BATFE did commit perjury and here is where:

BATFE claimed that the information requested by defense was covered under "tax" shielding.  BATFE legal internally published a document detailing what must be turned over during FOIA and legal discovery.  The documents Mr. Olofson's attorneys requested not shielded according to the document that BATFE's own legal department issued.

On another note, BATFE withheld evidence that shows Mr. Olofson's innocence.  Can we say NIFONG?  Mr. Nifong can tell the BATFE how painful such an act can be.  BATFE will face criminal prosecution for this.

To 918v... The BATFE are out of control and operate outside the law.  They have the opinion that the laws do not apply to them, they are sadly mistaken and will be shown that the law DOES apply to them and it will do so in the harshest manner possible.  Unless you are BATFE, I would really think about defending these NAZI's.  It makes your credibility very quesitonable.

I've been keeping a VERY close eye on the Olofson case among others and the BATFE is WAY out of line here.  But, what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Cases like Olofson, Kwan, Miller, Glover, Wrenn, and others show a desperate need to be rid of laws that put citizens who have no criminal intent in dire jeopardy.  The 1934 NFA, 1968 GCA, Hughes Amendment, and ALL prohibitive bans on classes of firearms need to be eliminated.  BATFE is on a draconian witch hunt so they can dip their greasy little hands a little deeper into the public coffers.  

Everyone should contact their elected officials by mail, not email, send letters by certified mail demanding answers about this case and the actions of the BATFE.  Refer your Congressmen and Senators to this thread and demand an explanation WHY a rogue agency is operating outside the law with NO legally or scientifically accepted standards of testing or conduct.  

BATFE has pulled the wool over the eyes of prosecutors, judges and other law enforcement agencies but that won't float anymore.  As I understand it, courts, law enforcement and Congress may start receiving packets on the actions of the BATFE and how to spot questionable and malicious prosecution before more people get fooled into risking their very careers for the advancement of the BATFE and their illegal actions.  

Another point to think about, since BATFE is most likely reading this.  Be assured that SCOTUS knows what is going on with Kwan, Olofson and KT Ordinance.  Care to place a bet on the Court taking BATFE actions into account when they make their decision on Heller?  

Mike

Originally Posted By Hard Rock: BATFE claimed that the information requested by defense was covered under "tax" shielding.  BATFE legal internally published a document detailing what must be turned over during FOIA and legal discovery.  The documents Mr. Olofson's attorneys requested not shielded according to the document that BATFE's own legal department issued.

I'm sorry but the BATFE's failure/refusal to follow an internally published document isn't perjury.  Now if they had a BATFE employee on the witness stand and someone asked him/her whether certain documents were not turned over contrary to an internally published document and that person said no, that would be perjury.

Quoted: Quoted: FMD, I appreciate your restraint in your latest response. No, I'm not saddened that Bladerunner remains free, I'm sad that Balderunner is in this predicament. Second, perjury requires a lie about a MATERIAL fact. The ATF did not perjure themselves in this case. Sure as shit did. TITLE 26 > Subtitle F > CHAPTER 61 > Subchapter B > § 6103 Confidentiality and disclosure of returns and return information <snip> (o) Disclosure of returns and return information with respect to certain taxes (1) Taxes imposed by subtitle E Returns and return information with respect to taxes imposed by subtitle E (relating to taxes on alcohol, tobacco, and firearms) shall be open to inspection by or disclosure to officers and employees of a Federal agency whose official duties require such inspection or disclosure. Link to long ass tax code where you can see and verify the above. For the BATFE to say they couldn't show the info to the court is BS and a flat out lie.

But it is not PERJURY.

A lie offered in court isn't always perjury, especially in this case.

Quoted: Allot to think about there. I believe a slamfire as you put it is a malfunction any way you put it. It is not part of any MG design. It is life threatening in some weapons like a AR and should be repaired ASAP. But not because the US code says so, but because common since says so. Only a Darwin awardee would keep attempting to use such a condition to deceive themselves into thinking it was the same as a FA.

