Blood baths in Kanas
The (anti)"gunguys" worry about the prospect that Kanasa might allow private sake of licensed Title II firearms. I.e., firearms that cost $5000 and up, require FBI fingerprint clearance, and in 70 years have been involved in, depending upon which report you want to believe, either zero or one violent crimes. I'm tembling in my boots...
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (7)
Article on silencer prosecutions
In the Western Criminology Review. Basically, the conclusion is that most silencer prosecutions are for simple possession; when charges involve possession in connection with crime, it's usually a drug offense. Prosecutions for use in a violent offense are almost zero.
The point he ultimately makes is that sentencing should reflect this Instead, the Federal sentencing guidelines call for two year's minimum imprisonment for first-offense possession, and if possessed in connection with crime, a separate provision mandates a 30 year, consecutive, minimum, without parole -- a sentence exceeding many jurisdiction's punishment for 2nd degree murder, and far exceeding their punishments for forcible rape.
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (9)
In line for the Heller case
Clayton has some pics he took of the determined folks standing in line to get in for the Heller argument. These were taken around 9 PM the night before and yes, they were camped out in sleeping bags. Most of those who got in, I'm told, camped out TWO nights, beginning in line Sunday.
I've seen some other blog entries from people standing in line, but now can't find them; if anyone has some, please add to comments. (Note: due to spam, I think the filter is set to allow one or maybe two htmls per comment; if you have multiples, I'd suggest a separate comment for each).
UPDATE: Yup, if we win in Heller, the 2nd Amendment doctrine recognizing in the 6th Circuit (and in fact in nine of the twelve circuits, I think -- not counting Federal CIrcuit, which handles only certain cases -- will no longer be good law.
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (3)
Interesting statute
SayUncle notes an interesting TN statute that requires an LEO to sign off on an NFA transfer application, if the recipient is legit.
Background: the ATF form for acquiring a National Firearm Act firearm (full auto, suppressor, etc.) must be signed by a chief LEO or prosecutor for your area. But absent a law like this, there is no duty to sign, no matter how good your character might be, and many won't.
Via Instapundit....
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (5)
NFA weapons registry and studies of its flaws
The NFA Owners Assn has put up small pdf of studies of the NFA database, and how many errors were found. It's pretty impressive...
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (0)
Rather fair article -- on machineguns!
From the not-exactly pro-gun Atlanta Journal-Constitution:
"Randy Powell has a .50-caliber machine gun he would like to sell you —but he can't afford to.
The monster, sitting in a cage in back of his gun store and shooting range in Lawrenceville, can cut down a tree — and could easily fetch $30,000 in a perfectly legal sale. But for Powell, the sale would be the equivalent of hawking a Picasso or vintage wine.
The gun increases in value exponentially each year....."
Hat tip to reader Justin Martin.
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (3)
New trial granted in NFA case
Here's the ruling, as a small pdf file.
One gets the impression the court was a bit put off by ATF. (1) The raid was without any basis. Defendant had been an NFA dealer, and when he went out of that business, transferred an NFA gun to himself. At trial, the US Attorney conceded that was entirely legal. ATF either didn't notice the transfer, or claimed it was illegal in some other way. (2) The court cites an ATF advisory letter which clearly suggests that the count upon which defendant was convicted was without basis.
Basically, he had two shoulder stocks for pistols, and two pistols that would take them. One was a registered full auto pistol, for which the stocks were perfectly legal, and one was an ordinary semiauto pistol -- which, if a stock were attached to it, would be an NFA short barreled rifle. The court cites Thompson-Center for the proposition that possession of a set of components that could be made into a short barrelled rifle is not improper if it has "obvious utility" for also making non-NFA handguns or rifles. This is rather the flip side of that: the components had obvious utility for making a registered NFA firearm.
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (8)
New TItle II prosecution
David Codrea has a full report.
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (1)
Calif court supresses result of search based on NFA inspection
Story here. Sounds as if the ATF inspectors checked his title II inventory, noticed he had non-NFA guns banned under the CA ban on "assault weapons," and alerted State authorities.
