User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/14/2017 7:27:00 PM EDT
[#1]
The Feds take their tax revenue seriously!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2017 7:47:19 PM EDT
[#2]
The IRONY is deep.
Gun-scared England sells suppressors cheap like we sell gas grills or doorknobs at a hardware store. We have to pay high prices, wade thru tons of bullshit regs, wait 9 months for the privilege Much irony in this situation.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2017 8:08:56 PM EDT
[#3]
Should have claimed they were 'marital aids'.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2017 9:05:30 PM EDT
[#4]
 to the jury. All gun laws are infringements. Not guilty.
And even if we overlook this, maybe if the ATF did something to speed things up people wouldn't resort to stuff like this. They have no business taking months to approve these. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2017 9:19:56 PM EDT
[#5]
Jury should have let the dude walk.
F the ATF. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 11:26:16 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The IRONY is deep. Gun-scared England sells suppressors cheap like we sell gas grills or doorknobs at a hardware store. We have to pay high prices, wade thru tons of bullshit regs, wait 9 months for the privilege Much irony in this situation.. Which part about the way they do it in Europe is your favorite? 1. The part where silencers are completely banned in some EU countries? 2. The part where it takes 10 weeks of waiting to buy both guns and silencers? 3. The part where the UK government gets to conduct unannounced warrantless home searches to see if your home is suitable? 4. The part where you must agree to give the government permission to freely talk to your doctor about your mental health and use this information to deny you firearms? 5. Maybe it is the part where you must provide "Good Reason’" to her majesty for each gun and silencer you want to own, and "any lawful purpose" doesn't cut the grey poupon. I wish silencer purchasing in the USA was simpler, but I damm sure don't want Europe's model. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 11:34:45 AM EDT
[#7]
He should have submitted a form 1 before heading back to the states, but I guess at some point he got caught with them.
Had he gotten them back without getting caught and since they didn't have serial numbers/manufacturer engraved on them, he could have engraved his own info on them and submitted a form 1 and I guess no one would have known. Maybe that was his plan. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 12:39:52 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Which part about the way they do it in Europe is your favorite? 1. The part where silencers are completely banned in some EU countries? 2. The part where it takes 10 weeks of waiting to buy both guns and silencers? 3. The part where the UK government gets to conduct unannounced warrantless home searches to see if your home is suitable? 4. The part where you must agree to give the government permission to freely talk to your doctor about your mental health and use this information to deny you firearms? 5. Maybe it is the part where you must provide "Good Reason’" to her majesty for each gun and silencer you want to own, and "any lawful purpose" doesn't cut the grey poupon. 1) Not in the UK or in MOST of the EU. Silencers are also completely banned in some US States and localities. 2) I waited ten MONTHS to buy my silencers and NFA firearms. 3) The US government has, on several occasions, conducted warrantless searches on my home. (ATF) 4) The state of North Carolina requires that I give blanket permission for the government to search my medical and mental health records prior to me getting a pistol purchase or carry permit. They can deny the permit for ANY reason, including the color of my skin (the original intent of the law). 5) In my state until recently, you had to provide good reason to the Sheriff's office to own an NFA firearm or silence. The Sheriff could then deny your suppressor for any reason such as, again, the color of your skin or your 'character'. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 2:01:37 PM EDT
[#9]
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Enjoy your 10 years, hope you didn't have a wife or job you liked.
It shouldn't be illegal, but I'll let him fight the Supreme Court. I'll enjoy my bed not being in a concrete room. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 2:42:10 PM EDT
[#10]
Guess he got caught with mailing them?