Can't think about it that way, as the US Code does not distinguish between the two. A slamfire makes a machinegun, or does it?  You could argue that section is uncontitutionally vague, or that it gives the ATF (an executive agency) legislative/judicial authority because they get to define/interpret what a machinegun is for the purpose of criminal prosecution.

Quoted: Originally Posted By Hard Rock: BATFE claimed that the information requested by defense was covered under "tax" shielding.  BATFE legal internally published a document detailing what must be turned over during FOIA and legal discovery.  The documents Mr. Olofson's attorneys requested not shielded according to the document that BATFE's own legal department issued. I'm sorry but the BATFE's failure/refusal to follow an internally published document isn't perjury.  Now if they had a BATFE employee on the witness stand and someone asked him/her whether certain documents were not turned over contrary to an internally published document and that person said no, that would be perjury.

They would have just claimed ignorance.

Quoted: Quoted: If Bladerunner did not testify, why??? I believe I stated before that it was decided that the government broke so many laws and rights it would be better for ourselves if just left it at that instead of making a losing hand look visibly worse. Without being allowed to introduce any evidence the case was already shot. To try to go on would only have made me look guilty and would have tacitly been construed as granting permission to the government to do what they did. Let me put it this way, if they broke the rules, why continue to play the game?

Because by failing to testify, you allowed the jury to give undue weight to the "kid's" testimony.

I would have testified if it were me. Anyone who asserts that right looks like he has something to hide. While this cannot be used against him, it is. human nature.

Why is this so hard to understand?

The ATF and the AUSA lied to the judge and withheld evidence prejudicial to their case. This is what got the conviction. This lie to the judge deprived Bladerunner due process.

Stop getting all hung up on Purgery vs purgery. The AUSA obtained a conviction under false pretenses. That is not justice and in fact violates the law.

It wouldn't have mattered if BR testified. The only evidence allowed was the kid's testimony and the ATF definition of full auto. BR's word against that wouldn't have made a difference.

And once again, it has been ruled in another court case that a malfunctioning weapon does not meet the definition of full auto as that was not the intent of the law.

You really do sound like an ATF agent or assistant AUSA justifying the conviction.

Perjury is knowingly presenting false testimony under oath to the court.

never mind

You sound like a tin-foil hat wearing anarchist. I'm not an ATF agent. I don't work for the Federal Government.

What should the ATF have done? Beg and plead with Bladerunner to repair his AR? Give him money for the repair or maybe offer to fix it for free?

Maybe they had it out for him. Maybe he pissed them off. But he gave them all the ammunition to convict him.

And once again, it has been ruled in another court case that a malfunctioning weapon does not meet the definition of full auto as that was not the intent of the law.

No it hasn't.

Quoted: You sound like a tin-foil hat wearing anarchist. I'm not an ATF agent. I don't work for the Federal Government. What should the ATF have done? Beg and plead with Bladerunner to repair his AR? Give him money for the repair or maybe offer to fix it for free? Maybe they had it out for him. Maybe he pissed them off. But he gave them all the ammunition to convict him. And once again, it has been ruled in another court case that a malfunctioning weapon does not meet the definition of full auto as that was not the intent of the law. No it hasn't.

I see you don't believe in karma.

Quoted: You sound like a tin-foil hat wearing anarchist. I'm not an ATF agent. I don't work for the Federal Government. What should the ATF have done? Beg and plead with Bladerunner to repair his AR? Give him money for the repair or maybe offer to fix it for free?

The funny thing is, there are government programs for low-interest auto loans, to allow low-income folks to bring "malfunctioning" cars up to code, or to put a down payment on a new car.

I'm sure the irony starts about there.

I know Texas has a state program that does this, but I think there's also a federal program, too.  Could be mistaken, though.

