUS) capable of firing multiple rounds with one pull of the trigger, would be the perfect opportunity to get rid of the NFA. They are going to jail no matter what if they lose, so they should go for broke in my opinion. Before anyone else says it again, I know if it were one of us they would just toss us in jail and lock the door for ten years, but this really is a good opportunity.

That is a great idea. Do you believe the NRA will take this case? I'd be willing to donate a few dollars to the legal team.

 

[wdlsguy]

Why should the NRA take their case? These men had the same opportunity to pay the $200 transfer tax as the rest of us. If you want to do something positive, work for the repeal of 18 USC 922(o).

 

[Car Knocker]

I highly doubt they violated the spirit of the law.

The way I see it, they violated the spirit of the law every day for the last 30 years.

 

[cordex]

People have to remember there is the letter of the law, and then there is the spirit of the law. Even if these police officers violated the letter of the law, I highly doubt they violated the spirit of the law.

Er ... the spirit of the NFA?
The "spirit" of the NFA was to make ownership of machine guns, suppressors and short barrelled shotguns/rifles essentially a legal (or at least a financial) impossibility. Who would pay a $200 tax on a machine gun that cost at the time $50-$150? Who would pay $200 tax for a $5 sound suppressor or a $10 cut down shotgun? $200 meant an awful lot in 1934.

If you're talking the "spirit" of the law, these officers were probably violating the spirit of the NFA as well as the letter.

 

[Don Gwinn]

Ferrari308, consider giving it up. You're just not going to convince anyone that this is OK. We all get what you're saying. It's not a terribly profound point, to be honest. We all agree that it shouldn't be against the law for these men or for you or for me to own a machine gun in Illinois. But what you're advocating in fact, whether you choose to see it or not, is that it be:
Illegal for you
Illegal for me
But legal for these cops simply because they're cops.

That won't cut it.

The guns are legal for those who pass a background check, pay a fee and submit the proper forms.

That is absolutely untrue and I can't believe no one has mentioned it yet. Am I wrong here? It is illegal according to state law for a private citizen to possess full auto, suppressors, DD's, SBR/SBS's, AOD, etc.
Registering it with the feds and filling out their paperwork doesn't mean squat. To my knowledge the only "civilians" in Illinois who can legally own machine guns are Class 3 dealers, SOT's, etc.
If I can own a legal machine gun, by God I want one.

 

[Don Gwinn]

Originally, the NFA was going to outlaw ownership of all handguns with the same "tax" idea.
Owning just about anything that's more fun than it has to be, up to and including jazz records or a fast car, violates the "Spirit of the NFA."

 

[Ferrari308]

The "spirit" of the NFA was to make ownership of machine guns, suppressors and short barrelled shotguns/rifles essentially a legal (or at least a financial) impossibility.

The spirit of the NFA can't be to make ownership of machine guns illegal, because that would be against the 2nd amendment. The spirit of the NFA must be to protect the public by imposing minor inconveniences. Isn't that the ultimate goal of gun control? It would be very interesting to read the transcripts of Congressional debate when the NFA was debated. How many members of Congress said outright they want guns banned, and how many gave speeches about public saftey? My guess is the "spirit" of the law was to keep people safe. That's why I said I do not believe these police officers violated the spirit of the law. If the spirit of the law was different, and Congress acknowledged it, then I believe the NFA would have been struck down.

But what you're advocating in fact, whether you choose to see it or not, is that it be:
Illegal for you
Illegal for me
But legal for these cops simply because they're cops.

Im not advocating that. I'm advocating that the courts should consider the good of a man when making decisions. Politicians have used crime as a way of getting elected- politicians promise to be "tougher on crime" and they continue to increase jail sentances. Politicians have taken away the authority of judges to judge, and they've issued manditory sentencing guidlines. I believe a judge should have flexibility. Clearly, if these police officers were not sentanced to jail time they would not be a risk to society. I think we should look at the person. And that includes everyone here. If one day you were arrested for owning a gun you shouldn't, I would hope the judge could look at you and see a good person, and decide that jail is not necessary.

