Personal LEO ownership of LEO marked "assault weapon"? - Page 2

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Personal LEO ownership of LEO marked "assault weapon"? (Page 2 of 2)

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:13:29 PM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Its not rare or unusual to find a BATFE agent that doesn't know what hes talking about..

So fucking sad and so fucking true.

Yeah except this is the agent who's job it is to fulfill these information requests, now what Einstein?

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:13:55 PM EDT

[#2]

THEY CANNOT BUY IT FOR PERSONAL PURPOSES UNDER FEDERAL LAW.

But they can use it for that once they bought it for LE purposes.

CRC

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:14:34 PM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
Quoted:
JRZY,

They can buy the gun only for use on duty but once they buy it and are still a LEO they can use it for personal uses to.

Hunting, plinking, home defense, shooting, paper weight.

As long as they also use for their LE job too.

CRC

I agree with that statement.
Thye can not have it in their name as if they own it personally.
It must remain in the dept. name.
If that gun was logged out to them by the FFL into their name they committed a felony.
I'll let you know what the ATF says when I get this back in writing from them.
Why do you think this is such a sore subject with LEO's?
If I'm right then some of them are felons.

The rifle is most certainly in their name. But it is conditional ownership. The must have the money to buy it, and it must be a weapon that has been certified for duty use.

The gun is sold on a 4473 to the individual officer, with certification that it is for duty use.

If they leave LE, they can sell it, (to an FFL, or another person allowed to have a post ban AW, like another LEO) and keep the proceeds from the sale.

The problem is you are creating new and different meanings to the word ownership.

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:15:52 PM EDT

[#4]

http://www.bushmaster.com/le/individual.htm

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:17:55 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Its not rare or unusual to find a BATFE agent that doesn't know what hes talking about..

So fucking sad and so fucking true.

Yeah except this is the agent who's job it is to fulfill these information requests, now what Einstein?

Let me guess, at the local office?

The moron at the office local to me told a friend of mine he couldn't build a SBR Thompson when he asked. I got him to call the tech branch and they told him the right info and sent him the forms.

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:21:24 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
http://www.bushmaster.com/le/individual.htm

To Individual Officers wishing to order complete Bushmaster Firearms:

Below are listed the specific legal requirement and limitations necessary for the purchase of complete functional weapons from Bushmaster Firearms.

A letter from the Office's Department Chief, Sheriff or Shift Supervisor authorizing such purchase. This letter must state that the weapon is for the Officer's use in his/her official duties.

Cost for the weapon must be billed directly to the Officer's Law Enforcement Agency. The Individual Officer may make payment to the dealer or distributor for the weapon but the invoice for said weapon must be made out to the Law Enforcement Agency.

N.F.A. (National Firearms Act) weapons and short barreled weapons are available for sale only to Law Enforcement Agencies and may not be owned by Individual Officers.

If the Individual Officer leaves the Law Enforcement Agency, ownership of the weapon may be transferred to another Law Enforcement Agency through a Federal Firearms Licensed dealer.

Any weapon sold to Law Enforcement Agencies by Bushmaster Firearms will carry a stamping on the lower receiver reading "Restricted Law Enforcement / Government Use Only"

Why do you suppose they said "another Law Enforcement Agency", becasue it was in the officers depts name.

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:23:00 PM EDT

[#7]

The whole dang law is stupid and confusing.

Your dealing with .gov

CRC

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:24:18 PM EDT

[#8]

"may be transferred to another Law Enforcement Agency through a Federal Firearms Licensed dealer."

It MAY also be transferred to another authorized LEO.

CRC

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:27:14 PM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
Quoted:
http://www.bushmaster.com/le/individual.htm

To Individual Officers wishing to order complete Bushmaster Firearms:

Below are listed the specific legal requirement and limitations necessary for the purchase of complete functional weapons from Bushmaster Firearms.

A letter from the Office's Department Chief, Sheriff or Shift Supervisor authorizing such purchase. This letter must state that the weapon is for the Officer's use in his/her official duties.

