Target Sports

He sold illegal AR-15s. Feds agreed to let him go free to avoid hurting gun control

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Gulf Coast States

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • FrommerStop

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Joined
    Apr 7, 2016
    Messages
    6,897
    Points
    113
    Location
    NWFL

    I lost my patience with the article. One from a more analytical source would be useful. So I did not finish it. Likely a more reliable and direct article will show somewhere else.

    It starts out with:
    is customers, more than two dozen of whom were legally prohibited from possessing a firearm, could push a button, pull a lever, and walk away a short time later with a fully assembled, untraceable semi-automatic weapon for about $1,000, according to court records.
    That makes it sound like they were using his equipment to machine an 80% lower. It is sort of a clip bait article and I suspect there is better elsewhere, after all it is CNN.
     

    DFSgunner

    Marksman
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Joined
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages
    773
    Points
    28
    Location
    NW FL
    It's a fairly long article but worth the read in my opinion. The main takeaway is that AR15 lower receivers don't really meet the definition of a firearm receiver or frame per ATFs definition of a firearm frame or receiver. The ruling in the case would've set case law in favor of an AR15 lower not really being a firearm receiver or frame. Most of the pertinent info is towards the bottom of the article.
     

    MarkS

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Joined
    Sep 26, 2013
    Messages
    3,280
    Points
    113
    Location
    Baker,Fl.
    Don’t usually have any use for the Commie News Network either.

    So if the Judges decision had been handed down then AR15 lower receivers would have no longer have been considered firearms under the existing law.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     

    DFSgunner

    Marksman
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Joined
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages
    773
    Points
    28
    Location
    NW FL
    Don’t usually have any use for the Commie News Network either.

    So if the Judges decision had been handed down then AR15 lower receivers would have no longer have been considered firearms under the existing law.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    They way I read it was, it would've basically paved the way for the topic to be open for discussion for other folks in a similar situation. So basically they gave the guy a deal so the judges ruling didn't get mass publicity and didn't go down as case law so it could be referenced in a future case
     

    Ric-san

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Joined
    Sep 29, 2012
    Messages
    2,866
    Points
    113
    Location
    Milton FL
    Well worth the read...even though it’s from CNN. This article points out the loopholes in the ATF’s logic of taking a law and then interpreting their own view of it and shoving it down our throats.
     

    FrommerStop

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Joined
    Apr 7, 2016
    Messages
    6,897
    Points
    113
    Location
    NWFL
    From a discussion elsewhere
    I read it yesterday or day before.

    What I think I remember reading was that the judge made a ruling/statement that scared the ATF/prosecutors concerning a motion from the defense attorney.

    The definition, on the books, of a receiver is the piece/part that holds the firing mechanism, bolt and is threaded for screwing a barrel into it. The part that makes it possible for all the other parts to attach and make a weapon capable of firing a cartridge.

    The AR15 lower doesn't fit that definition. No place for the bolt or the barrel to attach. So, by the legal definition, the AR15 lower is not a receiver. Neither is the AR15 upper receiver.

    Therefore, in the opinion of the defense lawyer, the ATF was incorrectly interpreting the law when they arrested his client. The judge originally disagreed with the defense attorney but after further consideration he let the ATF know that he did agree that they had been using their power/authority to misinterpret the law to their advantage and using it to arrest/prosecute people.

    That (supposedly) scared the ATF because they were afraid if the case went to trial the judge's ruling would begin to affect any future cases and have an unknown effect on previous cases.

    So the ATF dropped the charges on the guy to keep from getting dumped on in other courts when this trial resulted in case law/examples that would twist their heads into knots.

    But, the info is out there now. Someone finally noticed it, brought it up, publicized it and sooner or later it will be used in court.
    My practical thoughts
    Looks like I should stock up on AR uppers lol. Currently there is no requirement that the uppers bear a serial number and so effectively all of the legal requirements relative to possession, manufacture, and what goes on the 4473 relative to the sale may not stand up in court. Perhaps many of those in prison convicted on federal charges relative to AR lowers could appeal the convictions.
     

    FrankT

    6.8 SPCII Hog Slayer
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Joined
    Sep 26, 2012
    Messages
    17,360
    Points
    113
    Location
    Crestview/Hwy 90E/Shoal River
    Right, currently there should be no reason to 4473 a lower as the judge ruled it is not a weapon/receiver. so unless the definition is changed the 4473 of a lower is not required. What they will do is make the upper and lower subject to 4473 and change the definition. it is all a scam
     

    FrommerStop

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Joined
    Apr 7, 2016
    Messages
    6,897
    Points
    113
    Location
    NWFL
    Right, currently there should be no reason to 4473 a lower as the judge ruled it is not a weapon/receiver. so unless the definition is changed the 4473 of a lower is not required. What they will do is make the upper and lower subject to 4473 and change the definition. it is all a scam

    The ATF has not made any changes yet so all goes on as before.
     
    Top Bottom