Jump to content

timelinex

Seaman
  • Posts

    28
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    United States

Reputation

0 Neutral

About timelinex

Personal Information

  • City and State
    Phx,AZ

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Right.....I think where most people go wrong is the uncomfortableness with the idea that "intent" in others can only be assumed and it is not provable. So they start dreaming up extreme scenarios where mal intent is imposed onto them just by owning X, Y, or Z.......But feels a bit like missing the forest for the trees when overall the biggest things that will attract that mal intent is having a firearm in the first place... I wonder what actually ended up happening to the guy that you mentioned. Did he actually get convicted of the nfa violation? It makes 100% sense why he was charged... Afterall, the configuration that the officer sees makes it clear that there is a high chance he was on his way to use it in an illegal configuration. However proving in court is different animal. It seems like any attorney worth anything would be able to get that dropped since he did own legal configurations at home. But of course I am not a lawyer. Even so, it's a much more clear line to possession of illegal NFA item there than the examples in this thread.
  2. Has anyone known anyone to get a constructive possession charge for ridiculous situations as outlined in this thread? I'm not talking about a friend of a friend through the grapevine rumour. I am talking about actually know the person (so it's not rumour). Or is there proof in news or court cases where this happens? The closest thing I've found is not locking up guns when a felon is in the house, addon's to violent crimes like in gang violence and then some dude that sold a gun with accessories that clearly made it illegal. Those are some VERY clear cut situations. From my understanding, it's not some specially tailored law where the govt automatically portray your intent for having some no no parts. It's just using the basic "constructive possession" idea in general law, where there is no direct evidence of you possessing something but rather the prosecutor has to construct your possession. That's on them to actually convince a jury that the only reason you could reasonably have this item is so you possess something illegal for you to possess. Example: Having multiple short barrelled uppers isn't illegal , as long as you have one SBR lower. Just because they COULD be put on a non registered SBR, doesn't mean it's constructive possession. No more so than them nailing you for constructive possession because you have the ability to easily take the upper off your SBR and put it on your Non-sbr. Whats stopping you from constructing a illegal SBR there? An extra 10 seconds it takes to take the upper off your SBR? On the other hand, if you have only non-registered lowers and a bunch of short barrelled uppers... It's much more clear what is going on. Having a m16 lower parts group, when you have an m16 going through the system and none of your ar15's have a 3rd hole, shouldn't give you any trouble. Why would it? Show me one person where it has. It's clear why you have it and it is for legal purposes. On the other hand, do you have an m16 lower parts group and a spare ar15 lower that you drilled a 3rd hole into? Well it's not illegal to own the m16 parts kit and it's not illegal to drill holes in guns.... But it's pretty clear what is going on here and this is where the prosecutor will have an easier time to construct your possession of an illegal MG. Last point to address is this idea of "well they can charge you with it ignorantly and then it's on you to fight in the courts. Who wants to deal with that"...... I mean sure.... But you can literally say that about anything since they can charge you with anything at any time for any reason. You think the officer that wants to make your life hell can't take away your MG and charge you with owning an illegal machine gun regardless of you showing your paperwork? All he has to claim is he didn't know about that paperwork or he couldn't verify it's authenticity. You're back in courts sorting it out and he's got qualified immunity so it's not skin off his back. Moral of story? They can already get you for something if they want to. Try not to give them a reason to and if you do, you have to fight it. We shouldn't have to hide under a rock in fear of our rights being taken away just out of expedience. They may as well be taken away then. I am not a lawyer, and this is just from everything I have gathered from tons of threads and attorney websites. I would love for someone to give any evidence that proves my ides on the issue wrong though!
  3. I know that you can order one directly from CMMG, but I heard it may take months. Let me know if anyone has extras they are willing to sell. Thanks
  4. Awesome, thanks for the info guys!
  5. In reference to this thread, where I can't ask the question since it is closed: A few things were said that I did not understand and wanted to know the answer for curiosity's sake: 1. What makes this an M4 lower? I thought the only difference between m4 lowers and m16 lowers is literally just the marking. The marking on this lower is m16a1 still. Is there some difference between m4 and m16a1 lowers I do not know about? And if there is, did they then use the m4 lower buy stamped it "incorrectly" with m16a1 to keep it consistent with the lower that they were replacing? 2. Even more to the point....How could they have "replaced" an NFA lower and kept it legal? I thought that is why taking care of the MG part of guns is so crucial (like in an M60). You CANNOT replace the part that is the MG. It has to be "fixed" in any way possible, but if replacing , it is now considered a new MG and not allowed to be owned by civilians. What am I missing? Is that a newer rule that was added sometime post 1986 or something?
  6. Thanks! I think I will be changing all the parts on the m16 and holding the originals in my safe. I was going to get a dedicated new upper, but realized that I have full auto compatible uppers already and I realistically wont be shooting it THAT often, so I will probably just use one of the ar15 uppers I currently have. But I definitely want to get a dedicated 22 upper. The Razorback 22lr would be ideal, so I'll have to keep an eye out for one. Let me know if you see one! I have a 8.5" suppressed noveske 300blk upper that I run with subsonic ammo that works flawlessly in semi auto. It is rediculously quite. All you hear is basically the BCG. I am excited to see if how that will work FA
  7. I ended up purchasing an M16 yesterday. The seller was initially fine with doing the lock box method but then decided against it. I was OK with either way, so I took all non-registered parts and now the waiting game starts. Thanks for all you gentlemens input.