The court noted that there are statutory immunities regarding NFA information (put in place to prevent an argument that the amended NFA requires self-incrimination, as the Supremes had held the original NFA did require), and that (I think, the article is unclear) that includes information uncovered during inspection of an NFA dealer's inventory and records.
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (5)
922(o) -- or NFA -- held void for vagueness as applied to LEO
A district court has ruled in US v. Vest, dismissing the indictment (pdf file). The charge was possession of a machinegun in violation of 18 USC 922(o) and without proper registration under NFA, and the defendant was a police officer.
Apparently, he got the MG for use in official duty, certifying it as such (getting around 922(o)'s ban), and registering it as such. The prosecution argument was that 922(o) makes an exception for possession by a police dept or under authority of such a dept, and that that didn't cover personal ownership by an officer, but only by the PD.
Court found the requirement void for vagueness as applied (that is, under these particular circumstances, not under any possible circumstances).
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (3)
922(o) -- or NFA -- held void for vagueness as applied to LEO
St. Louis papers are reporting that a Federal judge threw out a machinegun case against a police rifle instructor. He bought it privately, and used it only for police purposes. The court held the statute void for vagueness as applied to him.
The article doesn't say which statute the prosecution relied upon. 922(o) bans post-ban MGs with an exception for "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." There might be ambiguity with regard to possession "under authority of ... a State, or department, agency..." The article reports that, whichever statute it was, ATFE takes the position that it excepts only a police dept itself, and not an individual officer who owns one.
It might be NFA, but that exempts "A firearm may be transferred without the payment of the transfer tax imposed by section 5811 to any State, possession of the United States, any political subdivision thereof, or any official police organization of such a government entity engaged in criminal investigations," 26 USC §5853, which sounds much clearer in saying only the PD itself can register the gun tax-free.
[Hat tip to reader Michael Gale of Shall Not Be Infringed,
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (4)
WWI machinegun seized, turned over to museum
An interesting story. Des Moines police found a water-cooled German MG from WWI in a drug raid, and made arrangements to turn it over to a military museum.
Thought: back in the 70s, police generally auctioned off seized firearms. I used to go to the auctions here. One of the judges sent his bailiff over to bid on the ones he liked. (I guess he thought it'd be improper to bid against attorneys). Then in later years that changed, here and almost everywhere else, to where seized guns were destroyed. I wonder if it might not be useful to try to get exceptions. For example, guns on the ATFE curio and relic list can be donated to museums, and those not accepted can be sold. That way collectibles wouldn't be melted down, at least.
[UPDATE: I think there is a museum exception (not dead sure). The only police exception is, as I remember, that they don't have to pay the $200 tax -- but guns on which no tax is paid become "law enforcement only," I think even if a person offers to buy and pay the tax on that transaction.]
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (3)
Title II ideas
An interesting discussion on getting NFA permits issued to a trust, corporation or limited liability company, instead of to an individual.
One problem with an NFA permit is that it's issued to one person or entity, and only that one can possess the firearm. If the permit is to you, your spouse cannot use it without you being present, even tho the spouse is co-owner. I don't do trusts, but it does sound like an interesting idea.
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (4)
State troopers charged with illegal full auto possession
From the Belleville News-Democrat: three Illinois state troops and a physican have been charged with possession of illegal full autos, and ten police chiefs have written to ask that charges be dropped.
[Update: Brady Campaign was asked for comments, and gave a diplomatic "If that's what happened, it's a lapse in judgment." (BTW, this latter news article has more factual and legal errors than I can easily count).
UPDATE: Here's the letter in support, with signatures.
UPDATE: yep, the second article linked has quite a few errors. The M-4 is described as a subgun. The article implies that ANY full auto can be owned with payment of a $200 tax (ignoring that it takes more than that, and post-bans are out). It says subguns "often" fire pistol ammo, when firing such is the very definition of a submachinegun. It implies that full-auto breaks down into two classes: tripod mounted MGs and subguns.
Strange part is that it says the M4 was registered, to the law enforcement agency. Sounds as if the charges against one trooper are purely that he took it home contrary to regulations, which is a pretty tenuous basis for an NFA charge. Of course, the reporter may have missed some other details, or got that wrong.
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (11)
NFA record fiasco update
It's been known since the 1970s that BATFE's registrations of NFA firearms (chiefly full-auto and short barrelled rifles and shotguns, taxed and thus registered under the National Firearms Act of 1934) were seriously flawed -- missing files, wrong serial numbers, the accumulation of (today) seventy years of paperwork and file cabinet mistakes. As noted earlier, there's a push on to get the records cleaned up -- which is vital, since "no registration found" means search warrants and indictments.
Over at Subguns, Eric Larson has posted a note that ATF has apparently stopped auditing NFA firearms records during its periodic audits of dealers' records, which he interpets as "stop finding errors!" He notes a report of a Senate Judiciary Committee subpoena served on ATFE regarding its records, and suggests contacting your legislators to press for a full investigation. Click on additional data below for his full posting.
Continue reading "NFA record fiasco update"
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (2)
Mich. a full auto state
From Eric Larson, on subguns.com:
"Michigan Attorney General Cox issued Opinion No. 7183, dated December 27, 2005, which supercedes former Michigan Attorney General Frank Kelly's Opinion No. 5210, dated August 10, 1977.
Boiled down, it means that Michigan residents are legally entitled to lawfully possess NFA firearms and devices, as long as they are legally registered with ATF and ATF approves the transfer application (i.e., that the Michigan resident has no convictions that would prohibit possessing a firearm, and gets his/her paperwork signed by a CLEO or done through a corporation). Anybody who wants it should be able to obtain a copy of the foregoing Opinion by contacting the Michigan Attorney General's office.
Opinion No. 7183 clarifies that an approved application to transfer an NFA firearm or device meets the requirement under Michigan law as a "license" required to lawfully possess a machine gun. If you get the Opinion, and read it, it will answer all of your legal questions. I understand some folks are in the process of sending the Opinion to ATF to get it implemented in the National Firearms Act Branch so applications by Michigan residents will be approved. This covers all NFA firearms and devices, in addition to those classified as curios or relics."
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (1)
Congressional Research Service lights fire under NFA registry
The Congressional Research Service has issued a lengthy study (pdf) of the NFA registration system, and it's a scorcher. Understand that search warrants, raids, and convictions are based upon negative reports from this system, which are used to establish that an NFA weapon (full auto, or short barrelled shotgun or rifle) is not registered, so the sytem should be perfect or very near perfect. According to the report, it's far from that.
Questions about its accuracy have been raised since the 1970s. (pp. 1-2). Treasury's Inspector General found significant problems in 1998, including improper destruction of records, inaccuracies, and failure to follow procedure. But the IG did not examine legal issue of whether problems were sufficient to call into question certifications that guns were not registered. (p. 2).
The GCA 68 provided an amnesty period for registrations, and they flooded in, overwhelming the staff. As a result records were fouled up, wrong serial numbers recorded, records misfiled (no computers then, so a paper in the wrong file might go missing forever). (p. 4)
A 1975 internal ATF document refers to "continuously" finding errors in the system, and raises the worry that an innocent person might be convicted as a result, if he had lost his own copy of the registration. (p.6).
In 1996, John LeaSure was convicted of six counts of possessing unlicensed machineguns. His attorney, Jim Jeffiries, obtained a copy of an ATF training tape in which the fellow in charge of NFA registrations told agents that the database was flawed, but that his people would always testify that it was perfect. Informed of a partial transcript of the tape, the judge set aside five of the six counts. (p. 7) [Here's a previous posting that includes video of the training tape.
Actual accuracy is unknown. It was claimed to be 1.5%, but a 1998 Treasury Inspector General study found it was higher, based on samplings -- strangely, the report does not give the actual number, and the IG declined to study larger samples. (p.9)
The accuracy may be esp. problematic for DEWATS, deactivated war trophies. (p. 10)
A MAJOR set of criticisms of Treasury Inspector General responses to inquiries about accuracy. (pp. 11-15).
