Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 12/3/2002 11:49:11 AM EST
I'm talking just normal people minding there own buissness who got caught with a gun with too many evil features? It would be interesting to know of the cases where people were not commiting a crime other than mistakling put a flash hider or baynot on there gun.

Im not taking about a guy who robs a bank with a "assault rifle" then gets in more trouble because it is a AW.
Link Posted: 12/3/2002 12:01:28 PM EST
I haven't heard of any cases, personally. I'm still not sure if that's good or bad. It's good that no one is getting prosecuted under an unconstitutional law,but if they were, we could challenge it in court...
Link Posted: 12/3/2002 12:03:20 PM EST
don't you think there would be a few or does that just make the prosecutor look bad.
Link Posted: 12/3/2002 1:48:26 PM EST
Link Posted: 12/3/2002 2:24:00 PM EST
NONE. Like Troy says, unless they were bonus charges after you were already running a meth lab or some shit.

The spirit of the assault weapons ban was to get rid of the AR15 in civilian hands. It failed when manufacturers removed the Flash hider and bayo stud. So we still have the AR.

Thus, nobody really gives a shit (in my opinion) if you have a flash hider on a post unless you're up to other Illegal activity!
Link Posted: 12/3/2002 6:12:55 PM EST
Troy pretty much hit it on the head. I know of nobody who's been done for Crime Bill offenses alone- it's always been in conjunction with other felony charges, frequently drugs and domestic violence.
Link Posted: 12/3/2002 6:21:43 PM EST
Ditto the ditto the ditto. The only one I've heard of around here was for some assface who was turned in by his ex-wife for making Sten tube guns. His home was searched and in addition to the other BS, a post-ban AR was found assembled in pre-ban status.

I just don't think it's an important issue to the BATF
Link Posted: 12/3/2002 6:55:55 PM EST
I just can't agree anymore.

It will reach my limit when it doesn't go away in 2004.
Link Posted: 12/3/2002 7:38:53 PM EST
[Last Edit: 12/3/2002 7:40:47 PM EST by notack]
Troy only forgot to mention that it was an " unregistered assualt weapon" .
Link Posted: 12/4/2002 7:32:51 AM EST
what a dumb law, since it hasn't been used much can't we show that it isn't very effective?

and also if the 94 AWB isn't renewed is there any chance that CA laws might loosen up? have there been any convictions in CA for violating CA specific laws?
Link Posted: 12/4/2002 7:41:53 AM EST

Originally Posted By 1911greg:
have there been any convictions in CA for violating CA specific laws?

I saw a couple of cases on the local news (bay area) where some guys were caught with possibly un-registered AW's. I tried following up on them, but I couldn't find anything about it.
Link Posted: 12/4/2002 8:03:34 AM EST
With the post ban fake telestock things and brakes that look like flash suppressors anyway there's not really a way to tell preban from postban without closely inspecting it. Just look at some of KKF's brakes. Probably 95% of the people can't tell the difference in them anyway.
Link Posted: 12/4/2002 8:06:34 AM EST
This is another point on why the gun laws aren't working.

They aren't actually enforced... They're just used to force convicts to plead out to a lesser charge (If we go to trial, you'll get 25 years in Kansas. If you plead out, you'll do 5-10 here with your friends)...
Link Posted: 12/4/2002 12:12:17 PM EST
I know of a case in my locale jurisdiction where the officers tried to go after the guy for the AWB. The bad guy was a known local gang banger. The officers caught him and two of his buddies on their way to a drive by shooting. Only problem is that the only crime that they could charge them with was the AWB. Bad guy had a MAK-90 with the thumb hole cut off and only a pistol grip stub left. They took the rife as evidence and then called ATF in the morning to see how to proceed. ATF told them to never mind. ATF was only interested in the case if the guy was manufacturing/reselling the rifle out of compliance. No charges were ever filled. And no the bad guy never got his gun back.