If customs had seen the ones in his baggage, they would have confiscated them, so that only leaves the mailed ones. So much stupid... |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 6:36:38 PM EDT
[#11]
of all the dumb things to smuggle in, meanwhile at my local gun shows, there are three separate tables selling oil filter adapters for cleaning purposes...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 7:02:10 PM EDT
[#12]
From the pics on the article...he smuggled a Silencerco Osprey...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 8:53:22 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Enjoy your 10 years, hope you didn't have a wife or job you liked. It shouldn't be illegal, but I'll let him fight the Supreme Court. I'll enjoy my bed not being in a concrete room. He hasn't received a sentence yet. https://www.atf.gov/news/pr/federal-jury-convicts-murfreesboro-man-smuggling-silencers-united-states |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 9:16:18 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He hasn't received a sentence yet. https://www.atf.gov/news/pr/federal-jury-convicts-murfreesboro-man-smuggling-silencers-united-states Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Enjoy your 10 years, hope you didn't have a wife or job you liked. It shouldn't be illegal, but I'll let him fight the Supreme Court. I'll enjoy my bed not being in a concrete room. He hasn't received a sentence yet. https://www.atf.gov/news/pr/federal-jury-convicts-murfreesboro-man-smuggling-silencers-united-states "Enjoy up to 10 years" doesn't have the same ring to it, but thank you very much. I'll sleep better tonight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 10:41:00 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"Enjoy up to 10 years" doesn't have the same ring to it, but thank you very much. I'll sleep better tonight. I'm sure you will. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 11:13:58 PM EDT
[#16]
Yet they won't enforce the federal laws against pot. Wonderful.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2017 11:39:18 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yet they won't enforce the federal laws against pot. Wonderful. You know, he evaded $1,200 in taxes not to mention tariffs. I don't defend this kind of activity, but then if nobody did this, there would be no Supreme Court cases. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 8:11:06 AM EDT
[#18]
What an idiot, he could have bought 6x tax stamps and all the materials he needed for less than a round trip ticket to England (or at least close too it)
Should suppressors be restricted by the NFA? No, but they are so you have to follow the darn law. There are a lot of laws I don't like but I and everyone else has to follow them, if we don't this country would crumble. Also, at those who say "F the ATF" the ATF didn't create the NFA or the Hughes Amendment, that was congress, The ATF just enforces the silly laws our elected representatives create. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 10:34:29 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yet they won't enforce the federal laws against pot. Wonderful. Customs certainly does. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 12:08:11 PM EDT
[#20]
Let em' go.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 12:37:16 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Also, at those who say "F the ATF" the ATF didn't create the NFA or the Hughes Amendment, that was congress, The ATF just enforces the silly laws our elected representatives create. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 1:40:03 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
3) The US government has, on several occasions, conducted warrantless searches on my home. (ATF) An ATF compliance inspection is not a "warrantless search" by any stretch of the imagination. 4) The state of North Carolina requires that I give blanket permission for the government to search my medical and mental health records prior to me getting a pistol purchase or carry permit. They can deny the permit for ANY reason, including the color of my skin (the original intent of the law). Uh, no. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. 5) In my state until recently, you had to provide good reason to the Sheriff's office to own an NFA firearm or silence. The Sheriff could then deny your suppressor for any reason such as, again, the color of your skin or your 'character'. Wrong |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 3:18:41 PM EDT
[#23]
oh boy- purse swinging
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 5:33:03 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
3) The US government has, on several occasions, conducted warrantless searches on my home. (ATF) An ATF compliance inspection is not a "warrantless search" by any stretch of the imagination. The ATF (and google) agree disagree. ://www.atf.gov/resource-center/docs/factsheet-ffl-complaincepdf-0/download]LINK 4) The state of North Carolina requires that I give blanket permission for the government to search my medical and mental health records prior to me getting a pistol purchase or carry permit. They can deny the permit for ANY reason, including the color of my skin (the original intent of the law). Uh, no. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. That is true, but the Pistol Permit system in North Carolina is a Jim Crow law that was designed to do exactly that and it's still on the books and enforced. Until recently, the Sheriff could deny a permit simply based on you not meeting his/her personal definition of "good moral character" or just the sheriff's gut feeling that you shouldn't have one. When they tried to remove the pistol permit, the NC Sheriff's association came out strongly against that, and won, sadly, because "the sheriffs should be able to deny people for their own reasons because they know their citizens." Until the laws were amended and the sheriffs were forced to be more uniform, some places required written character references before you could get a permit, some would deny you for things like having piercings and tats. Just because there's a law forbidding something doesn't mean that it's adhered to strictly. 5) In my state until recently, you had to provide good reason to the Sheriff's office to own an NFA firearm or silence. The Sheriff could then deny your suppressor for any reason such as, again, the color of your skin or your 'character'. Wrong Actually, no, that's correct. Until recently, unless you used a trust, the sheriff had no obligation at all to sign off on an NFA application. When the requirements were changed from CLEO signature to CLEO notification, that went away. But in NC, most people were forced to use trusts as an end run around the local Sheriff because many of them wouldn't sign off on NFA forms. In my own county, the excuse the sheriff used was that the AG told the Sheriff's Association that they could be legally responsible should anyone commit a crime using an NFA weapon they signed off on. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 5:48:36 PM EDT
[#25]
I'll stay out of the NC part.
Ol' boy in Knoxville should have FedExed the parts to his long lost cousin Juan Gonzales right across the line in Matamoras and put the return address as E.Holder c/o Fast and Furious. Feds would've never looked in that box. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 6:32:20 PM EDT
[#26]
3) The US government has, on several occasions, conducted warrantless searches on my home. (ATF)
An ATF compliance inspection is not a "warrantless search" by any stretch of the imagination. The ATF (and google) agree disagree. ://www.atf.gov/resource-center/docs/factsheet-ffl-complaincepdf-0/download]LINK If you take the time to actually read that document you'll note that it's NOT a search, but a compliance inspection. Compliance inspections are strictly limited in what ATF can review: the licensees business inventory, his bound book, 4473's and multiple sale forms.......and that's it. He can't go through your sock drawer without a search warrant signed by a judge and based on probable cause. If ATF believes a licensee has committed a crime they would be required to have a valid search warrant before they conduct such a search. The US Constitution requires it. 4) The state of North Carolina requires that I give blanket permission for the government to search my medical and mental health records prior to me getting a pistol purchase or carry permit. They can deny the permit for ANY reason, including the color of my skin (the original intent of the law).