An examination of how an amnesty could be used to try to make the system accurate, and how it could be structured. (pp. 16-18)
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (2)
NRA on Veterans' Heritage Firearms Act
From Eric Larson:
NRA supports H.R. 2088/amnesty legislation
Posted By: Eric M. Larson
Date: 12/20/05 18:01
The NRA is doing something for the Class III community. An article entitled "NRA Supports House Legislation To Protect Gun-Owing Veterans," on page 75 of the January 2006 issue of AMERICAN RIFLEMAN gets this legislative word out to, what...some 3.5 million or so people? That's impressive.
The article discusses H.R. 2088, the Veterans' Heritage Firearms Act of 2005, which would provide a 90-day amnesty period during which veterans and their family members could register firearms acquired overseas between June 26, 1934 and October 31, 1968. The bill provides that "in the absence of clear and convincing evidence to the contrary the attorney general shall accept as true and accurate any affidavit, document, or other evidence submitted by an individual to establish that such firearm meets the requirements" under H.R. 2088.
Read that: " . . . shall accept . . . " language. In other words, no arbitrary victimization by ATF or anybody else in the Government, and an opportunity to preserve valuable historical artifacts that are, to many families, irreplaceable heirlooms symbolizing service to the United States in time of war or conflict.
It isn't just a blurb of an article, either---it is 5" of text on the ILA Report pages, or roughly 1/3 of a page.
The article, which is based largely on an earlier press release this year by the bill's Congressional sponsor, Rep. Jim Gibbons (R-Nevada), concludes:
"NRA members are encouraged to contact their representatives and ask them to support N.R. 2088."
I'd say the NRA has just done quite a bit for the NFA community.
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (4)
Reports of audit of NFA database
By way of background, under the NFA the BATFE is charged with keeping records of the several hundred thousand licensed NFA firearms (chiefly full-autos, but also short barreled guns and some others). Going back to 1978, there have been complaints that the database is seriously flawed, there are licensed guns, probably MANY licensed guns out there that don't show up in the present database, and there have been intermittant reports of persons being raided, etc. who turned out to have complied with the law. (Back in 78 or 79, I dealt with dealer and collector Curtis Earl, who during a raid had agents stack up a pile of his inventory that their records showed had no proper registration. He went into his files, produced his copies, and every one of the firearms went back onto his racks).
From Eric Larson, who has keep pushing the issue these ten or twenty years:
In a letter dated October 21, 2005, the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (OIG) stated that the OIG will begin an audit of the NFRTR in late 2005.
Specifically, Deputy Inspector General Paul K. Martin wrote: "In response to correspondence we have received expressing concerns over the accuracy and completeness of the NFRTR, the OIG plans to initiate a review of the ATF's management of the NFRTR in late 2005." The letter repeats many of ATF's recent responses to questions about the NFRTR (and attributes them to ATF). But the letter also notably states that the OIG is "also aware of extensive correspondence, beginning in 1998 and continuing through the present, [alleging inaccuracies in the NFRTR] between the concerned individuals and the ATF, United States Attorneys' Offices, and the Department of the Treasury OIG, as well as several Members of Congress."
The lesson to be drawn here is the importance of involving your Congressional representatives in expressing your concerns about the NFRTR. It is obvious from this letter that the sustained objections to how ATF is conducting the public business have been heard, and will now be acted upon.
A copy of the letter is at the web site of the National Firearms Act Owners Association (NFAOA).
A huge "thank-you" is due to Mr. Cott Lang, who took the time to express his concerns to his Congressional representatives, as well as to the many other people I know who have worked hard on these issues, and involved their Congressional representatives as well.
Finally---I've said this before, and will say it again---the ATF is not immune to Congressional pressures and concerns, and at the end of the day the Congress can go a long way towards reforming ATF if it wants to. The "if it wants to" requires people who are willing to be part of the solution and not part of the problem. Be part of the solution by continuing to express your concerns to your Congressinal representatives.
The Department of Justice Inspector General has recently done some audit work involving ATF. Take a look at the NFAOA web site, under "Resources," for an example of that work---and imagine that kind of attention and diligence being paid to ATF's mismanagement of the NFRTR. It is likely going to be a whole new day for the NFAOA community.
