Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Your government has betrayed you! Drill instructor convicted after rifle jams. World Net Daily

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=59650

    A drill instructor in the National Guard has been convicted in a Wisconsin federal court of illegally transferring a machine gun after a rifle he loaned to a student malfunctioned, setting off three shots before jamming.
    The verdict of guilty on one count in the case against David Olofson was confirmed yesterday by the http://www.wied.uscourts.gov/generalinfo.htm]clerk's office in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.[/url]
    That means now that anyone whose weapon malfunctions is subject to charges of having or handling a banned gun, according to an expert witness who reports that the particular problem is a well-known malfunction and was even the subject of a recall from the manufacturer.
    (Story continues below) adsonar_placementId=1270202;adsonar_pid=663759;ads onar_ps=1451068;adsonar_zw=300;adsonar_zh=250;adso nar_jv="ads.adsonar.com";
    "If your semiautomatic rifle breaks or malfunctions you are now subject to prosecution. That is now a sad FACT. I guess we know now what Sen. Kennedy meant when he said he looked forward to working with [Acting Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Director] Mike Sullivan on Gun control issues, after his committee approved him for full Senate vote," Len Savage, a weaponry expert who runs Historic Arms LLC, said in a blog.
    "To those in the sporting culture who have derided 'black guns' and so-called 'assault weapons'; Your double barreled shotgun is now next up to be seized and you could possibly be prosecuted if the ATF can get it to 'fire more than once,'" he wrote in http://redstradingpost.blogspot.com/2008/01/len-savage-duck-hunters-and-sportsman.html]a blog run by Red's Trading Post.[/url]

    "Hey, but don't worry," Savage said. "The people testing it have no procedures in writing and the testing will be in secret. Also if you know of information that proves YOUR innocence, maybe the ATF won't claim that it's tax information at your trial and prevent YOUR judge from viewing it."
    He told an http://www.jpfo.org/media-sound/len-savage-01-10-08.mp3]interview with Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership[/url] that Olofson had been instructing a man in the use of guns, and the student asked to borrow a rifle for some shooting practice.
    "Mr. Olofson was nice enough to accommodate him," Savage said. So the student, Robert Kiernicki, went to a range and fired about 120 rounds. "He went to put in another magazine and the rifle shot three times, then jammed," Savage said.
    A couple of police officers who also were at the ranged immediately approached him and started asking questions about the "automatic" fire, and he told them it was a borrowed weapon.
    "Mr. Olofson, being a responsible person, went down to the police station and said, 'I'm in the National Guard. I know what a machine gun looks like. That's not it,'" Savage said.
    But instead of having the issues resolve, Savage said, it got worse.
    He reported that because of the malfunction, the rifle was seized and sent to the Firearm Technology Branch, the testing arm of the federal agency.
    "The examined and test fired the rifle; then declared it to be 'just a rifle,'" Savage said. "You would think it would all be resolved at this point, this was merely the beginning."
    He said the Special Agent in Charge, Jody Keeku, asked for a re-test and specified that the tests use "soft primered commercial ammunition."
    "FTB has no standardized testing procedures, in fact it has no written procedures at all for testing firearms," Savage said. "They had no standard to stick to, and gleefully tried again. The results this time...'a machinegun.' ATF with a self-admitted 50 percent error rate pursued an indictment and Mr. Olofson was charged with 'Unlawful transfer of a machinegun.'. Not possession, not even Robert Kiernicki was charged with possession (who actually possessed the rifle), though the ATF paid Mr. Kiernicki 'an undisclosed amount of money' to testify against Mr. Olofson at trial," Savage said.
    And then during the trial, the prosecution told the judge it would not provide some information defense lawyers felt would clear their client, Savage continued. That included the fact that the rifle's manufacturer, Olympic Arms, had been issued a recall notice for that very model in 1986 over an issue of guns inadvertently slipping into full automatic mode, if certain parts were worn or if certain ammunition was used.
    Ryan Horsley, who posts the http://www.redstradingpost.com]Red's Trading Post[/url] blog, said the results were "very concerning."
    "Basically if your Ruger 10/22, Browning Citori Over and Under or Remington 11-87 malfunction and fire more than one round at a time; the ATF will now consider it a machine gun," he wrote.
    He told WND he's had personal experience with guns that malfunction and fire more than one bullet. Even double-barreled shotguns, if both shells would be released at once, now could be considered machine guns and illegal, he said.
    "This precedent is very dangerous," he said.
    Defense attorneys in the Olofson case couldn't be reached immediately to determine whether an appeal would be pursued, but Savage noted the arguments by assistant U.S. Attorney Greg Hannstad, who handled the prosecution.
    "Haanstad claimed the law does not exempt a malfunction. He claims that it states 'any weapon that shoots more than once without manual reloading, per function of the trigger is a machinegun.' To clarify when I was on the stand, I asked him, 'Are you saying if I take my Great Granddaddy's double barrel out and I pull one trigger and both barrels go off, it's a machinegun?' He went back to … 'any weapon that shoots…'" Savage said.
    On the Red's blog, commenters were incensed.
    "'Innocent until proven guilty' has been transformed by the AFT into 'guilty until framed,' said LibertyPlease.
    Horsley also told WND the 2008 edition of Firearms Law Deskbook quotes from a 1999 case in which the court concluded the law on automatic weapons "is not intended to trap the unwary innocent, and well intentioned citizen who possess an otherwise semi-automatic weapon that, by repeated use of the weapon, by the inevitable wear and tear of sporting activities, or by means of mere inattention, happenstance, or illfortune, fires more than semi-automatically."


