What a federal agent did during a testing procedure to result in "automatic" fire from an AR-15 has no bearing on the case of a man convicted of transferring a "machinegun" after he loaned to a prospective buyer the gun he considered a semi-automatic rifle, according to a ruling from a panel of appellate judges. [More]Bob Unruh and WorldNetDaily flesh out the story I talked about here.
Thing is, at this writing, WND is the only other news outlet talking about this. And most"gun-bloggers" aren't giving this any attention either.
Maybe I don't have a very good sense of what is newsworthy.
14 comments:
So that's it, then. Nothing left but Unintended Consequences.
It's newsworthy.
So, it's open season on us, and how long will we be hunted, until we decide to do the hunting? Whatever they do is fine, and whatever we do is wrong. We are bad, and they are good. Anything can happen, and just like in "Aliens", afterwards, they just make up any story they like.
You've got great news sense,bro.
It's just that what everyone else "feels" is "newsworthy" just makes no damn sense.
CIII
It seems to me that I read a scanned copy of the handwritten statement of the person who borrowed the firearm in question. In that statement was a reference to Olofson stating the selector switch had a "third" position but to not ever put the switch in that position, reason stated I don't remember. That would indicate to me that Olofson had in his possession an arm perhaps capable of full auto fire and the statement certainly casts some doubt in my mind as to the merits of his case from the beginning. However, since I am not in possession of all the facts of the case, especially those that may be extant to counter the description of the "third" position of the selector switch, I can only defer to those who are versed in all the facts. I have not yet read anything concerning the truthfulness of the statement that I read. It was some months ago but I believe it was linked from the War On Guns blog or maybe one of the GRE's, but I'm not sure about that either. In my mind it is not so clear about Olofson's complete innocence as it is in the minds of others. Personally I think it's a crock of duck butter that a US citizen can be treated the way Olofson has been treated, especially some of the rulings in the last appeal, and I would certainly support the repeal of the NFA of 1934, GCA of 1968, and the fortuitious unexplained diappearances of many of our "friends" in Congress and elsewhere. I'm not defending the Government in this case, which I believe is indefensible, but only asking the question about the truthfulness of the statement I read and how that relates to the case.
If I recall, Olofson had claimed that putting the selector in the third position would cause it to jam. Which, apparently, it did. So, if that's true, maybe he knew something.
In my mind, without reading all the court documents, it's entirely possible that Olofson was in violation of some unconstitional statute. I wish there was a way -- through the system -- to fight the NFA and subsequent human rights violations by our government. But with near universal aversion to even touching the issue by politicians currently in office, it's a non-starter.
Nancy "King George" Pelosi has declared the preeminence of her and her peers. Now this court has confronted us on the Lexington Green. I have to wonder what's next in this unfolding story.
Remember when Desert Eagles in the .50 cal. were a little over sized? Well ATF told Desert Eagle to stop or to file the correct paperwork under NFA to classify these over sized .50's as "destruction devices". Desert Eagle at once put out recalls and got the barrel size corrected.
This brings up a standard way ATF did business in the past. ATF did not go out an arrest anyone but corrected the situation. Being said, if someone has one of the old over sized .50's and ATF finds his out due to the gun's numbers. Should this person be arrested and sent to federal prison for years?
Note: if anyone has a Desert Eagle in the .50 cal and its can't hit the broad side of a barn. Better get it checked out, like real quick.
"In that statement was a reference to Olofson stating the selector switch had a "third" position but to not ever put the switch in that position."
How many FAL's have a third position on the selector?
In older AR's and FAL's it is possible to put the selector in the third position. Does that make them machineguns? NO! It creates a hammer follow malfunction. This just means the hammer follows the bolt into battery.
Results???
You fire one shot, have to eject a live round and rechamber another round of ammo. It makes it a single shot bolt action....
ATF had the same results when it was tested the first time....
Olofson was forbade by the court from doing an independent test or from even examining the evidence against him....not to mention his court qualified expert [ME] was was removed from the courtroom during ATF's testimony leaving his attorney [who never tried a gun case] to try and understand the technical testimony of ATF on his own.
Ask yourself this question:
What if this trial was about DNA sequencing? Your hired doctor or professor of DNA science was removed from the courtroom during the governments DNA testimony, and left your attorney to try and understand what he was talking about????
All nice and legal???
We shall see.....
Len Savage
Len, that was my point during my first post yesterday. What this makes is our court system a filthy stinking joke. That is because the defendant would need to hire two experts for his case. One expert would need to hear the government's own employee and take notes to pass on to the other expert witness. This is the only way to get around this current situation and it totally mocks justice. This ruling mocks justice by making the courtrooms in this country a game to see who can out play the other side. With truth and justice being the mat that everyone wipes their feet on when entering the courtroom.
The people in this country better read into this ruling and they better do it quick because we just lost about half of the United States Constitution.
I am beyond disgusted. I thought we had seen the low point of elected and anointed -- I mean appointed -- public officials, but they keep digging.
A local commonwealth's attorney (a prosecutor equivalent to a district attorney) has a 99.5 to 100 percent conviction rate. That is impossible without railroading innocent people. Otherwise EVERYONE who's ever been charged has been guilty. We know that's not true. It's THAT important to him. He'll destroy justice for his own ego. He's not the only one.
And IF there's a jury, are they so cowed and intimidated by these legal demigods that they can't try the laws as well as the defendants, as Americans are meant to?
It's about time to turn the cardtable over and not play the game anymore.
I once purchased new a Baretta .22 cal Short pistol that out of the box fired 2 rounds per trigger pull. I immediately returned it to my dealer for warranty repair. Does that place me in violation of this same law? Does this mean that Baretta manufactured a machine pistol without declaration of same according to the NFA? Did my dealer unknowingly transfer a machine gun to me?
It's not going to stop until they fear us. It is really that simple. Making them fear us is not something we are going to be able to do peacefully. The fix is in and they won't allow it to be done peacefully.
If voting made a difference it would be illegal (Claire Wolfe?)
Kurt made an impression on me this morning. And that is that we have had some successes recently in what we had come to think of as unlikely places. Perhaps the non-peaceful fear we can instill in these worst offenders might be accomplished if and when we can send armed men to arrest them. Men who serve as law enforcement but may eventually fall under legitimate supervision due to some of the advances we have gained and may be likely to gain.
It is more than I realistically hope for, but maybe. Would be a lot nicer for the nation if it could be done that way.
"In older AR's and FAL's it is possible to put the selector in the third position. Does that make them machineguns? NO! It creates a hammer follow malfunction. This just means the hammer follows the bolt into battery."
This certainly clears things up for me. Until I bought my Del-Ton Inc. "AR-15" last October I had no experience outside of qualifying on the M-16 in the USAF and never knew older AR's selector switches could be positioned that way. Thanks, and keep up the good work.
Post a Comment