Cost for the weapon must be billed directly to the Officer's Law Enforcement Agency. The Individual Officer may make payment to the dealer or distributor for the weapon but the invoice for said weapon must be made out to the Law Enforcement Agency.

N.F.A. (National Firearms Act) weapons and short barreled weapons are available for sale only to Law Enforcement Agencies and may not be owned by Individual Officers.

If the Individual Officer leaves the Law Enforcement Agency, ownership of the weapon may be transferred to another Law Enforcement Agency through a Federal Firearms Licensed dealer.

Any weapon sold to Law Enforcement Agencies by Bushmaster Firearms will carry a stamping on the lower receiver reading "Restricted Law Enforcement / Government Use Only"

Why do you suppose they said "another Law Enforcement Agency", becasue it was in the officers depts name.

You realize you posted a paragraph about MG's and SBR's covered under the NFA Act of '34, as well as the MG ban of '86, and not anything relevant to post-ban AW's, don't ya?

EDIT:

Also in there, talking about shipping to a LEA. Bushmaster or other firearms manufacturers can do that, under federal law individual states may place more restrictions, without shipping to an FFL. The LEA is legally transferring the weapon to an individual like an FFL would do. (Non-NFA weapons)

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:30:32 PM EDT

[#10]

From the Bushmaster LE site:

"Peace officers may not lawfully keep federally defined assault weapons that they purchased or acquired as their own property when they retire or leave their employment with a law enforcement agency"

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:33:07 PM EDT

[#11]

http://www.bushmaster.com/le/california/

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:39:09 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
They can buy it BUT they have to get department approval from their chief.

This isn't automatic weapons where only DEPARTMENTS can buy or obtain.

Any LEO that does the paperwork, gets permission and is allowed by the law can buy one.

BUT THEY DO NOT PERMANENTLY OWN IT.

It's theirs for use on the job for as along as they are a LEO. Then they have to get rid of it- sell to another officer, melt it down or sell it to a FFL.

Sucks really.

CRC

exatcly Its like Renting the gun As long there still a LEO they can posses it.

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:41:16 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
Quoted:
They can buy it BUT they have to get department approval from their chief.

This isn't automatic weapons where only DEPARTMENTS can buy or obtain.

Any LEO that does the paperwork, gets permission and is allowed by the law can buy one.

BUT THEY DO NOT PERMANENTLY OWN IT.

It's theirs for use on the job for as along as they are a LEO. Then they have to get rid of it- sell to another officer, melt it down or sell it to a FFL.

Sucks really.

CRC

exatcly Its like Renting the gun As long there still a LEO they can posses it.

(O9) May law enforcement officers keep their semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices when they retire or leave their employment with a law enforcement agency?

No. They may not lawfully keep semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices that they purchased or acquired as their own property. However, the law provides an exception for items that belong to a law enforcement agency and are transferred by the agency to an officer upon the officer’s retirement from, or termination of his or her employment with, the agency. Neither this exception nor the exception for official use permits officers to retain their own weapons or feeding devices after retiring or leaving the agency or to acquire additional items. Officers who retire or leave their employment with a law enforcement agency should transfer assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices that are their own property to a Federal firearms licensee or another qualified officer. [18 U.S.C. 922(v)(4), (w)(3)]

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:42:32 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Quoted:
They can buy it BUT they have to get department approval from their chief.

This isn't automatic weapons where only DEPARTMENTS can buy or obtain.

Any LEO that does the paperwork, gets permission and is allowed by the law can buy one.

BUT THEY DO NOT PERMANENTLY OWN IT.

It's theirs for use on the job for as along as they are a LEO. Then they have to get rid of it- sell to another officer, melt it down or sell it to a FFL.

Sucks really.

CRC

exatcly Its like Renting the gun As long there still a LEO they can posses it.

Its more like living in a state that allows it, the when you move (quit LE) into california you have to get rid of it.

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:43:02 PM EDT

[#15]

Wow, I even rated my own personal message from jrzy:

"Bet you wouldn't call me a fucktard to my face jerkoff.
POS like you are always so fucking brave behind a screen of a computer.
Do it on the board again and I'll make sure you ger booted."