  2. #2
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,964

    Post imported post

    Of course there is no standard. If there were an objective standard, then innovative people could develop new weapons that met the standard. Making it up as you go along is a much more effective tool for suppressing the rights of citizens.

    This sounds a lot like a slamfire malfunction. No details, so I am not sure.

    Boot the BATFE!!!
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  3. #3
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,737

    Post imported post

    This is the jury instruction that the judge gave.

    18 U.S.C. § 922(0)
    Definition of "Machine Gun"
    A machine gun is any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be
    readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by
    a single function of the trigger.

    This is what 18 USC 922(o) says.

    18 USC 922(o)
    (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful for any person to transfer or possess a machinegun. (2) This subsection does not apply with respect to— (A) a transfer to or by, or possession by or under the authority of, the United States or any department or agency thereof or a State, or a department, agency, or political subdivision thereof; or (B) any lawful transfer or lawful possession of a machinegun that was lawfully possessed before the date this subsection takes effect.

    18 USC 922(a)(4) and 18 USC 922(b)(4) both say machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986)

    The Internal revenue code defines machinegun as follows.

    26 USC 5845(b) Machinegun
    The term “machinegun” means any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, and any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.

    Sure does not look like the judge gave the definition of machinegun. Does 18 USC 922(o) define machinegun? No. Did the judge give the actual and complete definition of machinegun? No.

    This Judge is a con man. He should be removed from the bench. Oh, I forgot, federal judges are appointed for life.




  4. #4
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915

    Post imported post

    Have a malfunctioning double shotgun and you're just a machinegun toter ready to happen. Kerist, I had a double from the SKS today! ... Thankfully I'm stealing bandwith from the neighbor's wireless router, sucks to be him when the ATF comes callling.

    If some one makes the grave mistake of loading ammunition with pointy-style bullets into pappy's old thutty-thutty and the recoil sets off all the cartridges in the magazine - - - is the tubular magazine similar enough to a non-rifled "barrel" that he's now got a worthless lever action MG?

    I've heard heresay evidence that the ATF has no objections to using soft primers (as in article), holding parts of firearms with one hand while manipulating the trigger with the other, or holding the firearm in unconventional ways with unusual streses upon it in order to induce to perform in a manner it would otherwise not. (Is it a misfire when it doesn't miss- but shoots twice instead?)

    If I had been on that jury, I would have been Highly in favor of a little jury nullification, no matter what the judges "instructions" had been. I'm the juror, he has no right nor authority to tell me how to vote.



  5. #5
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,964

    Post imported post

    Fallschirmjäger wrote:
    If I had been on that jury, I would have been Highly in favor of a little jury nullification, no matter what the judges "instructions" had been. I'm the juror, he has no right nor authority to tell me how to vote.

    That is the premise of FIJA - Fully Informed Jury Association.

    If a law is written in such a complex manner that I cannot understand it, then I cannot convict another citizen. I don't care what instructions the judge gives.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  6. #6
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915

    Post imported post

    I'm Fully behind the FIJA.


    My mother, who is of an age that she can request not to serve on a jury, was called to duty. She wanted to request to be excused from it due to age, but I convinced her to show up and see what the attorney's would say about FIJA. We 'rehearsed' what she'd say so that she wouldn't stumble and would at the same time put out a little information.

    I can't remember exactly what we decided but it was something like " I appreciate the honor of being called and I'm so exited that I even joined the Fully Informed Jury Association so that I'd be fully informed of my duties as a juror" well, close to that at least.

    That was the only question she was asked besides her name and then she was dropped by perempory(?) challange.


  7. #7
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Alabama, USA
    Posts
    935

    Post imported post

    Fallschirmjäger wrote:
    I'm Fully behind the FIJA.
    +1

    ?"Parachutehunter"?.....my German not so gut :?....I know we disagree on some things but this isn't one of them.
    I find it reprehensible what our system has become....there was a time when judges told juries of their right to nullify instead of declairing a mis-trial if a defense attorney mentioned nullification in his closing.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post


  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Henderson, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    333

    Post imported post

    I'd be careful how quick you are to defend this guy. Supposedly, he installed an M16 FA selector, M16 bolt and carrier, filed on the bolt, etc. Whether he had an auto-sear in or not, there were enough "wanna be NFA" things done to show intent to the jury.

    I'm totally opposed to '68, etc anyway... but if I were planning on trying to convert some of my weapons, I'm pretty sure I'd not be loaning them out.

    Of course, I wouldn't put it past the F troop to trump this all up and swap parts themselves, but...

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    The article wrote:
    "Mr. Olofson, being a responsible person, went down to the police station and said, 'I'm in the National Guard. I know what a machine gun looks like. That's not it,'" Savage said.
    But instead of having the issues resolve, Savage said, it got worse.
    He reported that because of the malfunction, the rifle was seized and sent to the Firearm Technology Branch, the testing arm of the federal agency.
    Here's my question: would this case have happened the same way if Mr. Olofson had not gone down to the police station? Could this be one of those cases where it's not a good idea to cooperate with LEOs beyond what is legally necessary?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •