Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 9/13/2004 3:51:59 PM EST
Ok I know the ATF ruled that if you possessed a illegal Assault weapon prior to the ban you can still be prosecuted for it. I will have to disagree on this ruling, the Govt cannot file charges on someone if a law for it no longer exist (what are they going to charge you with?) even if it was illegal when you did it. And please don’t point out the ATF said it was illegal because the ATF doesn’t make the law or charge people with laws they just enforce.


I know this subject has come up but I want to start a legitimate discussion on the matter.
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 3:53:50 PM EST
Incorrect...You can be prosecuted for an ex post facto. I can't remember the exact USC code that covers this but it is true.

Someone have the code that covers this?

Link Posted: 9/13/2004 3:54:43 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/13/2004 4:00:24 PM EST by FLAL1A]
It's not an ATF decision. It's a general principle of law. It is pretty stupid, but AFAIK it has been the law for as long as there have been statutes written in English, and maybe longer.

ETA: Ex post facto laws are not the issue here. Article I, Section 9, Clause 3 of the US Constitution prohibits ex post facto laws. Ex post facto means "from after the fact;" what is prohibited is criminalizing conduct which was lawful when committed. That clause precludes enactment after September 13, 2004 of a statute making the possession on September 13, 2004 of a rifle with more than 2 evil features a crime. It doesn't preclude punishing acts which were illegal when performed, even if they are no longer illegal when the prosecution is commenced.
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 3:55:28 PM EST
Why is this even an issue? Who is even going to admit to anyone that they MAY have had an illegal weapon prior to the ban sunsetting? It's a non-issue now.
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 3:56:14 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 3:57:53 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/13/2004 4:04:02 PM EST by Mauser101]
Yes, you could be prosecuted.

No, it probably wouldn't stand up in court. In all likelyhood no prosecutor would even want to press charges and make himself look like a dumbass.

If "they" cannot prove when you owned the assault weapon, they don't have a leg to stand on. As far as anybody is concerned you purchased it today.

So go dig up the rifles you buried a few years ago.

ETA: I should have said it wouldn't go to trial, not that it wouldn't stand up in court. It most assuredly would.
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 4:24:46 PM EST
Yeah but what charges are they going to put on you??
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 4:26:17 PM EST
Same ones they would have put on you yesterday.
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 4:27:19 PM EST
they cant charge you with a law that doesnt exist
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 4:27:59 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/13/2004 4:27:59 PM EST by CockedandLocked]
dupe
Top Top