I believe a better punishment is to take all their guns away, punish them with some fine, and impose a 5 year wait until they can buy guns again. That will get the same result. No true gun collector will want his collection taken away. It will be enough of a detterent, and it won't ruin a good mans life.

 

[Jax]

I'm all for having them sentenced to whatever the "usual and customary" fine/penalty is for the offense in the court jurisdiction they're in. No more, no less. It may be a quaint viewpoint, but I believe in "All men are created equal".

That said, I would gladly contribute a decent chunk of money (for me, at least) for their appellate legal fees - all the way up to the top. As they have the required "standing" and are otherwise exemplary citizens, this could be Miller's undoing.

Unfortunately, because Mugge pleaded guilty, he has no grounds for appeal and it ends here. Sad...

I *really* hope the other two don't plead out - but I'd bet they will.

Jax

 

[DMF]

The speculation about the time this guy will get is quite amusing. I also find the comments like where people claim someone who wasn't a LEO officer, in the same stituation "most certainly would do hard time," amusing too. The speculation and comments about non-LEOs doing more time show extreme ignornance of how sentencing in the federal courts works.

1st, federal judges are no longer required to sentence according to the federal sentencing guidelines, BUT the vast majority of the time they do follow the guidelines.

2nd, the sentencing guidelines are the same regardless of whether someone is a cop or not.

3rd, the 10 years/$250K is the max, not what everyone gets for violating the law. Several factors go into determining how the guidelines are used to calculate the sentence, including prior criminal history and whether the defendant accepts responsibility.

4th, this guy is unlikely to have any prior criminal convictions, which puts him at the very bottom of the sentencing guidelines. Further his guilty plea and acceptance of responsibility will likely get him a downward departure from the guidelines.

Therefore unless the judge decides to depart from the sentencing guidelines, it is unlikely this person will do much, if any, jail time. However, he will most likely have a couple years of supervised release, aka probation.

The things I just explained would happen to anyone, regardless of whether they were an LEO or not.

 

[DMF]

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

Sure, there are at least two that I know of:

Haynes v. US, 390US85 (1968) - challenged the NFA on 5th Amendment grounds, and as a result of the case, part of the GCA corrected the Constitutional flaw in the NFA.

US v. Freed, 401US601 (1971) - again challenged the NFA on 5th Amendment grounds, and was a test of the changes to the NFA brought about by the GCA.

 

[LAK]

"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

Right; and neither does "licensing" or taxing the purchase of firearms.

------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

 

[Beren]

Jury nullification is all we have left to fight unconstitutional restrictions like the FOPA '86 machinegun amendment.

 

[wdlsguy]

To my knowledge the only "civilians" in Illinois who can legally own machine guns are Class 3 dealers, SOT's, etc.

That is correct. According to the NFA FAQ, machineguns, suppressors, SBRs, SBSs and explosive DDs are illegal for mere citizens in Illinois. AOWs appear to be legal and large bore DDs may be legal.

The statutes in question are 720 ILCS 5/24‑1(a)(7) and 720 ILCS 5/24‑2.

 

[Michael Courtney]

Why should the NRA take their case? These men had the same opportunity to pay the $200 transfer tax as the rest of us. If you want to do something positive, work for the repeal of 18 USC 922(o)

This offense amounts to failing to file some paperwork and pay $200 in taxes. It should be punished equally with other crimes that amount to failure to file a tax form and pay $200 in taxes.



Michael Courtney

 

[Master Blaster]

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 regulations have been unchanged since 1934. The officers broke the law the penalty is a mandatory 10 years in federal prison. They should do every minute of it.

In fact the ATF should have handled the officers the same way they handled the Branch Dividians and Randy Weaver for their NFA violations.
The death penalty for them and their families. Kick in their door shoot their wife, kids, dogs, and burn their houses to the ground.

The difference between them and David Koresh is that Koresh had an FFL class III he could actually own and sell a machine gun legally. He was rumored to have been making illegal machine guns, (post 86 no manufacturers license) but the ATF never did find a single machine gun or even a part.

These OCIFFERs had machine guns and knew they were breaking the law.

