Glock Talk

Glock Talk (http://glocktalk.com/forums/index.php)
-   Gun-Control Issues (http://glocktalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Malfunction = Machinegun = Arrest & Conviction (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=810186)

MTPD 01-13-2008 20:11

Malfunction = Machinegun = Arrest & Conviction
 
Drill instructor convicted after rifle jams

Guardsman guilty of illegally transferring 'machine gun' after firearm malfunctions

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: January 13, 2008
1:00 a.m. Eastern



© 2008 WorldNetDaily.com


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.


"If your semiautomatic rifle breaks or malfunctions you are now subject to prosecution. That is now a sad FACT. I guess we know now what Sen. Kennedy meant when he said he looked forward to working with [Acting Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Director] Mike Sullivan on Gun control issues, after his committee approved him for full Senate vote," Len Savage, a weaponry expert who runs Historic Arms LLC, said in a blog.

"To those in the sporting culture who have derided 'black guns' and so-called 'assault weapons'; Your double barreled shotgun is now next up to be seized and you could possibly be prosecuted if the ATF can get it to 'fire more than once,'" he wrote in a blog run by Red's Trading Post.


"Hey, but don't worry," Savage said. "The people testing it have no procedures in writing and the testing will be in secret. Also if you know of information that proves YOUR innocence, maybe the ATF won't claim that it's tax information at your trial and prevent YOUR judge from viewing it."

He told an interview with Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership that Olofson had been instructing a man in the use of guns, and the student asked to borrow a rifle for some shooting practice.

"Mr. Olofson was nice enough to accommodate him," Savage said. So the student, Robert Kiernicki, went to a range and fired about 120 rounds. "He went to put in another magazine and the rifle shot three times, then jammed," Savage said.

A couple of police officers who also were at the ranged immediately approached him and started asking questions about the "automatic" fire, and he told them it was a borrowed weapon.

"Mr. Olofson, being a responsible person, went down to the police station and said, 'I'm in the National Guard. I know what a machine gun looks like. That's not it,'" Savage said.

But instead of having the issues resolve, Savage said, it got worse.

He reported that because of the malfunction, the rifle was seized and sent to the Firearm Technology Branch, the testing arm of the federal agency.

"The examined and test fired the rifle; then declared it to be 'just a rifle,'" Savage said. "You would think it would all be resolved at this point, this was merely the beginning."

He said the Special Agent in Charge, Jody Keeku, asked for a re-test and specified that the tests use "soft primered commercial ammunition."

"FTB has no standardized testing procedures, in fact it has no written procedures at all for testing firearms," Savage said. "They had no standard to stick to, and gleefully tried again. The results this time...'a machinegun.' ATF with a self-admitted 50 percent error rate pursued an indictment and Mr. Olofson was charged with 'Unlawful transfer of a machinegun.'. Not possession, not even Robert Kiernicki was charged with possession (who actually possessed the rifle), though the ATF paid Mr. Kiernicki 'an undisclosed amount of money' to testify against Mr. Olofson at trial," Savage said.

And then during the trial, the prosecution told the judge it would not provide some information defense lawyers felt would clear their client, Savage continued. That included the fact that the rifle's manufacturer, Olympic Arms, had been issued a recall notice for that very model in 1986 over an issue of guns inadvertently slipping into full automatic mode, if certain parts were worn or if certain ammunition was used.

Ryan Horsley, who posts the Red's Trading Post blog, said the results were "very concerning."

"Basically if your Ruger 10/22, Browning Citori Over and Under or Remington 11-87 malfunction and fire more than one round at a time; the ATF will now consider it a machine gun," he wrote.

He told WND he's had personal experience with guns that malfunction and fire more than one bullet. Even double-barreled shotguns, if both shells would be released at once, now could be considered machine guns and illegal, he said.

"This precedent is very dangerous," he said.

Defense attorneys in the Olofson case couldn't be reached immediately to determine whether an appeal would be pursued, but Savage noted the arguments by assistant U.S. Attorney Greg Hannstad, who handled the prosecution.

