Posted on 01/17/2008 10:45:33 AM PST by CrappieLuck
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 clerk's office in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.
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.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
I agree. But in doing a google search, This story doesn’t appear anywhere in the non-firearms related media. The mention that the defendant is a Drill Sergeant also seems a little puzzling. Clearly, this weapon wasn’t a military weapon.
By “military weapon”, I mean a government owned weapon.
It’s from WND - of course it’s humor.
I reaed the same thing. To those who are questioning this, do a search to find the charges and the newspaper reports of the trial. If this was a railroading, there were a whole bunch of people in on it, not just the BATF. This article looks like it was written by the person who was charged. It tells nothing of the tests where it fired automatically when the selector was put in the “unmarked third position”.
LOL
If you have time, skim the first page of the link inpost 16. The weapon had a filed sear and other mods to make it full-auto. The owner seems to be claiming that the guy he loaned it to (for months) must have made the mods.
I'm sure, but forgive me for wanting to watch that from about a mile away. ;~))
Careful, I think you just did. Now go answer the doorbell in ... 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...
Yup. Plato said that would be the eventual end of a pure democracy, which we are rapidly becoming. After anarchy comes tyranny.
Carolyn
*Snicker*
i thought owning any 1 of the 6 parts that mark the difference between an AR15 and an M16 was enough to get you nailed on a conspiracy charge?
I have seen - personally - the BATF do EXACTLY that, manufacture evidence.
The case involved a built-from-parts AR-15. It had all AR-15 parts, including receiver, with the exception of the bolt carrier. There was no full-auto position. In fact, there was a manufactured bump out on the receiver that would prevent the selector from ever being put over to the rock’n’roll position. The defendant built four of these rifles.
Once in a while, when rapid firing on semi-auto, the thing would kick off two or three rounds and then jam. BATF got hold of one and took it to their lab. They used soft primer ammo, and ‘tuned’ it to get it to rip through a mag. In short, THEY made it into a machine gun and then prosecuted the guy they bought it from. He even had a letter from the BATF ahead of time saying that what he was doing was legal so long as the thing didn’t have the auto sear or modifications to the receiver.
So, don’t tell me that the BATF is above doing this. I spent time in Federal Court testifying and watched the entire trial. The only reason that the defendant won was that he had none other than Col. William C. Davis himself come in a testify for the defense that it was BATF’s abuse of the weapon that made it full-auto.
Something smells about this case. Not sure just who is telling the truth.
Yet the article posted says he was convicted. Are people discussing two different cases here?
I am refering to another, seemingly very similar case, with which I had personal experience. The proposition that the BATF would target a private citizen for destruction and manufacture evidence to do it seems to be incredible to some of the gentlefolk here.
I am saying that I have witnessed it with my own eyes. Beware if you come into their crosshairs - and one of the best ways to do that is to mess about making guns from surplus parts.
Gotcha. Thanks.
Looks like the guns were junk and would behave exactly like a machine gun unexpectedly.
"BATF got hold of one and took it to their lab."
Looks like the guy never corrected the problem that resulted from his own work.
"They used soft primer ammo, and ‘tuned’ it to get it to rip through a mag."
Tuned it my ass. They used commercially available ammo and it behaved identically to a machne gun.
"In short, THEY made it into a machine gun"
BS.
"He even had a letter from the BATF ahead of time saying that what he was doing was legal so long as the thing didn’t have the auto sear or modifications to the receiver."
The ATF can't control for sloppy workmanship.
"I spent time in Federal Court testifying and watched the entire trial."
Wonderful.
"The only reason that the defendant won was that he had none other than Col. William C. Davis himself come in a testify for the defense that it was BATF’s abuse of the weapon that made it full-auto."
Davis of course provided no evidence that ATF did any modificaitons to the guns that were inherently of such poor quality that they would behave identically to a full auto weapon on a random, or consistent basis. I'm sure if Davis purchased one of those gems, expecting semi and got auto at some unexpected point, he'd have been less than amused at the poor quality. I'm sure the jury was simply sympathetic to the defense's storytelling.
In no way does any of what you said amount to ATF fabricating evidence.
As proven by the first set of BATFE tests I posted. The BATFE is noted for arbitrary standards and manufacturing things when the evidence doesn't go their way. This is documented.
Just keep on shilling for your buddies in the BATFE though. It's entertaining if nothing else.
The one he was originally busted for was an Olympic Arms that malfunctioned while someone else was shooting it. His machining 80% business was actually one of the better outfits out there and entirely above board. No charges have been filed against him for any of those rifles.
Learn something before you make yourself sound any more ignorant...
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.