Tyrell's Uzi be jammin'. Need moe gubment cheese.

918v: You sound like a tin-foil hat wearing anarchist. I'm not an ATF agent. I don't work for the Federal Government. And thus begins the personal attacks on those that don't agree with you. But I'm the tin foil hat anarchist? What should the ATF have done? Beg and plead with Bladerunner to repair his AR? Give him money for the repair or maybe offer to fix it for free? The ATF should have complied with the first Tech Branch inspection where it ruled it wasn't a FA gun just a malfunctioning one. Returned the gun and informed BR it was broke and tell him to fix it. Maybe they had it out for him. Maybe he pissed them off. But he gave them all the ammunition to convict him. He did not tell them to lie to a judge. He did not tell them to reinspect the gun and change their findings of FA. He did not make the AUSA initiate a malicious prosecution. He did not tell the "kid" to lie about the condition of the gun when he got it from BR. I suppose you think a woman in a short skirt and low cut blouse asks for it if she is raped too.

This conversation is pointless as you have already made up your mind the ATF and the AUSA did nothing wrong and that BR is guilty.

Ignorance is bliss so you must be f*cking ecstatic.

Quoted: You sound like a tin-foil hat wearing anarchist. I'm not an ATF agent. I don't work for the Federal Government. What should the ATF have done? Beg and plead with Bladerunner to repair his AR? Give him money for the repair or maybe offer to fix it for free? Maybe they had it out for him. Maybe he pissed them off. But he gave them all the ammunition to convict him. And once again, it has been ruled in another court case that a malfunctioning weapon does not meet the definition of full auto as that was not the intent of the law. No it hasn't.

Ah not disprect intended 918v, but you do sound kinda like an ATF sympathizer there, and there are not a lot of such sympathizers around here.  Let us just say that ATF has had a long and sad history of making up the rules at their convenience.  Never mind the outragious criminal actions committed during the waco tragedy.

Is not an open bolt machinegun( MAC 10 etc. ), a slam fire action , because of its fixed firing pin on the bolt face.Words can be used against you.

On a nother note , this type of fore play by the ATF has been going on for as long as I have been into firearms( thirty five plus years) , name one time that an agent or agents got into any trouble of any kind for this kind of stuff ? I can't for the life of me , remember one . This is as I have said , nothing new , may be the world wide web will make a change , but I doubt it ,any more than all the years and all the people I knew that wrote all there elected officials about similiar sh-- long ago . No I didn't give up , its just nobody in any official status will do any thing to change there GUN POLICE. We look at it one way and they look at it totaly differant. They think the BATF makes them safe , they may be right ,in there point of view.

Has there been any contact with the NRA and if so , what is there possition( if any ) ? They are no totaly worthless. Just my two!

Quoted: Has there been any contact with the NRA and if so , what is there possition( if any ) ? They are no totaly worthless. Just my two!

The NRA usually stays away from small potatoes types of matter like these.  They like to get involved when there is a good potential for national media coverage that they can use.  They also seem to keep away from criminal matters as a rule until they can, again, exploit the media coverage.

For something like this, they wouldn't even give you the time of day.  You'd only do ever so slightly better with SAF or other smaller groups.  They'd type up a press release and end up using the issue to try to collect donations to their organizations, and not help the OP at all, or very little, until the case reached the SCotUS.  Then, you'd get more press releases.

Quoted: 918v: You sound like a tin-foil hat wearing anarchist. I'm not an ATF agent. I don't work for the Federal Government. And thus begins the personal attacks on those that don't agree with you. But I'm the tin foil hat anarchist? What should the ATF have done? Beg and plead with Bladerunner to repair his AR? Give him money for the repair or maybe offer to fix it for free? The ATF should have complied with the first Tech Branch inspection where it ruled it wasn't a FA gun just a malfunctioning one. Returned the gun and informed BR it was broke and tell him to fix it. Maybe they had it out for him. Maybe he pissed them off. But he gave them all the ammunition to convict him. He did not tell them to lie to a judge. He did not tell them to reinspect the gun and change their findings of FA. He did not make the AUSA initiate a malicious prosecution. He did not tell the "kid" to lie about the condition of the gun when he got it from BR. I suppose you think a woman in a short skirt and low cut blouse asks for it if she is raped too. This conversation is pointless as you have already made up your mind the ATF and the AUSA did nothing wrong and that BR is guilty. Ignorance is bliss so you must be f*cking ecstatic.

