Worn sears and slam fires a federal crime?

[DeltaII5]

New post, I was fixing lunch now I can finish



The whole point of this case is they said he had an M16 with a three round burst. So you need to know how the gun works. M16 bolt carriers / bolts / hammers are nothing special, they simply have areas filed down or cuts that when paired with an auto sear or three round burst kit allow it to function. Alone the bc/b/hammer can't do anything special



See there are 3 catches. Hence it has a three round burst. A normal AR only has one catch, hence single fire.

The point is it's caught 3 times from 3 different parts and thus fires three rounds per trigger pull.

If you don't have those 3 catches, how can a gun fire a three round burst? There is no mechanism to catch the hammer three times in a row.


If parts are worn down, and thus the hammer isn't caught and it slam fires, why would it only slam fire an extra 2 rounds? Why wouldn't it keep firing? How does the gun know to catch the hammer the extra 2 times.

If it doesn't have the parts to operate in such a way, then it isn't a machine gun. It isn't designed to be a machine gun.

[Vortex]

Originally Posted by DeltaII5

If parts are worn down, and thus the hammer isn't caught and it slam fires, why would it only slam fire an extra 2 rounds? Why wouldn't it keep firing?

If it doesn't have the parts to operate in such a way, then it isn't a machine gun.

I'm glad that someone that knows something about the mechanical internals has responded, because it has removed the only hesitation that I had about really slamming BATF with regard to this particular prosecution.

Based on what DeltaII5 states, it sounds like a three selector switch moved to the third position, without having the corresponding machine gun parts in that position to interact with, will still fire as if it's in single fire mode.

So I'm BATF and I don't care how I win my case. I start a video camera and show the selector switch in the third position and wait for it to slam fire three times with soft primer commercial ammo. I edit out all the times it singles, doubles, quadruples, jams, fails to fire and so on.

Apparently, the resulting video that the jury saw was highly edited and no more than 15 seconds long.

Now BATF can testify (with a straight face) that the rifle did triple while the selector switch was in the three round position. Look, here's the video. The jury is going to have no idea about sears, bolt carriers, disconnectors or slam fires. In the strictest and most narrowest sense of the words BATF isn't technically lying either, they are just being criminally misleading in their misrepresentation about what is really going on.

[Philadelphia]

Originally Posted by Vortex

Now BATF can testify (with a straight face) that the rifle did triple while the selector switch was in the three round position. Look, here's the video. The jury is going to have no idea about sears, bolt carriers, disconnectors or slam fires. In the strictest and most narrowest sense of the words BATF isn't technically lying either, they are just being criminally misleading in their misrepresentation about what is really going on.

That's why there's a sixth amendment right to counsel along with requirements for due process. If the tape was indeed highly edited with exculpatory evidence removed, the prosecuting attorney would be required to turn over the entire tape to the defense (as exculpatory evidence) or the conviction would likely get tossed on appeal (and the prosecuting attorney subject to sanction or disbarment).

A lot of conflicting info on this case.

Whatever the facts of the case may or may not be, the most damning info regarding BATFE is their position that if a gun goes off more than once for one operation of the trigger, no matter the reason, it's an MG. I think we all agree that's is just total and complete BS. Owning a broken gun is now a crime (according to BATFE)? I don't recall seeing that in the US code.

OTOH, even if it was just a broken gun, if the gun owner knew it was broken and continued to fire it anyway (and loan it to others, WTF?) maybe this guy should expect a little unwanted attention from the gov't?

The whole situation is a little effed as MGs should be legal anyway. If the standing army can have M16s, so should the rest of us.

[ar15jules]

I have no idea what court this was heard in, or who the lawyers were on either side. Judging by the things that have been posted here, it seems a little fishy to me. And when I say fishy, I don't mean that the BATF used tactics to wrongfully prosecute someone. I say that to mean, without being in the courtroom, we will not know what really transpired. I tend not to believe everything I read on a BLOG.
Jules

[sjl127]

Was Masood Ayoob consulted?

[DaveM55]

This is scary...

[medik212]

Originally Posted by DaveM55

This is scary...

damn right. absolutely outrageous. i just finished reading the entire thread over on arcom, and it is certainly worth a read if ya'll are bored and waiting for lunch/quitting time. talk about getting absolutely RAILROADED!

One factoid that made me chuckle: apparently the arresting fed left her sidearm in a public restroom a few years back.

[Shawn.L]

CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/bes....govt.guns.cnn

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/pol...ef=videosearch

[schr8er2000]

UPDATE


JS ONLINE: NEWS: WISCONSIN: E-MAIL | PRINT
THIS STORY




Posted: May 15, 2008
A Wisconsin Army reservist sentenced this week on a federal machine gun conviction was reprimanded in 2002 for corrupting military computers and possibly providing sensitive information to Wisconsin militia groups, Army documents state.

That report called for an Army criminal investigation into whether David R. Olofson and other soldiers broke federal laws. It also recommended that Olofson, who told soldiers he belonged to an anti-government militia, and at least one other soldier be involuntarily separated from the military.

A two-star general issued a reprimand in which he calls Olofson's actions "reprehensible and inexcusable."

The Army review also says Olofson, 36, of Berlin, failed to notify the military of two earlier gun-related convictions, including one that stemmed from carrying a loaded gun while trick-or-treating with his children.

The recommendation for a criminal investigation was rejected, according to a note on the file. Olofson received an honorable discharge in September 2002, Army officials said Thursday.

Four years after the reprimand was issued, Olofson re-enlisted in the Army Reserve and remains a member of the 108th Training Division headquartered in Charlotte, N.C., a division official said Thursday.

Lt. Col. Scott Fitzgerald, a spokesman for Olofson's former unit, the 84th Division out of Milwaukee, said he wouldn't expect someone with such a reprimand could re-enlist.

"I am surprised, with as strong as that general reprimand is," said Fitzgerald, who also is a state senator. "That seems pretty strange."

But officials said nothing was on Olofson's discharge paperwork showing it was involuntary or barring his re-enlistment.

"His discharge showed no limitations," said Master Sgt. Keith O'Donnell of the Army's Human Resources Command in St. Louis. "Without that, they would have no way of knowing there was an investigation or non-judicial punishment against him."

Olofson was sentenced Tuesday to 30 months in prison in the machine gun case, which has received national attention on Lou Dobbs' show on CNN. The stay-at-home father of three is appealing his conviction and sentence, with support from the National Rifle Association.

His attorney, Brian Fahl, said Olofson, who was on active duty for four years, didn't know anything about the Army's investigation. However, a prosecutor said the reprimand and other documents came from Olofson's own computer, which was seized in a raid.

"He did not know of it," Fahl said of the investigation. "He says he doesn't know how it got on his computer."

Assistant U.S. Attorney Greg Haanstad disclosed the Army investigation along with other documents at sentencing, portraying Olofson as a man who doesn't think laws apply to him.

In a 2003 e-mail to a fellow gun owner, Olofson said members of the "Sovereign" movement don't have to follow federal gun laws, including those that cover machine guns, which he called "small toys."

"Remember as a Sovereign you are unhindered by the regulations that the federal citizens have to follow," Olofson wrote. "Then you can literally do most anything you want so long as it interferes with no others' rights or person."

Haanstad also presented a letter from 2004 in which Olofson offered help to a group patrolling the Mexican border for illegal crossings.

"You will find our multitude of cells very well-equipped and trained," Olofson wrote. "We have many things most individuals do not (including) light armor and heavy weapons."

Access to computers
In May 2002, Olofson and other soldiers reconfigured military computers to allow access to outsiders, including possibly Wisconsin militias, Army records indicate, although they don't specify any groups. The changes allowed outside access to personal information such as Social Security numbers of 91 soldiers, according to the records. The report says Olofson and another soldier spent five hours deleting computer files after the initial changes had been detected.

Olofson, who held the rank of specialist, and the others violated federal laws including damaging a government computer and conspiracy, the records indicate, and the investigation recommended the Army's Criminal Investigation Command, Computer Crime Investigative Unit in Virginia launch its own investigation. The word "no" is written next to that recommendation.

The report notes that Olofson was absent without leave during the investigation, wasn't returning phone calls and refused to answer questions, though an attorney had been appointed for him.

"It can be inferred he is hiding his conduct," the report said.

Maj. Gen. Charles Gorton wrote, "I reprimand you for your abysmal failure to adhere to basic security measures. . . . Your deplorable conduct is wholly unacceptable and intolerable in a senior soldier."

The report recommends rescinding a commendation Olofson had received and that officials "involuntarily separate" him from the military. It's unclear what happened to other soldiers involved in the security breach.

An involuntary separation can be honorable, said Maj. James Lincoln, spokesman with Olofson's current unit. However, in Olofson's case there is nothing on his paperwork showing he was forced out, said Lincoln, who added an investigation is under way into Olofson's current conviction.

Fitzgerald, the spokesman for the 84th Division where Olofson received the reprimand, said he could not find anyone in the unit who knew details about the 2002 investigation or its outcome.

This is an article in todays Milwaukee Journal Sentinel......

[headcase]

The more I read on this story, the more it seems like the feds are planting evidence and falsifying documents. From my personal experience, an E-4 doesn't get reprimanded by a General. If a General gets his/her nose into something an E-4 did, the Spc. will be article 15'd by his CO. You don't get a letter of reprimand from a General as an lower enlisted member, unless you're on your way to Levenworth. Your chain of command will probably get letters for failure to lead, but E-4's just don't rate the notice. Especially with what they are claiming happened. That would have been on CNN and the Spc. and everyone involved would be breaking rocks under the hot Kansas sun right now. Not to infer I am wearing tinfoil, just sayin'