U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Hobbies and Recreation > Guns and Hunting
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-19-2018, 10:08 AM
 
9,345 posts, read 15,780,146 times
Reputation: 17142

Advertisements

The guy is wrong and he knew it, but it makes you wonder of there is a back story.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-19-2018, 11:28 AM
 
4,755 posts, read 8,380,470 times
Reputation: 3414
Yeah technically he’s wrong for possessing the firearm but the punishment is unusually harsh. If it proves he was not involved in the commission of crime with said firearm then the punishment should be no more severe than a fine and a probation period.

This example just going to encourage others who own “illegal firearms” to keep their mouth shut. Just like when the assault weapons ban days, how many owners of AK/ AR refused to surrender? The NRA should jump in and help to negotiate a less severe punishment for this guy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-19-2018, 11:53 AM
 
Location: Cape Cod
9,774 posts, read 7,102,126 times
Reputation: 17875
There has to be more to the story and I hope there is because it seems to be pretty routine in my state of MA. where a drug dealer or illegal alien is caught with an unlicensed handgun and the weapon charge gets dismissed by some liberal judge despite the law that is on the books where it is a mandatory one year in jail for possessing an unlicensed gun.





Of course having an automatic "assault weapon" is a bit different than being caught with a stolen .38 but still ??



I think the court was making an example of this guy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-19-2018, 12:25 PM
 
Location: Texas
1,107 posts, read 857,097 times
Reputation: 1130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cape Cod Todd View Post
I think the court was making an example of this guy.
Either that or he got the wrong judge.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-19-2018, 11:23 PM
 
5,220 posts, read 2,375,434 times
Reputation: 5111
Quote:
Originally Posted by iknowftbll View Post
Thoughts on this?


Those of us who are gun enthusiasts have a healthy respect for gun laws. I seriously question what problem the ATF solved with this one though. The guy purchased the weapon in the early 1980s, and apparently the serial number was scratched off. That's illegal (and I assume it was back in the early 1980s). Owning a fully automatic is only illegal if done without the appropriate license (a detail the linked story fails to acknowledge, nor does it address if this veteran, described as a "collector" has said license).


I am also a little disturbed at the timing of the raid and the probable cause for said raid. The timing is purely emotional. Two weeks after the man's wife passed away is certainly not law enforcement's problem but that should have definitely been considered at sentencing and it does not appear to have been. But the bigger issue to me is what prompted the raid to begin with? Did someone share with authorities that this individual was in possession of a weapon that had been rendered illegal? And if that's the case was that all it took to convince a federal judge there was probable cause enough to authorize the raid? Seems like a pretty low threshold (read: "nonexistent threshold") for probable cause. Again, I have to wonder what problem the ATF solved here.


Sure, the weapon is illegal. It's a safe guess the guy knew this and took a risk he shouldn't have taken. But collectors keeping a weapon like this in a case for sentimental reasons are not the threat that justify the laws on the books. From what I've been able to discern this guy was a solid citizen outside of this gun purchase.


If the ATF had been trying to locate this weapon and somehow traced it to him, that's great. But a 7 year sentence seems absurd. Owning a weapon that has the serial number scratched off is against the law so I can definitely understand seizure of the property, and perhaps a fine and/or probation. But a 70 year old who is a decorated veteran and from the sound of it kept the weapon in a display case...a 7 year sentence makes me question the sentencing judge's discernment. Again I ask, what problem did this federal judge solve with her ruling?


I think the lesson to be had here is even in an era where jurisdictions at all levels selectively enforce their own laws, violations of gun laws are going to be crushed. Legal gun owners have zero margin for error, and no matter how clean your nose may be, if you make the slightest mistake you will be shown no mercy in the courts.


Be smart, everyone. And please, if I'm missing something about this guy I'd love to know more. I've searched a few different articles now for any hint that maybe he isn't the upstanding citizen he appears to be but haven't found anything to indicate as much.


The story:


https://www.foxnews.com/us/vietnam-w...urchase-report
There is no license required to own a fully automatic weapon. This is a common misconception.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-19-2018, 11:25 PM
 
5,220 posts, read 2,375,434 times
Reputation: 5111
Quote:
Originally Posted by HB2HSV View Post
Yeah technically he’s wrong for possessing the firearm but the punishment is unusually harsh. If it proves he was not involved in the commission of crime with said firearm then the punishment should be no more severe than a fine and a probation period.

This example just going to encourage others who own “illegal firearms” to keep their mouth shut. Just like when the assault weapons ban days, how many owners of AK/ AR refused to surrender? The NRA should jump in and help to negotiate a less severe punishment for this guy.
The Federal assault weapons ban grandfathered existing weapons. There was no requirement to surrender.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2018, 07:33 AM
Status: "Rocktober...well that was fast. :-(" (set 18 days ago)
 
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
10,285 posts, read 10,442,913 times
Reputation: 13239
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaxPhd View Post
There is no license required to own a fully automatic weapon. This is a common misconception.
Then please correct me. If the required weapon was not illegal outside a Class III under the NFA OF 1934, help me understand what I’m missing. It’s great to point out that someone is wrong, but it’s actually a worthwhile conversation when you offer the right information.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2018, 07:39 AM
 
Location: USA
13,228 posts, read 7,277,975 times
Reputation: 9572
Quote:
Originally Posted by VeeGer View Post
This is where we get rid of these judges.
That is often VERY difficult to do. Judges are largely not held accountable, nor are District Attorneys that just want conviction stats even though the violent criminal gets little or no jail time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2018, 11:23 AM
 
5,220 posts, read 2,375,434 times
Reputation: 5111
Quote:
Originally Posted by iknowftbll View Post
Then please correct me. If the required weapon was not illegal outside a Class III under the NFA OF 1934, help me understand what I’m missing. It’s great to point out that someone is wrong, but it’s actually a worthwhile conversation when you offer the right information.
What is commonly called a “class 3 license” is actually a type 3 SOT which is an add on to a class 1 dealers license. The type 3 SOT allows a dealer in firearms to deal in NFA items. It is a requirement for a dealer, but not for a non-dealer that wants to own an NFA item. A non-dealer has some minor hoops to jump through to buy an NFA item, but no special license is required.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-20-2018, 12:00 PM
Status: "Rocktober...well that was fast. :-(" (set 18 days ago)
 
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
10,285 posts, read 10,442,913 times
Reputation: 13239
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaxPhd View Post
What is commonly called a “class 3 license” is actually a type 3 SOT which is an add on to a class 1 dealers license. The type 3 SOT allows a dealer in firearms to deal in NFA items. It is a requirement for a dealer, but not for a non-dealer that wants to own an NFA item. A non-dealer has some minor hoops to jump through to buy an NFA item, but no special license is required.
Thank you for the clarification. The distinction goes back to my earlier point that the scratches of serial is a more serious infraction than just owning the fully auto since there is a mechanism for doing that legally. That was my point: that it is not illegal to own a fully automatic weapon as indicated in the story. Owning a weapon whose serial has been removed or altered is always illegal. No mechanism for lawfully owning that kind of weapon, be it a fully auto, semi, or a revolver.

So then we go to why those are illegal to begin with: they are rendered untraceable and associated with criminal activity. Was that the case with this weapon? No. And I believe that should have been considered during sentencing.

Again: gun owners have to be smart. I don’t think any legal gun owner who makes a mistake is going to get the benefit of the doubt in these hyper politicized times.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Hobbies and Recreation > Guns and Hunting
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top