You do not have any evidence of the US Attorney suborning perjury from his witnesses. I never said the government behaved like angels. You are now making up shit. And, BTW, calling me an ATF aget is an insult, so it is you who started the personal attack.

Quoted: Quoted: You sound like a tin-foil hat wearing anarchist. I'm not an ATF agent. I don't work for the Federal Government. What should the ATF have done? Beg and plead with Bladerunner to repair his AR? Give him money for the repair or maybe offer to fix it for free? Maybe they had it out for him. Maybe he pissed them off. But he gave them all the ammunition to convict him. And once again, it has been ruled in another court case that a malfunctioning weapon does not meet the definition of full auto as that was not the intent of the law. No it hasn't. Ah not disprect intended 918v, but you do sound kinda like an ATF sympathizer there, and there are not a lot of such sympathizers around here.  Let us just say that ATF has had a long and sad history of making up the rules at their convenience.  Never mind the outragious criminal actions committed during the waco tragedy.

Why? Because I'm not defending Bladerunner's behavior. Maybe I disagree with what he did. I don't think he should be a felon for it, though, but such is life.

Quoted: Is not an open bolt machinegun( MAC 10 etc. ), a slam fire action , because of its fixed firing pin on the bolt face.Words can be used against you. On a nother note , this type of fore play by the ATF has been going on for as long as I have been into firearms( thirty five plus years) , name one time that an agent or agents got into any trouble of any kind for this kind of stuff ? I can't for the life of me , remember one . This is as I have said , nothing new , may be the world wide web will make a change , but I doubt it ,any more than all the years and all the people I knew that wrote all there elected officials about similiar sh-- long ago . No I didn't give up , its just nobody in any official status will do any thing to change there GUN POLICE. We look at it one way and they look at it totaly differant. They think the BATF makes them safe , they may be right ,in there point of view. Has there been any contact with the NRA and if so , what is there possition( if any ) ? They are no totaly worthless. Just my two!

If you think that was shady, you should spend some time at your local DA's office. In an adversarial criminal justice process, both sides play games with evidence. That's why you have an appellate process.

Bladerunner has a good argument:

1. ATF takes inconsistent positions when defining machineguns.

2. Aguilar-Espinosa talks about malfunctioning semi-auto firearms not being machineguns, although the statement has no precedential value because it is unpublished dicta.

3. Common sense leads most level-headed people to believe that the legislature did not intend to include malfunctioning semi-auto firearms in the definition of a machinegun, UNLESS the malfunction was purposefully induced by the owner.

Quoted: You sound like a tin-foil hat wearing anarchist. I'm not an ATF agent. I don't work for the Federal Government. What should the ATF have done? Beg and plead with Bladerunner to repair his AR? Give him money for the repair or maybe offer to fix it for free? Maybe they had it out for him. Maybe he pissed them off. But he gave them all the ammunition to convict him. And once again, it has been ruled in another court case that a malfunctioning weapon does not meet the definition of full auto as that was not the intent of the law. No it hasn't.

Um yes it has.

United States vs. Aguilar-Espinosa, 57 F. Supp. 2d 1359 (M.D. Fla. 1999): On the other hand, the law is not intended to trap the unwary innocent, and well intentioned citizen who possess an otherwise semi-automatic weapon that, by repeated use of the weapon, by the inevitable wear and tear of sporting activities, or by means of mere inattention, happenstance, or illfortune, fires more than semi-automatically.