"Haanstad claimed the law does not exempt a malfunction. He claims that it states 'any weapon that shoots more than once without manual reloading, per function of the trigger is a machinegun.' To clarify when I was on the stand, I asked him, 'Are you saying if I take my Great Granddaddy's double barrel out and I pull one trigger and both barrels go off, it's a machinegun?' He went back to … 'any weapon that shoots…'" Savage said.

troy96 01-13-2008 20:13

deja vu

PeterJasonMN 01-13-2008 20:15

= Repost.


Here we go again, using WND as a sole-source.

Doc_Fuller 01-13-2008 20:32

WTF Over!!!
-Doc

Sam Spade 01-13-2008 20:33

The one piece of good news is that we can see who relies on what for information.

Oh, that and I saved a bunch of money by switching my car insurance.

MTPD 01-13-2008 21:08

ADDITIONAL SOURCE, AS REQUESTED, quoting Len Savage-President
Historic Arms LLC
--------------------------------------------------------------
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Len Savage: "Duck Hunters and Sportsman, You're the next target of the ATF!"

Acting ATF Director Michael J. Sullivan has taken the ATF to an all time low during a Federal trial this week, (US v. Olofson, Milwaukee Wisconsin). US District Judge, the Honorable Charles N. Clevert chastised Assistant US attorney Gregory J. Hannstad, for attempting to "Dupe the Defense" during the trial for attempting to use slight of hand to prevent me from testifying for Mr. Olofson.

Mike Sullivan and the ATF Duped the Federal District Court, and Judge Clevert. But this is nothing new!

Mr. Olofson, a Drill Instructor in the National Guard, was asked by Robert Kiernicki to teach him how to shoot a firearm. Olofson did and from time to time would let Mr. Kiernicki borrow his oldest AR-15 , go to a public range and target practice. He always returned the firearm and on his third time at the range after 120 rounds down range the rifle sputtered three times and jammed. The Law enforcement on the range swept in...

The rifle in question seized now by the ATF; It was sent to Firearm Technology Branch (FTB), the testing Arm of the BATFE. They examined and test fired the rifle; then declared it to be "just a rifle". You would think it would all be resolved at this point, this was merely the beginning. The Special Agent in Charge Jody Keeku asked FTB to re-test the firearm and this time use soft primered commercial ammunition.

FTB has no standardized testing procedures, in fact it has no written procedures at all for testing firearms. They had no standard to stick to, and gleefully tried again. The results this time..."a Machinegun". ATF with a self admitted 50% error rate pursued an indictment and Mr. Olofson was charged with "Unlawful transfer of a machinegun". Not possession, not even Robert Kiernicki was charged with possession (who actually possessed the rifle), though the ATF paid Mr. Kiernicki "an undisclosed amount of money" to testify against Mr. Olofson at trial.

At the same time Mr. Olofson was being charged with "Unlawful Transfer" because the rifle malfunctioned and had a M-16 trigger, disconnector, and hammer; calling it an AR-15 with M-16 trigger parts (not the parts that make a machinegun). The ATF removed "a machinegun" from the NFRTR or NFA registry, claiming it was an AR-15 with M-16 parts, therefore NOT "a machinegun". I have the documents, I can prove this.

The court was never shown this information. When Mr. Olofson's Attorneys requested the court compel the ATF to provide this and other documents that proved his innocence to the court. The ATF Chief Counsel's Office told the court the documents contained tax information (federal excise tax stamp for $200) and the court was prohibited from seeing them. All documents were kept secret from the Honorable Judge Clevert and the rest of the court. Even the letter from the ATF to the manufacturer of Mr. Olofson's rifle from 1986, which mandated a "safety recall" due to the rifle going "full auto" if it malfunctioned. ATF Chief Counsel told AUSA Haanstad, who then told the court "The Court will have take our word, that the documents in question contain tax information and contain no exculpatory evidence".

It gets even worse...

AUSA Haanstad claimed the law does not exempt a malfunction. He claims that it states "any weapon that shoots more than once without manual reloading, per function of the trigger is a machinegun". To clarify when I was on the stand, I asked him "Are you saying if I take my Great Granddaddy's double barrel out and I pull one trigger and both barrels go off, its a machinegun?". He went back to the law (United States Code, Section 5845 (b)), and claims "any weapon that shoots..."
If your semiautomatic rifle breaks or malfunctions your are now subject to prosecution. That is now a sad FACT. I guess we know now what Senator Kennedy meant when he said he looked forward to working with Mike Sullivan on Gun control issues, after his committee approved him for full Senate vote.


