How many Federal laws were broken?
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Do we count NFA violations that occur because of NFA violations?
Just off the top of my head:
1. "Once a rifle, always a rifle." ~ So manufacturing an SBR w/o a tax stamp.
2. Since the SBR is illegal and/or suddenly a pistol, the forward grip would/might make this an AOW manufactured w/o stamp.
3. Pretty sure there is a Federal charge for the illegal NFA weapon in connection with narcotics trafficking
Those are the three off the top of my head.
On #1-#2: "In addition, unless registered to the possessor in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record, it is generally unlawful to possess short-barreled shotguns (defined as one with a barrel length of less than 18" or overall length less than 26"), short-barreled rifles (defined as one with a barrel length of less than 16" or overall length less than 26"), machine guns, silencers, and destructive devices. See 26 U.S.C. §§ 5845, 5861" ~ Justice.gov
On #3: "A person who "uses or carries" a firearm during or in relation to, or possesses a firearm "in furtherance of," drug trafficking or a crime of violence that can be prosecuted in federal court may receive enhanced penalties under 18 U.S.C. § 924 (c). Most of the cases arising out of this statute have centered on the definitions of "use," carry," and "in furtherance of." In a recent, unpublished First Circuit opinion (United States v. Dolliver, July 2007), the Court found that bartering drugs for firearms was sufficient to prove a violation of §924(c)(1)(A)(i). " ~ Justice.gov
Applying the Interstate Commerce Clause to make these stick: "In order to establish federal jurisdiction in § 922 cases, the gun involved must have traveled in interstate or foreign commerce. For firearms cases the prosecutor needs to show only that the firearm or ammunition crossed a state line at some point in its history. For example, if the firearm was manufactured in Michigan and is recovered in Maine, the interstate nexus requirement has been satisfied. If the firearm was made in Maine and recovered in Maine, but the prosecutor can demonstrate that it was used to commit a crime in Maryland 10 years ago, this too will suffice. " ~ Justice.gov
Although I would argue that ALL gun control is un-Constitutional, the question was "How many Federal laws were broken here? " not whether those laws should exist.
1. "Once a rifle, always a rifle." ~ So manufacturing an SBR w/o a tax stamp.
2. Since the SBR is illegal and/or suddenly a pistol, the forward grip would/might make this an AOW manufactured w/o stamp.
3. Pretty sure there is a Federal charge for the illegal NFA weapon in connection with narcotics trafficking
Those are the three off the top of my head.
On #1-#2: "In addition, unless registered to the possessor in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record, it is generally unlawful to possess short-barreled shotguns (defined as one with a barrel length of less than 18" or overall length less than 26"), short-barreled rifles (defined as one with a barrel length of less than 16" or overall length less than 26"), machine guns, silencers, and destructive devices. See 26 U.S.C. §§ 5845, 5861" ~ Justice.gov
On #3: "A person who "uses or carries" a firearm during or in relation to, or possesses a firearm "in furtherance of," drug trafficking or a crime of violence that can be prosecuted in federal court may receive enhanced penalties under 18 U.S.C. § 924 (c). Most of the cases arising out of this statute have centered on the definitions of "use," carry," and "in furtherance of." In a recent, unpublished First Circuit opinion (United States v. Dolliver, July 2007), the Court found that bartering drugs for firearms was sufficient to prove a violation of §924(c)(1)(A)(i). " ~ Justice.gov
Applying the Interstate Commerce Clause to make these stick: "In order to establish federal jurisdiction in § 922 cases, the gun involved must have traveled in interstate or foreign commerce. For firearms cases the prosecutor needs to show only that the firearm or ammunition crossed a state line at some point in its history. For example, if the firearm was manufactured in Michigan and is recovered in Maine, the interstate nexus requirement has been satisfied. If the firearm was made in Maine and recovered in Maine, but the prosecutor can demonstrate that it was used to commit a crime in Maryland 10 years ago, this too will suffice. " ~ Justice.gov
Although I would argue that ALL gun control is un-Constitutional, the question was "How many Federal laws were broken here? " not whether those laws should exist.
Joined
·
3,783 Posts
I used to believe in the Rule of Law and a Justice system as well. Now I'm down to Shall Not Be Infringed. 😐
Joined
·
9,822 Posts
I was thinking 1 & 2.
Therein lies the problem placed before the current SCOTUS...Just off the top of my head:
1. "Once a rifle, always a rifle." ~ So manufacturing an SBR w/o a tax stamp.
2. Since the SBR is illegal and/or suddenly a pistol, the forward grip would/might make this an AOW manufactured w/o stamp.