Now please don't ever say that a court has NOT found that a malfunctioning Semi-auto is NOT an illegal MG.

Quoted: Quoted: You sound like a tin-foil hat wearing anarchist. I'm not an ATF agent. I don't work for the Federal Government. What should the ATF have done? Beg and plead with Bladerunner to repair his AR? Give him money for the repair or maybe offer to fix it for free? Maybe they had it out for him. Maybe he pissed them off. But he gave them all the ammunition to convict him. And once again, it has been ruled in another court case that a malfunctioning weapon does not meet the definition of full auto as that was not the intent of the law. No it hasn't. Um yes it has. United States vs. Aguilar-Espinosa, 57 F. Supp. 2d 1359 (M.D. Fla. 1999): On the other hand, the law is not intended to trap the unwary innocent, and well intentioned citizen who possess an otherwise semi-automatic weapon that, by repeated use of the weapon, by the inevitable wear and tear of sporting activities, or by means of mere inattention, happenstance, or illfortune, fires more than semi-automatically. Now please don't ever say that a court has NOT found that a malfunctioning Semi-auto is NOT an illegal MG.

What was the ISSUE in the Aguilar-Espinosa case?

Quoted: ...And the paragraph you cite is DICTA, an off-point editorial.

Not to mention it keeps getting smaller.

The "off-point editorial”, however, references Justice Thomas' writing for the majority in Staples, specifically (as I posted a few pages back):

… The Government does not dispute the contention that virtually any semiautomatic weapon may be converted, either by internal modification or, in some cases, simply by wear and tear, into a machinegun within the meaning of the Act. Cf. United States v. Anderson, 885 F. 2d 1248, 1251, 1253-1254 (CA5 1989) (en banc). Such a gun may give no externally visible indication that it is fully automatic. See United States v. Herbert, 698 F. 2d 981, 986 (CA9), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 821 (1983). But in the Government's view, any person who has purchased what he believes to be a semiautomatic rifle or handgun, or who simply has inherited a gun from a relative and left it untouched in an attic or basement, can be subject to imprisonment, despite absolute ignorance of the gun's firing capabilities, if the gun turns out to be an automatic. We concur in the Fifth Circuit's conclusion on this point: "It is unthinkable to us that Congress intended to subject such law abiding, well intentioned citizens to a possible ten year term of imprisonment if . . . what they genuinely and reasonably believed was a conventional semiautomatic [weapon] turns out to have worn down into or been secretly modified to be a fully automatic weapon." Anderson, supra, at 1254. … In short, we conclude that the background rule of the common law favoring mens reashould govern interpretation of § 5861(d) in this case. Silence does not suggest that Congress dispensed with mens rea for the element of § 5861(d) at issue here. Thus, to obtain a conviction, the Government should have been required to prove that petitioner knew of the features of his AR-15 that brought it within the scope of the [National Firearms] Act.

The same point about dicta versus opinion came up during an interesting conversation I had at lunch.  Now since I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, would these paragraphs be "dicta" or "opinion"?  Inquiring minds (who didn't go to law school) want to know.

It does have a bearing on the case, since...

Quoted: ... the US Code does not distinguish between the two [a slamfire condition, and a designed FA]. A slamfire makes a machinegun, or does it?  You could argue that section is uncontitutionally vague, or that it gives the ATF (an executive agency) legislative/judicial authority because they get to define/interpret what a machinegun is for the purpose of criminal prosecution.

Not if what I quoted of the Staples opinion above (slamfire minus criminal intent does not equal NFA violation) is actual opinion versus dicta.




Also, not to backtrack, but...

