Posted on 07/26/2006 4:47:07 PM PDT by bad company
Illinois State Police trooper Gregory Mugge pleaded guilty to one charge of possessing an unregistered machine gun in federal court on Tuesday, according to an announcement from the U.S. attorney's office.
Mugge, 52, of Jerseyville, was indicted in January, along with Illinois State Police Sgt. James Vest, 39, of O'Fallon, and John Yard, 36, an Illinois State Police special agent assigned to the Collinsville office, each face separate charges of illegal gun possession.
Mugge faces up to 10 years in prison, a fine of up to $250,000 and a maximum three years of supervised release.
He is scheduled to reappear in court for sentencing on Oct. 27.
On Dec. 29, authorities seized Mugge's unregistered Colt .2234 caliber rifle from his home in Jerseyville. In his plea, Mugge admitted to knowing his possession of the rifle was unlawful.
In February, a group of 12 local police chiefs and sheriffs, and two state senators, Sen. Bill Haine, D-Alton, and Sen. James Watson, R-Greenville, endorsed a letter of support for the three state troopers.
At that time, the backers pushed for administrative punishment for the three troopers rather than prosecution.
I don't remember that being outlined in the Federalist Papers, although I have no doubt that it was in their minds. Certainly other statements by them indicate that.
But only a couple of people on this thread have argued that the citizens should have all the weapons available to the military. I don't know if you're in that camp or not, but I don't think that's a very good idea.
Why? The semi auto weapons you own are much more likely to be the kind used in a violent crime than a full auto weapon. Maybe the owners of the full auto weapons should be allowed to keep theirs, while you are forced to surrender yours? No, that wouldn't work, not for me at least. I have a substantial collection of thundersticks myself.
By the way, did you know that statistically, you are more likely to die by drowning in a swimming pool than from a gun shot? How about restricting those dangerous swimming pools?
"Why not a working cannon in his tank? Private ownership of cannon was not banned under the Constitution;although most people had better uses for the money."
I dunno why. I've watched a few shows that have guys who buy up excess miltiary equipment. One guy in England had a mobile missle launcher, sans missle of course.
They always say that the guns were made inoperative prior to the sale to comply with the law. Dunno why. The difference may be the black powder.
That's not the point. A swimming pool doesn't serve the purpose of being a purely offensive weapon in ordinary life.
If machine guns ever become commonplace in the US and it's necessary to own one for defensive purposes, my position will change.
Yes, I'm accusing you of racism. Your codewords fit the bill perfectly.
and I'll bet it was BLACK too!
mmmm, that isn't difficult to do. New Orleans, when the armed gangs were roving, raping, and pillaging, and the thugs who didn't have badges were doing the same.
I bet Reginald Denny wishes like hell he had a MP-5, a Mac-10 at least, when he tried to drive his rig through LA during the riots.
That's darn fine shooting, ya outta be a Texan.
Congrats on scoring one for the 'Good Guys' and I'm glad you're back home among family. Yeah, we Freepers bicker and fight; just like 99.9% of American families; but when everyone calms down we tend to agree to disagree.
Here in Texas, we have Mexicans waving pistols, robbing convenience stores, shooting at police and the general gang violence that trash (of any color) tends to breed. I'm not too happy to see this trash with semi-automatic pistols. I shudder to see how many more innocents would be murdered when 2 drunken and enraged adlescents decide to take machine guns to solve a problem their egos created.
In my time, such matters were handled outside; no weapons (as only a real 'loser' would have to use a knife against a person with fists). Now, the cowards walk away and get a dozen friends and stage a drive by.
On the plus side; if the bad guys use automatics, the cops will use automatics. If the cops use automatics, there may be a lot fewer bad guys.
Hey DCBryan1, sounds like we have had similiar experiencies, both outside of Camp Taji.
I also am a member of the NRA and I see no reason to treat machine guns different than any other. You do realize they are legal to own in all but 12 states.
Report me then. This forum doesn't tolerate racists. I hope it doesn't tolerate jackasses who throw that accusation out either with no justification.
Yes, I didn't say they should be illegal. I said they should be highly restricted. Big difference.
The Police officers are also going to be charged in Illinois for possessing assault weapons and automatic weapons *(25+ years in Illinois, and there is no double jeporady between state and federal courts)
Are you two even aware that a commonplace 12 gauge pump loaded with 5 shells of #4 buck is the equivalent of a 100 round submachine gun -- capable of aimed fire at 40 yards on man sized targets?
How will you rationalize the banning of shotguns & buckshot?
Give it up, tpaine. You're talking to gun people on this thread, and nobody but you is going to equate a shot gun with an automatic rifle.
Historian Paul Johnson said, "beware of those who seek to win an argument at the expense of the language. For the fact that they do so is proof positive that their argument is false, and proof presumptive that they know it is. ... Those who treasure the meaning of words, will treasure truth, and those who bend words to their purposes are very likely in pursuit of anti-social ones. The correct and honorable use of words is the first and natural credential of civilized status."
Nor are all automatic weapons purely offensive weapons. Standard military issue rifles, M-16, M-4, AK-47, whatever country/military you are refering to, those standard issue weapons, which are mostly capable of fully auto fire are considered defensive weapons.
Don't believe me? Read the articles of the Geneva Convention. Soldiers in medical units are restricted to the use of defensive weapons. That's why you'll never see a ma duece in the inventory of a battalion aid station, or a M14 or M24 sniper rifle, even if they have a trained sniper attached to the unit, he'll be carrying a M16 or M4. Carrying a M14 or M24 sniper rifle would violate the Geneva Convention, void any protections offered by it to the medical personnel, and put the unit commander in very hot water with his higher ups.
Give it up again. If you can't win the argument based on words and making sure they're understood correctly, the only other way to resolve misunderstandings is with machine guns.
Which is what you want.
I'd prefer words and logic. And keeping it civil so that we don't get mad at each other while we sort out any differences.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.