Pro Tip

"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn) 01/20/2015 at 18:20 • Filed to: None

2

5

If you're transporting 6 "military-style assault rifles" and another rifle with an illegally shortened barrel, it's probably best not to weave in and out of traffic, fail to keep a constant speed, and smoke pot. Especially is somebody "gave" you the weapons in Dallas and told you to deliver them to the Mexican border. Clearly, not the sharpest tool in the shed.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Ramblin Rover - The Vivisector of Solihull > ttyymmnn 01/20/2015 at 18:42

4

I'm really suspicious of the police report on this one. If they're really "assault rifles", then that's 7 NFA violations and not 1. He's being purportedly charged with 1. I have no question it's very likely he's trafficking, but they should have to prove that. "assault weapon" and assault rifle conflation is INCREDIBLY OBNOXIOUS.

On that other point, the NFA violation that he's being charged with on (an SBR), is an almost unbelievably flawed portion of the statute. In the guise of preventing more powerful rifle cartridges from being concealable, they make the whole classification of intermediate cartridge weapons with this or that configuration a farce. It's completely legal to build an AR-based pistol or a pistol-grip mare's leg lever action as long as it's not too long and is sold as a pistol, but if you make the *exact same thing* out of an existing rifle, it's a felony. If you take that AR based pistol and put a rifle stock on it, likewise, usually. It also makes pistol setups like this:

and this:

typically impossible to build or even own with few exceptions. The revolver portion of #2 with a given barrel length is legal, and the same gun is legal (as a rifle) with a permanent stock, but the *instant* you fit that add-on stock it becomes a rifle, which is then illegal to "modify" in any way, regardless of what that modification is. Even taking back off the stock - by one reading of the statute. It's so bad, that an AR-based pistol with an arm brace is perfectly legal for sale as long as you don't intend to prop that brace against your shoulder. Anyone who gets a kit for the brace and installs it *with the wrong intent* is a felon, anyone who doesn't, isn't, despite the exact same parts involved and the exact same result.

In short, the SBR section of NFA is a pile of nigh-inspired fuckwittery that serves no purpose and should have died long ago - to the point it irks me even to see a seemingly obvious criminal prosecuted under it.

/rant off

TheBloody, Oppositelock lives on in our shitposts. > Ramblin Rover - The Vivisector of Solihull 01/20/2015 at 19:11

3

Relevant:

samssun > ttyymmnn 01/20/2015 at 19:56

0

Is there any firearm reporters/activists don't call either "high powered" or a "military-style assault rifle"?

ttyymmnn > samssun 01/20/2015 at 20:31

0

ttyymmnn > samssun 01/20/2015 at 21:56

0

It was not my intention to turn this into a gun thread (in spite of my earlier reply to you, which is just funny). It was more of a "this guy's a moron" thread. But in defense of the reporter, it's very likely that he/she asked the police what they found, and "military-style assault rifle" is exactly what they told them. The police have an interest in making these guys look as bad as possible too.