I guess I should be afraid of the fucktard, eh?

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:46:36 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
They can buy it BUT they have to get department approval from their chief.

This isn't automatic weapons where only DEPARTMENTS can buy or obtain.

Any LEO that does the paperwork, gets permission and is allowed by the law can buy one.

BUT THEY DO NOT PERMANENTLY OWN IT.

It's theirs for use on the job for as along as they are a LEO. Then they have to get rid of it- sell to another officer, melt it down or sell it to a FFL.

Sucks really.

CRC

exatcly Its like Renting the gun As long there still a LEO they can posses it.
(O9) May law enforcement officers keep their semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices when they retire or leave their employment with a law enforcement agency?

No. They may not lawfully keep semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices that they purchased or acquired as their own property. However, the law provides an exception for items that belong to a law enforcement agency and are transferred by the agency to an officer upon the officer’s retirement from, or termination of his or her employment with, the agency. Neither this exception nor the exception for official use permits officers to retain their own weapons or feeding devices after retiring or leaving the agency or to acquire additional items. Officers who retire or leave their employment with a law enforcement agency should transfer assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices that are their own property to a Federal firearms licensee or another qualified officer. [18 U.S.C. 922(v)(4), (w)(3)]

You realize you just made OUR point, right? Thanks!

We all understand that as of now we can not keep those weapons if we leave LE. OWNERSHIP is conditional but it is still OWNERSHIP.

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:48:24 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
O9) May law enforcement officers keep their semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices when they retire or leave their employment with a law enforcement agency?

No. They may not lawfully keep semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices that they purchased or acquired as their own property. However, the law provides an exception for items that belong to a law enforcement agency and are transferred by the agency to an officer upon the officer’s retirement from, or termination of his or her employment with, the agency. Neither this exception nor the exception for official use permits officers to retain their own weapons or feeding devices after retiring or leaving the agency or to acquire additional items. Officers who retire or leave their employment with a law enforcement agency should transfer assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices that are their own property to a Federal firearms licensee or another qualified officer. [18 U.S.C. 922(v)(4), (w)(3)]

The red shows that this is saying what they have to do when they quit being LEO's.

The blue shows that they can buy and posess them, as this deals with what they do with such when they cease to be LEO's.

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:48:42 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
Wow, I even rated my own personal message from jrzy:

"Bet you wouldn't call me a fucktard to my face jerkoff.
POS like you are always so fucking brave behind a screen of a computer.
Do it on the board again and I'll make sure you ger booted."

I guess I should be afraid of the fucktard, eh?

No problem sparky, it's your account after all.

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:49:15 PM EDT

[#19]

Jrzy, Bro, this is getting sad...

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:53:37 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Jrzy, Bro, this is getting sad...

Why because one of your brother officers justs keeps violating the COC?
Part of my reasons for this thread was some LEO's don't know they have to follow the rules just as we do.
You don't think I had to bite my lip when he called me an ignorant fucktard in clear viloation of the COC?

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:55:26 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Jrzy, Bro, this is getting sad...

Why because one of your brother officers justs keeps violating the COC?
Part of my reasons for this thread was some LEO's don't know they have to follow the rules just as we do.
You don't think I had to bite my lip when he called me an ignorant fucktard in clear viloation of the COC?

Yet the reasons you list are false. When it comes to the law in this case you are ignorant.

Posted: 8/15/2004 6:57:00 PM EDT

[#22]

(O9) May law enforcement officers keep their semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices when they retire or leave their employment with a law enforcement agency?

No. They may not lawfully keep semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices that they purchased or acquired as their own property. However, the law provides an exception for items that belong to a law enforcement agency and are transferred by the agency to an officer upon the officer’s retirement from, or termination of his or her employment with, the agency. Neither this exception nor the exception for official use permits officers to retain their own weapons or feeding devices after retiring or leaving the agency or to acquire additional items. Officers who retire or leave their employment with a law enforcement agency should transfer assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices that are their own property to a Federal firearms licensee or another qualified officer. [18 U.S.C. 922(v)(4), (w)(3)]

It appears as thgough an LEO can order the rifle in his name as long as he meets the BATF mandates.
It also appears "ownership" sketchy at best.
I will get a clarifacation and I''l do it in such a way as to not cause as ripple effects.
My goal is not to cause anyone any harm even if I was totally right.