Uh, no. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. That is true, but the Pistol Permit system in North Carolina is a Jim Crow law that was designed to do exactly that and it's still on the books and enforced. Until recently, the Sheriff could deny a permit simply based on you not meeting his/her personal definition of "good moral character" or just the sheriff's gut feeling that you shouldn't have one. When they tried to remove the pistol permit, the NC Sheriff's association came out strongly against that, and won, sadly, because "the sheriffs should be able to deny people for their own reasons because they know their citizens." Until the laws were amended and the sheriffs were forced to be more uniform, some places required written character references before you could get a permit, some would deny you for things like having piercings and tats. Just because there's a law forbidding something doesn't mean that it's adhered to strictly. If an applicant believes he is being denied due to his "skin color" he will have a financial windfall if it can be shown that the North Carolina law is applied differently to person of color. If a sheriff in North Carolina wants to deny a person a pistol permit he damn well better have more reasons than "wrong skin color". 5) In my state until recently, you had to provide good reason to the Sheriff's office to own an NFA firearm or silence. The Sheriff could then deny your suppressor for any reason such as, again, the color of your skin or your 'character'.
Wrong Actually, no, that's correct. Until recently, unless you used a trust, the sheriff had no obligation at all to sign off on an NFA application. When the requirements were changed from CLEO signature to CLEO notification, that went away. But in NC, most people were forced to use trusts as an end run around the local Sheriff because many of them wouldn't sign off on NFA forms. In my own county, the excuse the sheriff used was that the AG told the Sheriff's Association that they could be legally responsible should anyone commit a crime using an NFA weapon they signed off on. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 6:58:14 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What an idiot, he could have bought 6x tax stamps and all the materials he needed for less than a round trip ticket to England (or at least close too it) Should suppressors be restricted by the NFA? No, but they are so you have to follow the darn law. There are a lot of laws I don't like but I and everyone else has to follow them, if we don't this country would crumble. Also, at those who say "F the ATF" the ATF didn't create the NFA or the Hughes Amendment, that was congress, The ATF just enforces the silly laws our elected representatives create. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 7:02:27 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Again, denying a right based solely on skin color (or race, religion, sex, or national origin) is a violation of the Civil Rights Act. If the Sheriff denies a person simply because they are the wrong skin color the USDOJ will be up his ass within a week not to mention the civil liabilities he will bring to his county. In fact, Blacks, Hispanics and persons of Asian descent throughout this country are disproportionately denied their right to keep and bear arms compared to Whites on the pure basis of where they live. This does not just apply to Black people in NC, this applies to Hispanics in LA, Asians in San Francisco, Puerto Ricans in New Jersey, etc. Gun Control is racist. Denying that does not make it untrue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 8:02:09 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Apparently, you ain't from around here. You do understand that North Carolina is part of the South, right? I understand that Yankee lawyers like to sit around sipping tea and pontificate on what is right and wrong for Southerners to do. They do the same thing with Texans. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Again, denying a right based solely on skin color (or race, religion, sex, or national origin) is a violation of the Civil Rights Act. If the Sheriff denies a person simply because they are the wrong skin color the USDOJ will be up his ass within a week not to mention the civil liabilities he will bring to his county. It doesn't take a Yankee lawyer to understand the Constitution. The problem is, it's okay to take away a black person's constitutional rights so long as they are the rights to gun ownership. Statistics show drastic differences in permit denials based on counties in North Carolina. It may come as no surprise that the counties with the highest denial rates and the most difficult policies also have the highest rates of black people.