3. Pretty sure there is a Federal charge for the illegal NFA weapon in connection with narcotics trafficking
Those are the three off the top of my head.
On #1-#2: "In addition, unless registered to the possessor in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record, it is generally unlawful to possess short-barreled shotguns (defined as one with a barrel length of less than 18" or overall length less than 26"), short-barreled rifles (defined as one with a barrel length of less than 16" or overall length less than 26"), machine guns, silencers, and destructive devices. See 26 U.S.C. §§ 5845, 5861" ~ Justice.gov
On #3: "A person who "uses or carries" a firearm during or in relation to, or possesses a firearm "in furtherance of," drug trafficking or a crime of violence that can be prosecuted in federal court may receive enhanced penalties under 18 U.S.C. § 924 (c). Most of the cases arising out of this statute have centered on the definitions of "use," carry," and "in furtherance of." In a recent, unpublished First Circuit opinion (United States v. Dolliver, July 2007), the Court found that bartering drugs for firearms was sufficient to prove a violation of §924(c)(1)(A)(i). " ~ Justice.gov
Applying the Interstate Commerce Clause to make these stick: "In order to establish federal jurisdiction in § 922 cases, the gun involved must have traveled in interstate or foreign commerce. For firearms cases the prosecutor needs to show only that the firearm or ammunition crossed a state line at some point in its history. For example, if the firearm was manufactured in Michigan and is recovered in Maine, the interstate nexus requirement has been satisfied. If the firearm was made in Maine and recovered in Maine, but the prosecutor can demonstrate that it was used to commit a crime in Maryland 10 years ago, this too will suffice. " ~ Justice.gov
Although I would argue that ALL gun control is un-Constitutional, the question was "How many Federal laws were broken here? " not whether those laws should exist.
All the laws being presented before the Court are piecemeal.
A single court case should be presented representing that All restrictions on Firearms Rights are uncostitutional!
Thus enforcing 'shall not be infringed'!
Rerun
There's enough illegal gun laws to put the user into Fed prison for a few years, but then I come to the conclusion that gun laws are an infringement on our gun rights.
With all the gun laws on the books now and what's happening with what criminals already having committed heinous crimes and being immediately released without bail or jail time just to commit another crime that's worse than before, that if I was on that jury (if it came to one), I'd say NOT GUILTY just to stick it to "the government man" and his stupidity.
With all the gun laws on the books now and what's happening with what criminals already having committed heinous crimes and being immediately released without bail or jail time just to commit another crime that's worse than before, that if I was on that jury (if it came to one), I'd say NOT GUILTY just to stick it to "the government man" and his stupidity.
My guess would be creating an AOW without filing a Form 1 would be the only charge when it comes down to the modifications made.
Now if he took the vertical grip off the charge would be for converting a rifle into a pistol without a Form 1, and if the fore grip was removed and the stock not cut, creating an SBR without the same paperwork.
In the end, the lawyers will have to decided what it is at the time it was found, although I'm sure one of them will get the bright idea to try to stack charges, arguing that there was a path taken to get the thing to where it is so they have more to work with in the plea bargaining process.
Interesting thing about this, most people could legally create one of these things with the proper paperwork, and since it would be an AOW and not an SBR, would actually be legal in some states like IL where SBR's are not allowed but AOW's are (although IL does have a strange loophole for SBR's.)
Now if he took the vertical grip off the charge would be for converting a rifle into a pistol without a Form 1, and if the fore grip was removed and the stock not cut, creating an SBR without the same paperwork.
In the end, the lawyers will have to decided what it is at the time it was found, although I'm sure one of them will get the bright idea to try to stack charges, arguing that there was a path taken to get the thing to where it is so they have more to work with in the plea bargaining process.
Interesting thing about this, most people could legally create one of these things with the proper paperwork, and since it would be an AOW and not an SBR, would actually be legal in some states like IL where SBR's are not allowed but AOW's are (although IL does have a strange loophole for SBR's.)
This does bring up an interesting possibility for Hi-Point if H.R.1808 goes through.
Joined
·
3,783 Posts
Obama's signature "gun control" achievement was legalizing SBRs & SBSs in his home state.
Joined
·
16,252 Posts
2 real ones, 5 or 6 made up during interrogation, all dropped when he rats and takes the plea.
Joined
·
3,499 Posts
I believe we have a legal system. It is beyond calling it a justice system in my opinion.
Joined
·
3,783 Posts
At this point, I'm not sure we entirely have that.
Joined
·
877 Posts
Well, it IS California. It’ll probably get plea bargained down to jaywalking, at least the perp will get his drugs back…..
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
