Stag Arms Pleads Guilty To Violating Federal Firearms Laws; Owner Will Sell Company

Discussion in 'Lounge' started by Rachgier, Dec 22, 2015.

  1. Rachgier

    Rachgier Administrator Staff Member

    Stag Arms Pleads Guilty To Violating Federal Firearms Laws; Owner Will Sell Company

    HARTFORD — New Britain-based Stag Arms LLC pleaded guilty Tuesday to violating federal firearms laws and as part of a plea agreement president and owner Mark Malkowski agreed to sell the company and have no further ownership or management role in a gun manufacturer.

    Malkowski pleaded guilty on behalf of the company in federal court in Hartford to a felony count of possession of machine guns not registered to the company.

    The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is also revoking Stag's federal license to manufacture firearms. A new owner could regain a license.

    Malkowski is scheduled to plead guilty Wednesday in federal court in New Haven to a misdemeanor charge of failure to maintain firearms records. For his guilty plea, Malkowski, 37, will pay a $100,000 fine and will not be permitted to own, operate or manage a firearms company.

    The federal government began its investigation of Stag in July 2014, after a routine ATF compliance inspection turned up a variety of record- keeping violations, missing firearms and unregistered machine guns, the government said.

    New Britain Gun Maker Stag Arms Under Investigation By ATF
    New Britain Gun Maker Stag Arms Under Investigation By ATF
    The guilty plea, Stag said in a prepared statement, was in the best interest of the company and its approximately 100 employees. Malkowski is in advanced talks with a New York private equity firm to sell the company, Stag and the government said.

    "For the first time in Connecticut, and there have only been a few of these prosecutions throughout the nation, a large manufacturer is pleading guilty to a felony charge relating to record-keeping violations," Connecticut U.S. Attorney Deirdre M. Daly said Tuesday.

    The company will pay a fine of $500,000 as part of its plea agreement. Sentencing is scheduled for March 15.

    "This company did not just manufacture small firearms. They manufactured semi-automatic weapons, machine guns, assault weapons," Daly said. "This is not an industry where sloppiness will be tolerated."

    The government said about 200 firearms could not be accounted for at Stag's John Downey Drive facilities. "We don't know where they are, whether they were stolen, whether they're on the streets, or whether they're just in the wrong hands," Daly said.

    The company pleaded guilty to possession of 62 machine guns and machine gun receivers that were registered to another entity or not registered at all. ATF agents found the automatic rifles and receivers at the New Britain factory during an inspection July 15, 2014.

    Eleven machine guns were registered to an entity in the Philippines, one to a police department and 25 to another manufacturer. The remaining 25 machine gun receivers — the portion of the firearm that houses the operating parts and on which the serial number is engraved — did not have serial numbers, the government said.

    Malkowski told U.S. Magistrate Judge Donna F. Martinez during the company's plea hearing that the machine guns in question were to be sold, but the sales agreement fell through. Stag Arms kept the weapons and failed to update records, he told the judge.

    In 2007, ATF inspectors found instances of poor record-keeping, administrative violations and regulatory violations, but worked with Stag to bring it into compliance, said Nealy Earl, area head of industry operations for ATF.

    The problems found during the 2014 compliance review at Stag Arms were similar or worse than those found in 2007, prompting the recommendation for criminal action, Earl said. Assistant U.S. Attorney S. Dave Vatti described the new violations as "egregious and systemic."

    Some of the firearms found at Stag also had obliterated serial numbers, a serious violation of the law, Vatti said. The government has not determined why the serial numbers were scratched out.

    Stag, in a statement, said the company "takes its obligations to comply with all laws and regulations very seriously and has made comprehensive changes to ensure that similar problems cannot happen again and that best compliance practices are maintained in all of its operations." The company also said it does not believe public safety was ever compromised.

    Malkowski founded Stag in 2003 and the soon company pioneered manufacturing AR-15 rifles for left-handed people and those who use their left eye to aim. The left-handed weapons remain an important product for the company. Stag Arms has sold its rifles to police agencies and militaries around the world, and to law enforcement agencies in the U.S. It also serves the civilian firearms market.
  2. undeRGRound

    undeRGRound ROLL wif Da MOLE! Supporting Member


  3. moona11

    moona11 King of you Monkeys Lifetime Supporter

    They were one of the sponsors of my M16/M4 school with RR.
  4. Rachgier

    Rachgier Administrator Staff Member

    Looks like STAG AR's are about to get expensive as hell until they find a new owner and a new license.
  5. undeRGRound

    undeRGRound ROLL wif Da MOLE! Supporting Member

    So What's the big diff?

    Sonny Boy's first AR was an $1,100 Stag, it was trash compared to
    my first AR, custom built by a Army Ranger, $700 :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
  6. Rachgier

    Rachgier Administrator Staff Member

    I don't know, never owned or fire one. As a matter of fact, I have yet to handle one either.

    In my experience, it's the smaller manufacturers who produce the higher quality and more reliable parts.
  7. MaryB

    MaryB Supporting Member

    Another Red Jacket Firearms type idiot! Wonder what other dirt the left will dig up on him?
  8. MachoMelvin

    MachoMelvin Well-Known Member

    I have owned 2 Stags, but have never owned another brand. The reason I picked the Stag over all the others was the Lifetime Transferrable NO questions asked warranty. Sound familiar?

    Attached Files:

  9. ajole

    ajole Supporting Member

    NE Utah
    Wonder if they meant lifetime of the company, or if it will transfer with the new owners...:confused:

    Be prepared for bad news.

    Wonder who's job it was to log things? I mean, sure, the owner is responsible...but was he the one that failed to do it, or did he think someone was doing that part of things, and just failed to check on them?

    Either way, he's guilty, I just wonder if he's an idiot, or a fool.:rolleyes:
  10. Likely just real busy.
  11. They didn't even ask if it was fully automatic :)
  12. MachoMelvin

    MachoMelvin Well-Known Member

    As was the case when Beemiller became Strassell Mfg. New owners can change anything. Most likely they will keep the warranty, it is what made them the stand out company there are?
  13. the gov't is and will do anything they can to get their anti-gun policies through...
  14. Back2School

    Back2School Member

    To bad we cant force the federal bureaus that fail to properly account for their firearms out of business. We could shut down most of the government, especially the DoJ and this administration.

    Must be nice to be above the laws you enforce.
  15. shubbell

    shubbell Member

    If it were an abortion factory....
  16. Bull

    Bull Just a Man Supporting Member

    But amazingly enough, the perpetrators of the failed "fast and furious" have faced zero arrests or repercussions.... Go figure...
  17. Liberty

    Liberty Shhh! Lifetime Supporter

    Nah, when the perpetrators are ordering the DOJ what to do, it's not surprising Obama didn't prosecute Holder and company.
  18. cicpup

    cicpup Resident PITA Supporting Member

    Good luck with that.

    Purchaser or Company, whichever comes first.

    I would think that is totally up to the new owners.
  19. MaryB

    MaryB Supporting Member

    Most companies will keep in place the policies that made them popular when they are bought out. Unless all they want are the assets in that case the company ceases to be.