Posted: 8/15/2004 7:03:02 PM EDT

[#23]

Guys, give it up. This is at least the second thread that jrzy has started on this subject and this one is going down the same sad road that the first one did. The bottom line is that you are not going to be able to convince him of the truth. He either has some psychotic hatred of law enforcement officers that renders him unable to listen to reason, or he suffers from a cognitive dysfunction that makes it impossible for him to logically process information. Either way, you are not going to get through to him.

Posted: 8/15/2004 7:18:28 PM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Jrzy, Bro, this is getting sad...

Why because one of your brother officers justs keeps violating the COC?
Part of my reasons for this thread was some LEO's don't know they have to follow the rules just as we do.
You don't think I had to bite my lip when he called me an ignorant fucktard in clear viloation of the COC?

No, you know I do not condone any of that crap, although I will at times call stupid as I see it.

What I think is sad is how badly you want to be right so you can demonstrate that the LEOs you hate so much are in fact felons themselves... Even in the face of all of the documentation you have been shown you refused to let it go. To me that is desperate and yes, sad.

Posted: 8/15/2004 7:35:24 PM EDT

[#25]

Sorry, but I took an oath to tell the truth, even if it violates the COC of this board

. I expect that tomorrow jrzy will post that he spoke with an FBI agent on the 'phone who told him that my use of that term on an internet board was a 'hate crime', and that everyone who posted here can expect to be subpoened into federal court as a witness for my trial.

Posted: 8/16/2004 2:00:30 PM EDT

[#26]

I await todays update

Posted: 8/16/2004 2:08:01 PM EDT

[#27]

IM sent to Sparky. The rest of you be advised that I will deal with those who violate CoC in this thread from here on.
Comprende?

Posted: 8/16/2004 2:27:13 PM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
IM sent to Sparky. The rest of you be advised that I will deal with those who violate CoC in this thread from here on.
Comprende?

Who else has?

I too wait to see if many of my peers are felons... NOT!

Posted: 8/16/2004 2:52:40 PM EDT

[#29]

fueling the fire

Posted: 8/16/2004 3:02:56 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
Quoted:
IM sent to Sparky. The rest of you be advised that I will deal with those who violate CoC in this thread from here on.
Comprende?

Who else has?

I too wait to see if many of my peers are felons... NOT!

What are you talking about?

Relax and enjoy the show.

Nobody gets "shot" around here unless they do it to themselves.

Posted: 8/16/2004 3:28:40 PM EDT

[#31]

crickets in NJ........

Posted: 8/16/2004 3:43:49 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
Quoted:
IM sent to Sparky. The rest of you be advised that I will deal with those who violate CoC in this thread from here on.
Comprende?

Who else has?

I too wait to see if many of my peers are felons... NOT!

As I said last night, The BATF repeated what they already told me and said if I want an answer in writing I must submit a request for clarification in writing.
I don't know how long it takes to get an answer but I am sending it out tonight via US mail.

Posted: 8/16/2004 3:47:01 PM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
crickets in NJ........

No, real life, I'm building a new house in Pa. and I wasn't here.
Sorry if that didn't fit in with your tight schedule.

Posted: 8/16/2004 7:15:25 PM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
IM sent to Sparky. The rest of you be advised that I will deal with those who violate CoC in this thread from here on.
Comprende?

Who else has?

I too wait to see if many of my peers are felons... NOT!

As I said last night, The BATF repeated what they already told me and said if I want an answer in writing I must submit a request for clarification in writing.
I don't know how long it takes to get an answer but I am sending it out tonight via US mail.

So after everything you have seen you still think you and your guy are right?

Tell you what I'll talf to MY guyS tomorrow if I get a minute...

Would you take my word for it?

