I’m not sure what else you can call it when a government can get someone convicted on false charges. Did the man have a jury trial?
docdave - 08:05pm on 05/08/2008
No we are not living in a police state. However, we are at the mercy of politically motivated heads of departments, like the ATF, who will do anything to get attention.
watashiwa - 08:05pm on 05/08/2008
I’m not too sure it was politically motivated but I would bet money it was ideologically motivated.
Two things I just can not understand the irrational hatred of Fox News or guns. No matter how many studies show Fox is the most balanced or that guns prevent crime there is a knee jerk reaction toward both. The best I can come up with is that both empower the individual and that is bad to the committed liberal.
DKK
LifeTrek - 12:05am on 05/09/2008
Ask Sean Bell.
Graeme - 03:05am on 05/09/2008
We would, if Sean Bell had not attempted to flee from the police in a high crime area.
These are certainly some busy little cossacks. Wonder why all this energy and effort are not being directed towards driving illegal aliens out of America?
2Hotel9 - 03:05am on 05/09/2008
I’ve been following this story for a while, there is a thread running on ar-15.com with all the details.
The two biggest problems here are:
1. The ATF took possession of his AR and would not give it back. They claim it has been modified in an illegal way but won’t let the defense have access to it to have an independent firearms expert verify their claims. The jury HAD to believe what the ATF said and there was no way to check if they were lying.
2. The ATF ended up charging him with “Illegal Transfer of a machine gun” but never charged him with actually converting it. They use fuzzy definitions of a machine gun, determined by them, to suit their particular agenda for a case. They argued that it was in fact a machine gun since several parts contained in the gun from the factory were also usable in an M-16. This is complete rubbish. Several months prior the ATF delisted a M16 from the registry because a part had worn down and it was no longer capable of fully automatic fire. This cost the owner about $20K. So which way is it ATF?
When you dig into this, their whole purpose for this case is clear. The guy was a gun enthusiast who got other people into guns. The thing the ATF didn’t like was that it was AR’s.
The problem with the damn gun laws is that you have to be big into guns to even get a grasph on them and how rediculous most are. In this case, the jury was cleaned by the prosecution of anyone who knew anything about guns so the verdict doesn’t surprise me.
ok.. end of rant
Nick Moszer - 06:05am on 05/09/2008
Watashiwa.
No we are not living in a police state. However, we are at the mercy of politically motivated heads of departments, like the ATF, who will do anything to get attention.
Yes. It would take 20-30 years of retirements before ATF and a few other government agencies could be fixed. There are people like these who went after a person in Waco for having a gun 1/2” too short. Killed innocent women and children. All they had to do was ask. That would have been too easy, janet.
This must stop. Electing conservatives is the only answer, but I am afraid that we are about to begin 400 years of oppression.
Chief RZ - 07:05am on 05/09/2008
That is the reason I give the NRA my 35.00 every year.
Wait see what happens if Clinton or Barry get elected.
goon - 07:05am on 05/09/2008
Nick’s got a great point; the ATF will prosecute you for owning a full auto weapon without a permit, but they don’t have an actual definition. By my logic, this invalidates the 1938 law against ownership of full auto weapons--it is unconstitutionally vague.
Moreover, his second point touches upon the right of the defendant to confront the evidence against him. Sorry, but if an independent expert can’t see the gun, ALL of the evidence regarding the weapon should be thrown out.
And the judge that allowed this? Well, de-bench and dis-bar. These are BASIC Constitutional realities that no 1st year law student, let alone a judge, ought to miss.
Bike Bubba - 08:05am on 05/09/2008
Sorry, but if an independent expert can’t see the gun, ALL of the evidence regarding the weapon should be thrown out.
I totally agree. Isn’t that grounds for appeal?
As Docdave said, did the man have a jury trial? I can’t imagine that it would have passed if he did.
I’m not sure what else you can call it when a government can get someone convicted on false charges. Did the man have a jury trial?
No we are not living in a police state. However, we are at the mercy of politically motivated heads of departments, like the ATF, who will do anything to get attention.
I’m not too sure it was politically motivated but I would bet money it was ideologically motivated.
Two things I just can not understand the irrational hatred of Fox News or guns. No matter how many studies show Fox is the most balanced or that guns prevent crime there is a knee jerk reaction toward both. The best I can come up with is that both empower the individual and that is bad to the committed liberal.
DKK
Ask Sean Bell.
We would, if Sean Bell had not attempted to flee from the police in a high crime area.
These are certainly some busy little cossacks. Wonder why all this energy and effort are not being directed towards driving illegal aliens out of America?
I’ve been following this story for a while, there is a thread running on ar-15.com with all the details.
The two biggest problems here are:
1. The ATF took possession of his AR and would not give it back. They claim it has been modified in an illegal way but won’t let the defense have access to it to have an independent firearms expert verify their claims. The jury HAD to believe what the ATF said and there was no way to check if they were lying.
2. The ATF ended up charging him with “Illegal Transfer of a machine gun” but never charged him with actually converting it. They use fuzzy definitions of a machine gun, determined by them, to suit their particular agenda for a case. They argued that it was in fact a machine gun since several parts contained in the gun from the factory were also usable in an M-16. This is complete rubbish. Several months prior the ATF delisted a M16 from the registry because a part had worn down and it was no longer capable of fully automatic fire. This cost the owner about $20K. So which way is it ATF?
When you dig into this, their whole purpose for this case is clear. The guy was a gun enthusiast who got other people into guns. The thing the ATF didn’t like was that it was AR’s.
The problem with the damn gun laws is that you have to be big into guns to even get a grasph on them and how rediculous most are. In this case, the jury was cleaned by the prosecution of anyone who knew anything about guns so the verdict doesn’t surprise me.
ok.. end of rant
Watashiwa.
Yes. It would take 20-30 years of retirements before ATF and a few other government agencies could be fixed. There are people like these who went after a person in Waco for having a gun 1/2” too short. Killed innocent women and children. All they had to do was ask. That would have been too easy, janet.
This must stop. Electing conservatives is the only answer, but I am afraid that we are about to begin 400 years of oppression.
That is the reason I give the NRA my 35.00 every year.
Wait see what happens if Clinton or Barry get elected.
Nick’s got a great point; the ATF will prosecute you for owning a full auto weapon without a permit, but they don’t have an actual definition. By my logic, this invalidates the 1938 law against ownership of full auto weapons--it is unconstitutionally vague.
Moreover, his second point touches upon the right of the defendant to confront the evidence against him. Sorry, but if an independent expert can’t see the gun, ALL of the evidence regarding the weapon should be thrown out.
And the judge that allowed this? Well, de-bench and dis-bar. These are BASIC Constitutional realities that no 1st year law student, let alone a judge, ought to miss.
I totally agree. Isn’t that grounds for appeal?
As Docdave said, did the man have a jury trial? I can’t imagine that it would have passed if he did.