Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 9/18/2003 4:08:47 PM EDT
Perhaps someone can tell me why I've seen so many posts about people building "full featured" ARs after the AWB sunsets and it becomes legal again to do so and then hatching elaborate plans to "prove" they built them when they did??

Some involve bringing them into local police departments, getting photographs notarized, mailing photos, etc.... I was under the impression one was innocent until proven guilty in this country? Isn't the burden of proof on the batfe?

Any thoughts?

Scot

Oh, and will the batfe (when did they get explosives anyway?) get upset I did not capitalize their acronym?
Link Posted: 9/18/2003 5:40:32 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/18/2003 5:50:15 PM EDT by glockdog]
Well 1st off I don't think anyone should exactly be buying parts in advance or anything. The BATF hasn't made any statements about if it will be legal to configure a post 1994 AR with the same features as a pre 1994, to the best of my knowledge. The idea behind getting proof is that if they ever have another ban then your post 94 will be certifed as being configured with "features" before the ban (2nd one) because it's already a given that they left the factory without them; if they say it's OK to due so in the first place. Now as far innocent untill proven guilty, it is acutualy "Presumed innocent untill proven guilty" BIG difference. The burden of proof lies with you the BATF has put this in writing and I'm sure someone will post a good link for you. Also back to the proving it subject, everyone who owns a Pre-ban AR configured with "featues" is also "technically" required to be able to prove that it was configured that way before the ban start date, so there again the reason behind documenting a post 94 with "features" before the start of another ban. Edit: for being a dumb ass who can't spell or write what he's thinking Glockdog Airborne!!
Link Posted: 9/18/2003 6:43:48 PM EDT
Check this out [url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=170331[/url] Glockdog Airborne!!
Link Posted: 9/18/2003 6:51:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/18/2003 7:11:11 PM EDT by Shal1]
Glockdog, Please know I'm not in anyway reflecting on what you said personally, but all this seems like a massive load of crap. Having to PROVE YOU DID NOT COMMIT A CRIME (be it jaywalking, murder, or assembling a preban featured AR-15 from a pre-sept 94 receiver) is flat out unconstitutional, even if the BATFE says otherwise. No, I do not want to hire lawyers to prove it, but it's still how our country was founded. I also feel certain the ACLU will never loan me it's lawyers either, because they only want us to have the "liberties" they subscribe to. Regardless, before a judge or jury decides otherwise, presumed innocent and innocent are the same thing! I'm quite sure this has been hashed out a thousand times here in the past, but to my way of thinking, simply put: unless a new law is passed prior to the AWB expiring, once it does sunset, there will be no pre or post ban because that law has ceased to exist. Sept 1994 will mean nothing. I would bet if a new AWB is passed and it is retroactive, it will not be retroactive to 1994, but will ban all so called "assault weapons" regardless of manufacture date. You are delusional if you think your pre 1994 AR will be safe from possible future AWBs. When the ban sunsets (and assuming it is not immediately replaced), my 2004 full featured AR will be in the same boat as your 1993 AR when it comes to future ridiculous legislation. Scot Edited to add - sorry I'm so worked up, I've read these posts for a while but never jumped in on one. When the ban expires, I plan to convert a couple ARs to full featured status (note I did not say preban!). I will do this legally and do not feel the need for proof as I know I will not have committed a crime. I trust the system, or at least the principals our country was founded on. Perhaps I am the delusional one!
Link Posted: 9/18/2003 8:08:45 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Shal1: I was under the impression one was innocent until proven guilty in this country? Isn't the burden of proof on the batfe? Any thoughts? Scot
View Quote
I assume you don't pay/know about taxes either. the 3 letter organizations can pretty much do whatever the fuck they want. IRS has had the burden of proof on the citizen for an audit for the "convenience" of the people. Government can and will do whatever it pleases until enough people fight back.
Link Posted: 9/18/2003 8:27:33 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/18/2003 8:28:11 PM EDT by kc3]
As the 1994 Crime Bill is written, "assault weapons" are illegal, all of them, regardless of when they were built. The code, however, allows for an exemption that can provide an affirmative defense against such a criminal charge: that the rifle was an "assault weapon" prior to Sept. 1994. Because of the way the statute is worded, it would be up to the defendant to prove the validity of this affirmative defense. As for the strategy involved with the Crime BIll sunsetting, beats me. I would assume that if Congress wants to perpetuate the Crime Bill, they will just strike the paragraph requiring the sunset from 922(v), which would make it as though there was never any sunset period.
Link Posted: 9/18/2003 8:39:59 PM EDT
I curious if anyone has knowledge of how many people have been prosocuted for violating the Ban by having an illegal AW.
Link Posted: 9/19/2003 2:05:37 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Shal1: Glockdog, Please know I'm not in anyway reflecting on what you said personally, but all this seems like a massive load of crap. Having to PROVE YOU DID NOT COMMIT A CRIME (be it jaywalking, murder, or assembling a preban featured AR-15 from a pre-sept 94 receiver) is flat out unconstitutional, even if the BATFE says otherwise. No, I do not want to hire lawyers to prove it, but it's still how our country was founded. I also feel certain the ACLU will never loan me it's lawyers either, because they only want us to have the "liberties" they subscribe to. Regardless, before a judge or jury decides otherwise, presumed innocent and innocent are the same thing! I'm quite sure this has been hashed out a thousand times here in the past, but to my way of thinking, simply put: unless a new law is passed prior to the AWB expiring, once it does sunset, there will be no pre or post ban because that law has ceased to exist. Sept 1994 will mean nothing. I would bet if a new AWB is passed and it is retroactive, it will not be retroactive to 1994, but will ban all so called "assault weapons" regardless of manufacture date. You are delusional if you think your pre 1994 AR will be safe from possible future AWBs. When the ban sunsets (and assuming it is not immediately replaced), my 2004 full featured AR will be in the same boat as your 1993 AR when it comes to future ridiculous legislation. Scot Edited to add - sorry I'm so worked up, I've read these posts for a while but never jumped in on one. When the ban expires, I plan to convert a couple ARs to full featured status (note I did not say preban!). I will do this legally and do not feel the need for proof as I know I will not have committed a crime. I trust the system, or at least the principals our country was founded on. Perhaps I am the delusional one!
View Quote
Shal, I don't like it either. I don't support what I stated and pray someone will prove me wrong but I fear what I've learned and stated here to be true. Glockdog Airborne!!
Link Posted: 9/19/2003 2:38:58 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/19/2003 4:49:25 PM EDT
Troy, Your point is perfectly valid now, and shall remain so for one more year... the need for proof of your ARs "grandfathered status". My point is, when the current ban expires (and hopefully is not replaced), there will be no "grandfathered" weapons, and no burden of proof needed. At this time, people will be fabricating evidence (essentially alibis) to combat prosecution of a future crime they did not commit, of a future law that does not exist. Doesn't this seem ridiculous? Scot
Link Posted: 9/19/2003 5:36:23 PM EDT
Top Top