Quoted:

Here's the bottom line: A man was just tried on felony charges for possession of what every single member of this forum would identify as a legal pistol. That's a fact, and there's no getting around it.

I think what most people worry about is an ignorant game warden or traffic stop by officer not-friendly. Nobody thinks the ATF is creeping around the range. Regardless, there's no legal basis to say "if you're not committing other crimes, the ATF won't prosecute you." True, it has been the ATF's past pattern, but "Hey, I wasn't doing anything else illegal," isn't a  defense to NFA violations.

Look at the defendant's expert report from the trial to see the "rifle" in question.

Quoted:

My GGF died in in '56-57 so I had very short time with him. We spoke of many things gun related, we even hunted together a few times. He certainly wasn't wanting to ban everything. The transcripts I posed a snip of were not from online but original copies from my GGF's library. I guess I could have saved myself some typing if they are online. So then read them and learn something Mike. In any case you simply want to believe what you wish and I have no more time for you.

My sig line is in reference to people like you.

Quoted:
"Mike" huh? If you're trying to AROCK, you need to work on your arock-ing skills. I mean, modern technology is tough for old timers, I get it, but let's just say your sig line applies just as much to you as it might to anyone else gramps. Except we might add that in addition to just plain ignorance, an ignorant man who is convinced that he isn't ignorant is worse than one who doesn't know the difference. But thanks for playing.

To reiterate for the peanut gallery, the NFA included SBRs and SBSs because they were initially attempting to ban handguns, much like Michigan did in 1931, and didn't want people to just be able to legally cut down long guns to be de facto handguns.

Quoted:

Save your breath.  We're talking about a guy who thinks nothing on Wikipedia is true because if there was a Wikipedia article about Harry Potter it would say it was a true story (there is and it doesn't).

Yet anything the government says about why they passed new legislation is the gospel truth.

Quoted:
It's worth making this point again: in the case brought up by the OP, it was local cops who arrested the guy at home. In addition to the SBR federal charges, the cops included the (later dropped) charge of "making an unregistered firearm". That was not a crime in Ohio (but of course an unregistered SBR is). The cops thought it was illegal to manufacture a firearm at home.

Local police don't know the law on this issue. They didn't believe (at the time of the arrest) that there really was such a thing as a braced pistol. It was "obviously" a stock (and of course the short barrel was "meant" to go on his regular AR rifle). Remember that Wright's AR pistol receiver didn't arrive at Dan's Gunstore until the day after the arrest (he had ordered it several weeks before).

I've had this friendly debate with local sheriff's that I'm friends with (including one who was an E-7 when I worked for DoD), AND these guys are firearms enthusiasts. Their words to me: "G., you can't own a firearm that doesn't have a serial number!"

I've shown them the Federal statute. They acknowledge it. Their comment was they would arrest anyone with a firearm (of any type) that didn't have a serial number.

My point is that all of us here in this forum are at potential risk for arrest for possession of legal firearms by local LEOs who don't know the law. I put my own (random) serial numbers on builds just for that reason. I now keep all of my firearms locked in cases on the way to and from the range.
I don't mean to sound paranoid, but I can't afford the cost of a good legal defense for a case like this, AND I'm not giving up the guns I enjoy.

We can bitch all we want, but the rain keeps falling. Get an umbrella.

P.S. I tried to look up this case on Westlaw. Parts of it are sealed (and not the evidence stuff that the ATF tried to hide). It appears the court was sympathetic to Wright's privacy.

Quoted:
No your just a young ass who has no notion of history. This is not just me talking about things only told to me but reading the words themselves from my GGF's library. Do you think these matters are not recorded?  I have the full transcripts of the hearings. They are also available from the US government printing office if you wish to learn the truth instead of passing on BS that you hear off the internet. Here's a very brief sample that as I have highlighted discusses, briefly, sawed off shotguns.

The bottom line is that no one, not even my GGF, expected the criminals to comply. In agreeing that the criminals would not obey the law, he argued that the bill was designed to make it easy to convict criminals for their noncompliance with the tax code  if a suspect has a machine gun and no paperwork, they could be prosecuted. He cited the arrest, prosecution, and conviction of Al Capone as an example of a known, violent, and slippery criminal who was apprehended because of the income-tax law that he violated. The goal, and his logic, was that this new tax law would similarly help law enforcement apprehend the John Dillingers of the time for violating the tax code rather than any of their violent criminal activity. That IS directly from my GGF's own words.

Quoted:

So, you have a relative that argued in favor of limiting the 2a to make arresting criminals easier?  Wow.

Quoted:

You don't get to choose family.

Quoted:

Ya, you do.  At least once you become an adult.

Quoted:

So when you grow up who will you choose for your Grand parents?

Quoted:
https://i.ibb.co/XCSbSjd/1.jpg
https://i.ibb.co/GtBRTkN/2.jpg