Every officer that I spoke to about this case stated that they would have never taken it so far had he not been a banger. Local LEO's do not give a shit and are pro-gun for the most part.
Link Posted: 12/4/2002 1:02:25 PM EST
[Last Edit: 12/4/2002 1:07:51 PM EST by ED_P]
Here in good old Massachusetts, where every gun we own has had to be registered with the Massachusetts Criminal Systems History Board since I can remember, I've found that alot of the people who are gone after at the state level are people who wander into a police station asking if something is legal, (as an example, an out of state competition shooter had this happen to him after moving to Mass) and draw attention to themselves, afterwhich the police, whether or not they want to, have to enforce the laws on the books. The competition shooter had all his stuff confiscated because it had been more than 30 days since he moved in without registering all his guns with the Criminal Systems History Board, but then he aggravated the situation by being very hostile, and the police were egged on to maximize their power.

But the bottom line is, people who goto the police to ask legality questions are the absolute last people we should be worrying about...
Link Posted: 12/4/2002 1:31:49 PM EST
I've also heard of no cases where a simple configuration violation of the AW ban had been prosecuted unless other crimes were involved.


Link Posted: 12/4/2002 1:36:20 PM EST
ED_P, how very true.

In the PRK when a person gets a CCW the paper work go the DOJ in Sacramento. More than once someone will have a firearm on their CCW that is registered to them as a handgun but not as an assault weapon under PRK law. So far DOJ just contacts the local issuing agency and advise them. In my area the local LEO's call the person on the phone and tell them that IF they still have the offending firearm that it is illegal for them to have it now. That's it. In fact they go out of their way not to ask if the guy still has the gun. Again, people with CCW's are not the problem.
Link Posted: 12/4/2002 6:35:43 PM EST
[Last Edit: 12/4/2002 6:40:06 PM EST by Sukebe]
I have lost a rifle because of the 94 AWB. It was confiscated by Agents from the Youngstown, Ohio ATF office. I was not prosecuted. The story goes like this; In early 1995 I purchased a standard Bushmaster XM15E2S in pre ban configuration from a co-worker (another cop) who had an FFL. The barrel index was not what it should be but I waited a few years before I got tired of the problem and decided to send it back to Bushmaster to have the index corrected. In the mean time my co-worker retired and surrendered his FFL and records. I sent the rifle to Bushmaster in 1999. They called me and told me that the rifle was a post ban lower and a pre ban upper. During the conversation I learned that the lower was purchased as a kit. I was told by the seller that it was a new from the factory rifle. To say that I was furious is an under statement. Bushmaster was reluctant to send the rifle back to me but agreed to ship the upper and lower separately. I contacted the seller and told him about the problem and wanted my money back. He suggested that it take off the flash suppressor and bayo lug and keep the rifle. Now I'm really getting pissed. I told him to find me a legal pre ban lower and I would exchange the post ban lower and that he would have to eat the difference in cost. I explained to him that I purchased the rifle at the going rate for pre bans at the time and expected the value to go up. Since he stuck me with an illegal rifle it was his responsibility to make good on it. He snow balled me for about a week so I didn't waste my time calling him back. I called the ATF and told them the story. They came and confiscated the rifle and assured me that no charges would be filed against me. They contacted the seller. I don't know what they said to him but they must have scared the shit out of him because within a day he paid me $1,000.00 which I felt was a compromise on my part. Before the ATF talked to him I was getting a "go piss up a rope" vibe from him. He did not get the rifle, the ATF kept it. He was not prosecuted. I was amazed that the ATF would not pursue charges against an FFL that admittedly violated the 94 AWB by manufacturing(he was a class II) and selling the illegal weapon. That's not the part that amazes me, what really floored me is that another cop I work with who had bought a Bushmaster from the same guy decided that because of my situation to check the serial number of his and sure enough another illegal AW. The ATF took his the same day they took mine. No prosecution for two violations. Since these incidents a third co-worker has discovered that he is in the same boat as me and the other guy. He has not reported it or pursued the matter with the seller.
Link Posted: 12/5/2002 5:03:53 AM EST
Sounds like the seller could be in for some rough weather if the ATF chose to make a case out of it.