Posted: 8/16/2004 7:59:22 PM EDT

[#35]

Hell, I missed the letters cruizer posted.

I guess that is pretty conclusive, eh?

Posted: 8/16/2004 11:01:31 PM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:
Quoted:
You got us- in a single telephone conversation with a BATF agent you have single-handedly revealed that THOUSANDS of cops all over the country are actually felons just waiting to get arrested. Here's a tip for you: NEVER, EVER believe what BATF tells you over the telephone. From BATF's own website:

(O8) May law enforcement officers purchase and possess semiautomatic assault weapons and high capacity ammunition feeding devices? [Back]

Yes. The law provides exceptions for law enforcement officers purchasing assault weapons and magazines for official use. However, assault weapons may not be lawfully distributed to, or received or possessed by, an officer having been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence. A licensee may lawfully transfer these items to a law enforcement officer and the officer may lawfully receive and possess them if:

(1) the officer is a "peace officer" having the authority to arrest persons for violations of the law and to obtain and execute search warrants;
(2) the officer is employed by a government agency; and
(3) in the case of a semiautomatic assault weapon, the officer has not been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.

The officer must simply get a letter from his agency saying he/she is a LEO, authorized to purchase the SAW/hi-cap mags for duty use, and has no domestic violence convictions/is not the subject of a restraining order. The officer may then purchase, with his/her own funds, the restricted item. The restricted item(s) are THEIR PROPERTY, not property of their agency. There are currently restrictions on keeping them when the officer retires or leaves law enforcement, but those will go away when the ban dies.

You got bad information from an agent who did NOT know the law. Happens all the time.

Take the chip off your shoulder, it's starting to affect your mind.

for official use

OK - i have powers of arrest anywhere in the state, 24/7. so... I'm alway ready to use an AW in an official capacity.

problem solved.

I had to buy my own sidearm. my Glock 21 was purchased on letterhead. if I leave I have to sell the mags and keep the pistol.

If I have an AW and I quit, I have to sell or transfer the rifle to someone else who can own it.

there are e-mails all the time about LE only weapons being sold from person to person in the dept... colt 9mm AR for 650 the other day. I should have grabbed it.

Posted: 8/17/2004 7:39:13 AM EDT

[#37]

I just wanted to post a relevant discussion regarding this thread from another thread...

Apparently Jrzy thinks cruizer's letter is bogus or he is mentally blocking it out or something. Hell if I know.

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

No, it is SCOTUS approved national standard that a SW is not required for a search of any conveyance that is mobile when that standard has been met.

post it.

Quoted:
"Hey, how 'bout that LEO/AW discussion? "

We are waiting for the written response from the BATF.

WE ARE NOT WAITING ON ANYTHING. A WRITTEN BATF RESPONSE HAS BEEN POSTED FOR PETE'S SAKE!!!! DID YOU SEE IT???!!!

Page 4, scroll down just a tad and READ!

BATF response in black and white.

GOD GRANT ME A LITTLE PATIENCE TODAY!

Here's the addy I sent the formal request to , I think some people are getting a little nervous LOL

ATF
Att. Firearms Technology Branch
244 needy road
Martinsburg, West Virgina
25401

Nervous? No.

Frustrated? Hell yes. I am absolutly amazed at your insistance on this issue. Did you not see who the letter cruizer posted was from? I guess you feel that is a fabrication?

You want so badly to be right, to be able to point your finger at the Po Po, that you are blind to what is right in your face and it is fucking sad, my friend. S A D . Sad that knocking someone else down is that important to you. S A D .

Oh, here is the SCOTUS cite you wanted me to post:

The Carroll Doctrine, or "SCOTUS on vehicle searches," in black and white...

Enjoy, Jrzy.

Posted: 8/22/2004 6:23:29 PM EDT

[#38]

Don't forget us! We await "The Letter."

Posted: 9/8/2004 9:02:39 PM EDT

[#39]

Get that letter? Waiting to see if some of my boys need bail money!

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Personal LEO ownership of LEO marked "assault weapon"? (Page 2 of 2)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us