In fact, Blacks, Hispanics and persons of Asian descent throughout this country are disproportionately denied their right to keep and bear arms compared to Whites on the pure basis of where they live. This does not just apply to Black people in NC, this applies to Hispanics in LA, Asians in San Francisco, Puerto Ricans in New Jersey, etc. Gun Control is racist. Denying that does not make it untrue. Well no shit Sherlock. That still doesn't make denial of a NC Pistol Permit for "wrong skin color" constitutional. It wouldn't take more than a phone call to the closest USAO to set the sheriff straight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 8:23:32 PM EDT
[#30]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2017 9:31:16 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
<----grew up in Arkansas, lived in Texas for 28 years. I know full well what Jim Crow laws are. It doesn't take a Yankee lawyer to understand the Constitution. Well no shit Sherlock. That still doesn't make denial of a NC Pistol Permit for "wrong skin color" constitutional. It wouldn't take more than a phone call to the closest USAO to set the sheriff straight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/18/2017 3:44:18 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're only partially right. That was spineless Republicans in Congress and the NRA not lobbying them for its removal or challenge. The Hughes Amendment passed on a contested voice vote. Charles Rangel (yeah, that fucktard) declared it passed and refused a recorded vote. EVERY REPUBLICAN who voted for the act in the end, Ronald Reagan who signed it, the ENTIRE NRA leadership who refused to challenge it, and the SUPREME COURT who refuse to take cases that challenge it is culpable. The 10th district court has invalidated the Hughes Amendment since the only reason the Federal Government can ban machineguns is because it can refuse to approve tax stamps for them. If it refuses to approve all tax stamps, then it is no longer a tax-gathering enterprise and therefore the Feds have no power. Seriously, here it is.. If you live in Utah, Kansas, Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico, or parts of Oklahoma, try sending in your Form 1 to convert an AR-15 into a machinegun. When it gets rejected, appeal using the Rock Island precedent. All we need is a few dozen people to do this. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/18/2017 5:21:22 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Interesting idea but I tend not to like to be a Guinea pig when it comes to challenging laws that have punishments of hundreds of thousands of dollars and many years in prison. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/18/2017 5:47:51 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
to the jury. All gun laws are infringements. Not guilty.
And even if we overlook this, maybe if the ATF did something to speed things up people wouldn't resort to stuff like this. They have no business taking months to approve these. The guy knew what the law is and still he "intentionally" violated the law. I've purchased several title II items and have submitted the proper paperwork, paid the outrageous fees, groveled to get the (at that time) required signatures from police chief and one from a State District Judge, and then patiently waited for 7-8 months to get my items. This jerk decided to violate the law. He's like the icehole that "cuts" in line, deserving of an ass whipping.  Well, he got it from the federal jury or federal judge if jury was waived (by him). Quit making excuses for criminal behavior. No sympathy for this icehole. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/18/2017 6:13:28 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
<----grew up in Arkansas, lived in Texas for 28 years. I know full well what Jim Crow laws are. It doesn't take a Yankee lawyer to understand the Constitution. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Again, denying a right based solely on skin color (or race, religion, sex, or national origin) is a violation of the Civil Rights Act. If the Sheriff denies a person simply because they are the wrong skin color the USDOJ will be up his ass within a week not to mention the civil liabilities he will bring to his county. It doesn't take a Yankee lawyer to understand the Constitution. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/18/2017 7:14:32 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"The jury convicted Gratton on charges including unlawful possession of unregistered silencers and illegal shipment of a firearm with intent to commit a felony." The guy knew what the law is and still he "intentionally" violated the law. I've purchased several title II items and have submitted the proper paperwork, paid the outrageous fees, groveled to get the (at that time) required signatures from police chief and one from a State District Judge, and then patiently waited for 7-8 months to get my items. This jerk decided to violate the law. He's like the icehole that "cuts" in line, deserving of an ass whipping. Well, he got it from the federal jury or federal judge if jury was waived (by him). Quit making excuses for criminal behavior. No sympathy for this icehole. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
to the jury. All gun laws are infringements. Not guilty.
And even if we overlook this, maybe if the ATF did something to speed things up people wouldn't resort to stuff like this. They have no business taking months to approve these. The guy knew what the law is and still he "intentionally" violated the law. I've purchased several title II items and have submitted the proper paperwork, paid the outrageous fees, groveled to get the (at that time) required signatures from police chief and one from a State District Judge, and then patiently waited for 7-8 months to get my items. This jerk decided to violate the law. He's like the icehole that "cuts" in line, deserving of an ass whipping. Well, he got it from the federal jury or federal judge if jury was waived (by him). Quit making excuses for criminal behavior. No sympathy for this icehole. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/18/2017 11:11:10 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
While I don't have sympathy for him because he's an absolute fucking moron, if I was on that jury he would walk. The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America is law, and as a juror I would uphold that law. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2017 1:47:15 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It will be interesting to see if his lawyer uses that defense. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/24/2017 12:07:24 AM EDT
[#39]
I bought my first suppressor face to face in Finland, no papers required, nothing special about owning one then.
I've literally seen .22 LR and center fire rifle cans on the shelves at sporting goods stores next to the bait and tackle and boat anchors, not in a case. They have since changed the law to where they can only be sold to people with a firearms license. Not once did I even entertain the idea of bringing it back, but this is still BS. Think about it. Sending someone to Federal prison for 10 years for a muffler. The only victim is the accused. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