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (2)
Video of ATFE expert examination
JPFO has released a video of a BATFE expert's examinaton of an alleged machinegun, and of the defense expert doing the same. The website doesn't give many details, but a viewer tells me that the ATFE showed how the rifle would fire (every now and then) in full auto, and identifies a ground-off piece of the bolt which he says converts it to full auto.
The defense expert shows then shows that the intermittent full auto fire is due to malfunction. The firing pin spring is worn and too short, and the firing pin defective, with result that the rifle occasionally slam-fires -- the firing pin is floating loose and can slam forward under inertia when the bolt closes. He points out that, in the FN-FAL rifle mechanism, the ground-off part that the ATFE expert singled out has no effect upon firing.
UPDATE: Publicola has viewed the video -- for some reason the spam filter blocked his comment, but I'll add it in the extended remarks below.
Continue reading "Video of ATFE expert examination"
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (3)
Bill to allow WWII trophy title IIs
HR 2088 is a bill which would allow WWII vets and their heirs to possess certain war trophies and DEWATs (deactivated war trophies).
What prompts the legislation is that during WWII, commanders were authorizing soldiers to own and take home war trophy guns, including machineguns. Many of the vets didn't realize that such a written authorization doesn't get them around the National Firearms Act; they weren't lawyers, were in war, and had a letter from their commander authorizing them to take the gun home, and figured that covered it. As a result, there are a considerable but unknown number of MGs out there where the owner thinks everything is legal, and it isn't.
In a September 22, 2005, letter, Representative John Boozman (R-Ark.) requested DOJ Inspector General Glenn Fine to investigate and tell him "which documents ATF currently recognizes as entitling World War II veterans, and/or their lawful heirs, to legally possess War Trophy Firearms, and to legally possess DEWATs." Rep. Boozman made this request as Chairman, Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity, House Committee on Veterans Affairs.
[UPDATE: I'm told that a number of these vets or their heirs have the written documentation showing that their commanders authorized them to bring the firearms home.]
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (5)
Practice tip on NFA cases
I just remembered an interesting practice tip, give to me by Jim Jeffries. The general federal statute of limitations is five years. However, the NFA is part of the tax codes, and has a three year statute of limitations (with some exceptions for willful failure to pay, filing of false documents, etc). See 26 USC §6531.
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (0)
Interesting data from NFA Owners' Association
The NFA Owners' Ass'n webpage has interesting data on BATFE NFA registration problems. Among the other interesting cases:
1. A case in which a widow wished to transfer her late husband's NFA firearm to a collector, BATFE ruled that it was unregistered and thus illegal, she came up with the registration papers, and the agency (at least for a time) refused to recognize them!
2. Use of the Busey videotape as Brady material to reverse a conviction under NFA (Brady material refers to the duty of the prosecution to disclose evidence that may suggest a defendant is innocent; you can't prosecute while hiding evidence suggesting innocence);
3. Another case, US v. LeaSure, where the judge dismissed a case, based on evidence that BATFE clerks may have thrown away the registration papers. More details here in an affidavit by attorney Jim Jeffries.
4. Several other cases in which a firearm was seized as unregistered, only to have the owner come up with the registration papers.
Continue reading "Interesting data from NFA Owners' Association"
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (0)
NFA Record Problems
An interesting compendium of studies on the National Firearm Act registry and its problems.
The National Firearms Act of 1934 requires a tax payment, and thus registration, for each making or transfer of certain firearms (chiefly full-automatic, or short barreled guns). Possession of such a firearm without registration is a felony, and in any prosecution for that offense an element is certification by ATFE that the firearm is not registered to the defendant. ATFE is in charge of maintaining the NFA database, which has several hundred thousand firearms listed.
As far back as 1980, it was known that the database had serious flaws and omissions (an ATF internal memo of the period expressed fears that innocent persons might be convicted due to a certification that a firearm had not been registered, when in fact it had been).
Eric Larson has over many years done yeoman work in further investigating the problems and in pushing for Inspector General investigation of the problem (the IG in turn told ATFE to look into it -- although the entire reason for having an IG is to deal with problems where the agency itself might have a temptation to cover up.