 

[sturmruger]

Every time this story comes up on THR we get every person that hates LE coming out of the woodwork.

 

[orangelo]

No every time a story like this comes up and a certain class of citizen is treated differently from the common American it makes us sick.

Here's the american class hierarchy:

Politicians
Filthy Rich
Police & Agents
Liberal MSM(if they get their way and get media immunity from the law)

Common peons.

So much for all men are created equal with certain unalienable rights.

 

[DMF]

In fact the ATF should have handled the officers the same way they handled the Branch Dividians and Randy Weaver for their NFA violations.
The death penalty for them and their families. Kick in their door shoot their wife, kids, dogs, and burn their houses to the ground.

The difference being these suspects did not violently resist the efforts of law enforcement to serve warrants and seize evidence, the way the Branch Davidians and the Weavers did. Further it was the Branch Davidians that started the fires on the final day, in three separate locations, after spreading accelerants throughout the compound.

The difference between them and David Koresh is that Koresh had an FFL class III he could actually own and sell a machine gun legally.

That is a complete and utter lie. Vernon Wayne Howell, aka David Koresh, was NOT a Special Occupational Taxpayer licensed to manufacture machine guns, nor did he have any NFA weapons registered to him as required by law.

He was rumored to have been making illegal machine guns, (post 86 no manufacturers license) but the ATF never did find a single machine gun or even a part.

Not true at all, the ATF proved beyond a reasonable doubt at the criminal trial of Paul Fatta based on the available evidence that there was a conspiracy illegally possess and manufacture machine guns. Further the government proved beyond a reasonable doubt at trial that Graeme Craddock illegally possessed an unregistered destructive device (handgrenade).

 

[glummer]

Off topic - sorry: Master Blaster,

..Koresh had an FFL class III he could actually own and sell a machine gun legally. He was rumored to have been making illegal machine guns, (post 86 no manufacturers license) but the ATF never did find a single machine gun or even a part.

Are these generally accepted facts (accepted by everyone who checks into it; courts, ATF, outside investigators?) Koresh had a ClassIII license? No clear full-auto evidence found?

On topic - another thing to consider; since Full-Autos ar illegal under Illinois STATE law, these fine officers could, at some point, have been called upon to enforce that prohibition against ordinary citizens.

What, do you suppose, they would have done?

 

[Deanimator]

Every time this story comes up on THR we get every person that hates LE coming out of the woodwork.

Is it "hatred" of LEs to expect them to obey the law?

As was pointed out by someone else, assuming for argument's sake that they were guilty of that of which they were accused, did the Branch Davidians deserve not to be prosecuted? How about Randy Weaver? What's the difference? The ones who were prosecuted were NOT police, but the alleged offenses were the SAME.

Can you explain for me your justification for your apparent belief that police should not be bound by the laws which they enforce?

What other laws should police be able to violate with impunity?

There's "cop bashing", and there's the opposite, namely the belief that police are a special class, above the rest of society and not bound by society's rules. The ONLY apparent reason to not prosecute the individuals in question is SOLELY because they are police. Is that "civilian bashing"?

 

[glummer]

Play fair, please?

DMF, your replies do not address the quotes:

Quote:

The difference between them and David Koresh is that Koresh had an FFL class III he could actually own and sell a machine gun legally.

That is a complete and utter lie. Vernon Wayne Howell, aka David Koresh, was NOT a Special Occupational Taxpayer licensed to manufacture machine guns, nor did he have any NFA weapons registered to him as required by law

The original says he had a Class III and could buy and sell; there is nothing about manufacturing or registering.

Quote:

He was rumored to have been making illegal machine guns, (post 86 no manufacturers license) but the ATF never did find a single machine gun or even a part.

Not true at all, the ATF proved beyond a reasonable doubt at the criminal trial of Paul Fatta based on the available evidence that there was a conspiracy illegally possess and manufacture machine guns. Further the government proved beyond a reasonable doubt at trial that Graeme Craddock illegally possessed an unregistered destructive device (handgrenade).

Again, you are changing the subject; nothing in your reply contradicts the original quote.

Is this a straw-man shooting contest?