• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Gun owner's conviction overturned

Cobra469

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2010
Messages
218
Location
West Allis, WI, , USA
imported post

http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/90900364.html

Alan Klebig hung dozens of squirrel tails and shiny CDs around his Watertown yard, monitored it with security cameras and kept containers of unlabeled caustic chemicals around his house.

He also had a couple of dozen guns, including a loaded shotgun he kept by the front door, which had a sign that read, "Nothing here is worth dying for."

But while he may have been considered eccentric, a federal appeals court has ruled that a prosecutor and trial judge let way too much character evidence affect the outcome of his trial, at which a jury convicted Klebig, 52, of knowingly possessing an unregistered rifle and silencer.

In an entertaining but critical opinion, the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently laid out how the prejudicial errors occurred, and why they reversed Klebig's conviction.

The gun at issue was an old .22-caliber rifle with a cut-off barrel and a broken stock. A man testified he had broken the stock hitting a raccoon over the head when hunting. "Apparently, the raccoon continued to climb out of a tree after (the witness) unloaded the clip into the raccoon," the ruling said. The man later sold the gun to Klebig's brother.

Klebig testified that he had inherited he gun from his father and thought it was a pistol. The barrel was 6 inches long.

The silencer was an oil filter that Klebig testified he was experimenting with as a flash suppressor on a shotgun, to help him kill raccoons at his mother's house. It was taped to another rifle when police investigating a neighbor dispute in 2005 found the weapons.





Hmmm.... Pay the $200 suppressor tax for an oil filter? Just curious if a flash suppressor would meet the criteria of a suppressor requiring such a tax stamp. Also Why this guy would care about suppressing a flash on a shotgun when shooting raccons. Is he scared of giving away his position to the rest of the coons? And if the oil filter was meant to be a silencer did he really think that it was going to make a difference?

Note the specific mention of his sign? Another good reason not to have such a bold sign when the crap hits the fan. They most definately wrote this in a manner that does nobody justice. Overturned for all the cheractor refrences and the media continues it. :banghead:
 

Spartacus

Banned
Joined
Dec 13, 2009
Messages
1,185
Location
La Crosse, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Those draconian laws from the '30s on rifle length and silencers gotta go!

So the guy was an eccentric. Since when did that become illegal?

I like the sign too. "Nothing Here is Worth Dying For". hahaha...
 

32HR MAG

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2008
Messages
141
Location
Fond du Lac, USA
imported post

Actually.The oil filter suppressor/silencer would work for at the very least a handful of rounds.A plastic 20 oz. soda bottle will keep a .22 rifle fairly quiet for 3 rounds.The first two no louder than an airgun.
On a shotgun I would think it would have to be a filter for a large engine.Like a semi-tractor diesel engine filter.Even then I would test it behind a secure wall with a string on the trigger.
 

J.Gleason

Banned
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
3,481
Location
Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

I don't see anything wrong with the sign. Only the anti's would.

It is about time someone steps up and stops the courts from railroading people.

I hope the court of appeals keeps up with the BS.
 

apierce918

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
276
Location
Appleton, WI
imported post

"Hmmm.... Pay the $200 suppressor tax for an oil filter? Just curious if a flash suppressor would meet the criteria of a suppressor requiring such a tax stamp. Also Why this guy would care about suppressing a flash on a shotgun when shooting raccons. Is he scared of giving away his position to the rest of the coons? And if the oil filter was meant to be a silencer did he really think that it was going to make a difference?"

usually you shoot raccoons at night, you see better at night when your vision has adjusted (sometimes 30-45 minutes) bright flash can make that start all over again.

suppress the flash, no loss of night vision, shoot rest of raccoons!

this is also why there is low flash defensive ammo, and why a light on your handgun can be used to "blind" an intruder
 

barronburke

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
Messages
183
Location
Chetek, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Spartacus wrote:
Those draconian laws from the '30s on rifle length and silencers gotta go!

So the guy was an eccentric. Since when did that become illegal?

I like the sign too. "Nothing Here is Worth Dying For". hahaha...
eccentric is only true if he was rich if your poor your just crazy lol
 
Top