You were right,  I used the term "Perjury" incorrectly.  Flat-out "lying to a Federal Judge in open court" would have been a better choice (since I was talking about the AUSA).  You were incorrect (I believe) that the BATFE didn't perjure themselves:

While SA Keeku's statement that she had observed that the "bolt had been filed down" as an indication of an attempt at FA conversion (sworn to in both the complaint, and in the search warrant) may have convinced a judge who didn't know better, those of us with even a passing knowledge of the internals of an AR15 understand the statement to be what it is: a blatant lie of mythological proportions.  Provable?  Probably not.  The words could be construed by a layman to mean damn near anything.  Unfortunately, the common myth Agent Keeku repeated and testified to under oath is what constituted at least some of the probable cause in this case.

Add in the omission of the FTB’s finding that the gun in question was, in fact a semi-auto on the same sworn criminal complaint. I guess the BATFE is allowed to ignore the exculpatory facts, even when they contradict what they affirm under oath?  If that isn't perjury, it sure-as-hell should be.

I also seem to remember BATFE talking of an Auto Sear (which we now know never existed), but I can't be positive of whether it was mentioned under oath or not.  I'd have to log back in to PACER and pour through the docs (not an option until next week some time).

In any event, we’ve had all sorts of tall tales sworn to in those affidavits.  Few, if any, have turned out even close to the truth.

918v,  I appreciate and respect your skepticism on any number of levels, but I believe this whole thing boils down to malicious prosecution on behalf of a frustrated Federal agent.

The ISSUE in Staples was thether the government was required to prove intent under the NFA. The court RULED the government does indeed need to prove intent, i.e. KNOWLEDGE that the AR15 fires full-auto.

The rest is DICTA.

The Aguilar-Espinosa language is likewise DICTA.

We need a published appellate case where the court rules a malfunctioning semi-auto  IS NOT a machinegun under the NFA.

Maybe US v. Bladerunner is it. I sincerely hope so.

$5 this 918 whatever guy is a troll trying to get you to violate the gag order. I suggest stop feeding him, you already have enough of this with the law. I think sticking to neutral updates would be in your best interest, especially since we know that the ATF is aware of this thread.

Personal attacks reflect poorly on those who raised you.

Quoted: The ISSUE in Staples was thether the government was required to prove intent under the NFA. The court RULED the government does indeed need to prove intent, i.e. KNOWLEDGE that the AR15 fires full-auto. The rest is DICTA. The Aguilar-Espinosa language is likewise DICTA. We need a published appellate case where the court rules a malfunctioning semi-auto  IS NOT a machinegun under the NFA. Maybe US v. Bladerunner is it. I sincerely hope so.

ETA 918v should just regurgitate this.  It makes about as much sense as the rest of his posts:

Wrong, sir, wrong!  Under Section Thirty-Seven B of
the contract signed by him it states quite clearly that all
offers shall become null and void if--and you can read it
for yourself in this photostatic copy: "I, the undersigned,
shall forfeit all rights, privileges, and licenses herein
and herein contained, et cetera, et cetera . . . fax mentis
incendium gloria culpum, et cetera, et cetera . . . memo bis
punitor delicatum!"  It's all there, black and white, clear
as crystal!  You stole Fizzy Lifting Drinks.  You bumped
into the ceiling which now has to be washed and sterilized,
so you get nothing!  You lose!  Good day, sir!

DICTA.

Sobriety enhances reading comprehension.

Quoted: Sobriety enhances reading comprehension.

DICTA.

Yes. Spelling it out in large letters is the first step.

Quoted: Now please don't ever say that a court has NOT found that a malfunctioning Semi-auto is NOT an illegal MG.

US v. Glover  (2005)

John Glover was found innocent due to the problem in his FN FAL being a disintigrating firing pin spring.  BATFU thug Michael Cooney couldn't even figure out how to disassemble the weapon (hell, why mince words, the idiot didn't even try) and Mr. Len Savage had to do it.  He also showed the damaged spring and pointed out just how dangerous shooting that firearm was.  Had Mr. Cooney tried firing light magnum ammunition in that gun, he would not be here with us now.  

In return for successfully defending Mr. Glover in court by showing the firearm was damaged, BATFU engaged in economic siege of Mr. Savage's business (Historic Arms, LLC.)  Not only is this kind of conduct unbecoming of a Federal agency, it is highly illegal.  918v is supporting this kind of illegal activity by defending these goons.  He is in contact with BATFU or someone associated with the Olofson case, this is a fact as he knows something that is NOT public information.  I know it because I have been kept up to date on this case.  

This is why I am recommending to Mr. Olofson right now to comment no further on this thread.  I suspect that the BATFU is trying to find a way to get all the lies covered up quickly by putting you in a position where you are found in contempt or some other bullshit.  

David, if you wish to speak to me about this, you can reach me though our mutual friend.

As for this issue, the BATFE has violated Mr. Olofsons Constitutional rights, violated due process laws and US code in general, and declared war on gun owners.  They are too cowardly to go after real criminals, so they take the safe road and go after people they think won't resist.  It's safer that way you know.  

Thanks to Senator Vitter and his solid stainless steel balls, the BATFU has suffered a hit this week with Minimum Mike's confirmation hold.  It's going to get a lot worse for BATFU in the coming weeks.  They've got a lot of explaining to do and Congress is slowly warming up to the idea of having a BBQ.  Smell the bacon?

Gotta wonder how BATFU would feel if Mr. Savage decided to stop manufacturing firearms and enter into the field of law as a defense attorney.  All this would go away if BATFU stopped assaulting gun owners who have no criminal intent, stop illegally engaging in economic siege, and if they would quit making up evidence and lying through their teeth in court.  

They are either too stupid or too inept to see that the walls are about to come  crashing down.  There are a lot of us that are going to help make it happen.  I've already requested to testify before Congress and so have many others.  

Mike

Originally Posted By Hard Rock: 918v is supporting this kind of illegal activity by defending these goons.  He is in contact with BATFU or someone associated with the Olofson case, this is a fact as he knows something that is NOT public information.  I know it because I have been kept up to date on this case.   Mike

www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200416745.pdf

Is this the case you are citing?

Glover concedes that he signed a written waiver but argues that his waiver was not voluntary, knowing, and intelligent because he lacked the mental capacity to comprehend the warnings. Glover relies on Durr’s testimony as to his level of education and his Intelligence Quotient. Durr’s testimony was not corroborated by an expert evaluation, and her recollection was vague: “his IQ level was like -- I’m not sure, I believe they said 57, 67.”

No, it's US v. John Glover out of North Carolina 2005.  

Mike

Cite please.

The charges were ordered dismissed with prejudice.  See www.nfaoa.org/documents/GloverCase.pdf for the available documentation.

So?

Charges are dismissed all the time. I was speaking in terms of PRECEDENT, a decision that is legally binding on other courts. Your Glover case is of no help.

Read the document.  Also, if you want to see just how incompetent and full of shit the BATFE was in this case, order "BATF Fails the Test" from JPFO.  You can see most of the video from this case, and the reason it was dismissed for yourself.

Mike

I'm not disputing the facts behind it. But this is not something you can argue in court. The fact that ATF takes inconsistent positions in court is irrelevant. Why? They can can do that in an adversarial criminal justice system. Further, the prosecutor has sole discretion whether to charge or not to charge a person with a crime. Hence, the fact the ATF is after you and not after someone else (who may be a real criminal thug) is irrelevant.

Personal attacks reflect poorly on those who raised you.

Sobriety enhances reading comprehension.

Yes. Spelling it out in large letters is the first step.

Full of hypocrisy. Give it a rest man.

Just how does your response pertain to Bladerunner's issue? Have you nothing relevant to contribute?

Does someone have a "pissing match" .gif animation we can use when appropriate?

I think they are trying to win something. If so, I concede.

I'm just curious why someone would defend a group of criminally minded people that approach law enforcement in the same manner as organized crime.  BATFE is the absolute poorest excuse for a law enforcement agency that has ever existed in the USA.  These people are constantly out of line, rude, beligerent to the industry, conduct themselves in a manner that would have us lowly peons in jail, AND they dare people to stand up to them.  

They illegally lobby Congress, they violate the NFA constantly, and they make Nifong look like an angel.  These people set innocent people up often resulting in the death of innocent people (Ruby Ridge anyone?  Waco anyone?)  all to make the agency stronger and justify a larger budget.  Senator Vitter is blocking Sullivan's confirmation, the man is doing it for a reason, not just for shits and grins.  Why?  Because Vitter sees a serious problem and has the balls to try to fix it.

BATFE has been repeatedly warned by Congress to publish standards of testing and definition, this has been ongoing for YEARS!  Yet, BATFE has NO written standards of conduct, or established scientific standards of testing and classification.  They make the rules up as they go along and innocent people with NO criminal intent are in jail or dead because of it.

We the people are no longer amused.  IT WILL STOP!  This is NOT a request.  We are going to hold a lot of people accountable for the attrocities that the BATFE have committed over the past 40 years.  BATFU, DOJ, members of Congress and the Senate read this site and this page.  They know the shit storm is coming.  People like Len Savage, David Olofson, Albert Kwan, Ryan Horsley, myself and others will have our day before Congress.  We will testify and we will DEMAND answers and that punishment be met out.  

Yet, there are some who defend BATFU to the death.  I just don't see how anyone with any morals at all can defend someone lower than whale shit.  

Mike

So you think that people should be able to throw M16 parts in an AR, hope it slamfires, and rejoice when it does, for now they have a post 1986 legal machinegun???

It is a malfunctioning semi-auto after all.

Think about the facts of this case:

Yahoo fires full auto bursts at the range.

Cops respond, fire the gun, and it does indeed fire in bursts.

Yahoo tells them he got it that way from Bladerunner. Yahoo tells them Bladerunner knew the gun fired bursts.

Bladerunner did not testify on his own behalf because the ATF is evil.

Bladerunner got convicted.

Anyone with half a brain understands why this happened, and it isn't because the ATF is corrupt.

Quoted: So you think that people should be able to throw M16 parts in an AR, hope it slamfires, and rejoice when it does, for now they have a post 1986 legal machinegun??? It is a malfunctioning semi-auto after all. Think about the facts of this case: Yahoo fires full auto bursts at the range. Cops respond, fire the gun, and it does indeed fire in bursts. Yahoo tells them he got it that way from Bladerunner. Yahoo tells them Bladerunner knew the gun fired bursts. Bladerunner did not testify on his own behalf because the ATF is evil. Bladerunner got convicted. Anyone with half a brain understands why this happened, and it isn't because the ATF is corrupt.

You left out some other pertinent 'facts' but that is to be expected. I thought you 'conceded'?

Quoted: You left out some other pertinent 'facts' but that is to be expected. I thought you 'conceded'?

Nothing pertinent. Only trivial irrelevant BS. I'm not in a contest, are you?

Quoted: Nothing pertinent. Only trivial irrelevant BS. I'm not in a contest, are you?

The whole proceding is not trivial nor irrelevant. Your lack of knowledge of the process leads me to believe that your claims of working in the legal or law enforcement field are exaggerated. A hot dog vendor at Angel Stadium can claim he works in Major League Baseball but it does not qualify him to speak of the workings of the league.

Your opinion is not more or less valid than anyone else who posts in this thread. I'm here to see how the rest of it unfolds. Your opinion is clear. You really don't have to argue with everyone else who posts here that isn't on board with your opinion.

918, why don't yo ustop being a BATFE cheerleader (or fluffer, not shure which way you swing), and leave these threads alone.

YOu side with the BATFE here and in the RTP thread.

You have a serious boner for the BATFE always being right.