  8. No worries. I'm not taking it personally! I really do appreciate the input. I would rather bicker back and forth with you guys and see if I'm missing something,, than do something that atf would frown on.. I dont deny what you are saying about possible civil liability. As you illuded to, you can be sued for anything these days!! Isn't this just the risk that is inherent in owning a MG in the first place though? If I take it from his home locked container, same civil liability for him. In both way I am the one that did something illegal to aquire the MG, but since his name is involved somewhere, the opponents lawyer will try to rope him in into the civil lawsuit. I do understand that what you are likely getting at is its probably easier for me to cut open a container at my home versus his. But on the other hand, we are pretty far into the "what if's". In my defense, none of these constructive posession NFA laws have ever been tested in court and no MG has been used in shootings for good reason....those that are willing to pay 30k to legally do something they can do with a cheap mod on a cheap ar15, aren't typically the same clientele as those that are doing the shootings.....but again, I do understand your point that is is a possibility.
  9. Literally no more or less on/off the hook as if I broke into his safe and took the firearm. Which is the exact point. The act of having me store it for him in a locked container is literally allowed according to their own written rules. Yes, I also understand that you can be arrested for anything, then you have to face your day in court. That is true of basically every circumstance though. For every example you guys can give, there is an equal and opposite side to it that could also happen. I guess we will just have to agree to disagree!
  10. This is a false statement. This happens every single day to tens of thousands of firearm owners. Their spouse is a felon, so how can they own a firearm as you are not allowed to have a firearm on same household as a fellow. Simple. As long as its locked in a container container they don't have access to, you are allowed to own one, leave it at your house while away and the felon is home, leave it In your car you guys share, etc... It seems like you guys are going off gut feeling and not the actual law/rules as they are written.
  11. The seller does not need to trust me in any way. He has his money already. Giving me the rifle to store at my house in a locked container I dont have the key to is legal for hom to do and literally on the ATF's own website and rules written down. It's not some random agent told me it can be done. It's the official policy that is written down.. From there, asking what happens if I crack it open, is like asking what happens If I crack open the safe at his house.. I AM NOW ILLEGALLY IN POCCESSION OF A MG. It was illegal for me to crack it open. Whats he got to do with it? He has done nothing wrong and I have. If something happens to me and the transfer can't be completed, it is once again a me issue. I own the MG. Lets ask it the other way. If he was holding onto it it during the transfer and something happened to me or I got denied. What happens? He has a MG in his possession that's not his but that he is the only one allowed to possess and I (or my estate) own a MG that we aren't yet allowed to possess. Crappy situation for all. The least complicated thing to do is to do a refund, but that is completely at the mercy of the seller. He can refuse. The more likely scenario is I (my estate) has to find a new buyer and start the process from scratch. The fact that he is storing the MG legally according to ATF rules at my house during this time doesn't change anything. The liability is ALL on me, not on him.
  12. For sure. Thanks for the suggestions. I will have to load up on uppers now I just wanted to reiterate this point since people keep mentioning it....There is absolutely zero reason a seller should have for not wanting to agree to this once he has the money as he carries no risk. He has what's owed to him ($$) and legally I own the gun as soon as I hand over the money, I just don't have the right to possess it. Even if I was wrong about my interpretation of the ATF rules. It would be me that is on the hook for anything as I am the one that would be in some form of constructive possession not him. As a side note, ALOT of guys in California own NFA items that they keep at their friedns house elsewhere. It's not allowed in CA but they still want it for collection and/or use when they are visiting. It's allowed for the same reason. Anyways, thanks again for the input guys.
  13. Thanks for chiming in guys. I know many of you guys are in the "I've always done it this way so it is the only way" thought process, and I understand and respect it. KISS (Keep it simple stupid) works. I will be moving forward with a private party purchase of an m16 locally and we will do it the lockbox way. I have talked to more people and that doing it this way is "by the book" as long as I do not have the key. In case you guys didn't get it from my last post, it's not just about trusting another individual. That's only one small part of it. I've talked to the seller more and I believe he is trustworthy. And it's not about getting it sooner or circumventing some wait time (I won't have access to it!). But anything can happen in a year. if it is possible for a seller to not have to be responsible for something that is no longer theirs, that is the best option.
  14. Right. I am glad you are using exact language, because when dealing with the law it is important. An m16, but I am also looking for an m60. I'm not sure what ownership has to do with me taking the registered part in the way I described. I'm not taking the registered part because I own it or have some kind of permission from the BATFE to possess it as my own. I am storing it for the seller. Storing it for someone else is explicitly allowed by the ATF as long as it is in a locked container you don't have a key to and you have a letter stating you are given permission to store it. So I'm not sure if you fully read my post or what? If you own a MG as an individual and you keep it at home unlocked... The second you leave the house while your wife is home, you guys are TECHNICALLY in trouble as she has construed possession of something she isn't allowed to have. Something along those lines. What makes it ok is if you have it in a safe she doesn't have access to. Implying that possession is defined by who has the ability to ultimately hold it in their hands without extraordinary/illegal actions (like cutting into a container). This is not my first transfer, but this would be my first private party NFA transfer.
  15. Cutting the box and getting the firearm is only a disservice to himself and no skin off his back. Again, he now has all the money and I am now in possible of a MG illegally. But hopefully my post right before this one clears up why I am asking these questions.
×
×
  • Create New...