He could be in BIG trouble.

Link Posted: 12/5/2002 6:02:57 AM EST
A few years ago a dealer in NorCal was busted for mfg'ing and selling AW's. The guns were 10-22's with sidefolders! 3ea if IRC. He was found guilty and fined $500,000.00!
Link Posted: 12/5/2002 6:05:36 AM EST
[Last Edit: 12/5/2002 6:25:18 AM EST by Boom_Stick]

I called the ATF and told them the story. They came and confiscated the rifle.........

I think 1911greg is asking if rifles have been confiscated on random checks or stand alone enforcement of the 94 ban. Apparently no law enforcement is going out of their way to specifically spot check individual rifles for compliance with the "law." In your case you lost the rifle because YOU involved the BATF while you were in possession of "contraband.". That's the evil when you involve them, but it is YOUR fault that the rifle is lost. It could have been worse! The BATF could have easily turned ON YOU!! Just like Troy said:

Remember: the legal system is very political. If you aren't liked by the "system" for other reasons, chances are that they'll take advantage of the situation and make things very difficult for you. Otherwise, they'll just take your gun(s)

You got lucky that they didn't prosecute you and that (for some reason) the seller gave you $1000.

Another point of this fiasco, is you have helped to empower the BATF's enforcement of illegal firearms bans.
Link Posted: 12/5/2002 6:26:31 AM EST
My understanding is that they confiscate in all cases of unitentional possession, or even individual possession by otherwise law abiding citizen. ATF rarley pusues, leo violations of aw bill either and also confiscates and refers matter to loe's dept for action (usually none or admin). The only case I know of a prosecution is unreported and involved a seller (licensed ffl who had bad rep anyway)who went to jail as a result.
Link Posted: 12/5/2002 6:42:59 AM EST
Along the same lines, I asked a LEO shooter friend of mine about prosecutions concerning the 94 AWB. From what I understand, the state police found some LE Only magazines in a vehicle they were searching. Evidently, the driver got threatened but nothing happened.

So it appears that the state and local cops are more concerned with other laws.

Link Posted: 12/5/2002 8:53:03 AM EST

Originally Posted By Sukebe:
I called the ATF and told them the story. They came and confiscated the rifle and assured me that no charges would be filed against me.

I have to ask: Why didn't you ask them if it would be OK to simply sell off or otherwise dispose of the features that caused the technical violation?
Flash hiders unscrew and threads can be filed off easily enough and hacksaws are more than a match for bayonet lugs. Ten minutes of work would probably have satisfied all concerned and you'd still have your rifle and it'd shoot the same as it did before.

If that situation had happened to me, I'd simply have corrected it without feeling it necessary to call the ATF about it. No need to stir up trouble. No harm, no foul, and what they don't know can't hurt you.

Incidentally, at the local gun show last week, I noticed a dealer selling a pre-ban configured A2 type Bushmaster, but with an obviously new lower receiver. A quick look at the serial number made me quite sure that this was technically not a legal rifle. I quietly advised him of this and he said "But Bushmaster sent it to me just like that." To which I replied "Maybe so, but if it's actually a post ban lower attached to a pre-ban upper, it's not BUSHMASTER that's going to have legal trouble over it. YOU will." I advised him to double check the serial number with Bushmaster and positively ascertain its pre/post ban status and make appropriate changes if warranted. It appears that he took the friendly warning in the helpful spirit that was intended and didn't get belligerent in any way.

I made sure he knew that I disagree with the ban as much as anybody, but there's no point in possibly getting in a LOT of trouble over something like this.

I'll be interested to visit his table at the next gun show and see what he has then.

Top Top