To those in the sporting culture who have derided "black guns" and so called "assault weapons"; Your double barreled shotgun is now next up to be seized and you could possibly be prosecuted if the ATF can get it to "fire more than once".

Hey, but don't worry. The people testing it have no procedures in writing and the testing will be in secret. Also if you know of information that proves YOUR innocence, maybe the ATF won't claim that it's tax information at your trial and prevent YOUR judge from viewing it.

Are you next up on the menu?

Len Savage-President
Historic Arms LLC

Listen to Len Savage's interview on Talkin' To America

UPDATE: The Paid witness lists himself as a Sergeant in the Army Reserves, there appears to be no one by that name listed as a Sergeant in the Army Reserves.


Posted by redstradingpost at 4:20 PM

Bladerunner71 01-31-2008 07:49

Should be up on CNN in the next week or so on Lou Dobbs. and the Knox report is running an updated story shortly. It will also be available in shotgun news the 3rd week of February.


G. Gordon Liddy podcast that covers this case.
http://hosts.radioamerica.org/podcas...7-01-08_H1.mp3
Articles

http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2008/0...rd-guards.html

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/articl...TICLE_ID=59650

http://redstradingpost.blogspot.com/


JPFO Podcast

http://www.jpfo.org/media-sound/len-savage-01-10-08.mp3



JPFO Transcripts

http://www.jpfo.org/pdf/LenSavage011008.pdf


Link to the smoking gun in this case

www.nfaoa.org/documents/ATFmemoTaxInfo6103.pdf

"Except for section 6103 (o)(1), which authorizes the discloser of tax information to Federal Employee whose official duties require such information"

Would the Honorable Judge Clevert have proceeded if he found out that ATF at the same time, in another part of the country declared an AR-15 with M-16 parts [including bolt carrier] was NOT a machine gun, and was removed from the National Machine gun Registry?

I doubt it. I also doubt the jury would have bought the ATF fictional display on the stand if they had access to it. I also believe it would never have gone to court if they knew they had to disclose it and the jury would see it.

Bladerunner71 02-01-2008 15:15

Heard the transcrips got released today. Ought to be interesting when we can see them posted.

passive101 02-01-2008 15:29

So we are all potential criminals :)


Bring the reset button.

Bladerunner71 02-01-2008 15:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by passive101 (Post 9782963)
So we are all potential criminals :)


Bring the reset button.

If you belive what the feds want you to.

Bladerunner71 02-04-2008 10:37

From another post. Thought it was interesting. Made me wonder if the guns were really converted or if the ATF was just trying another wild BS claim about the weapons. Although if he had a still they will most likely have him.

Quote:
League City man is held on moonshine, arms counts
Authorities discover stills, confiscate two Tommy guns

By HARVEY RICE
Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle

GALVESTON — A League City man was charged in federal court Friday with operating two moonshine stills and possessing four automatic weapons, including two Tommy guns.

The five-count indictment against Chris Coulter Hinkley, 54, was read to him by U.S. Magistrate Judge John Froeschner.

Hinkley is charged with two counts of distilling spirits at a dwelling and three counts of possessing an unregistered firearm.

An Aug. 3 raid by federal and state agents and League City police on Hinkley's home discovered a still, boiler and equipment for making moonshine, according to the indictment.

Authorities also confiscated an Olympic Arms Commando model .223-caliber machine gun; a DoubleStar, Star-15 .223-caliber machine gun, and two 1928-type Thompson .45-caliber machine guns, the indictment said.

Hinkley was indicted by a federal grand jury Jan. 23 and arrested at his home Thursday, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office.

Hinkley is represented by the Federal Public Defender's Office.

His attorney could not be reached for comment late Friday.
I saw this in the newspaper yesterday. It makes me wonder if they are using the "if it looks like a duck, it must be a duck" test.

AK_Stick 02-04-2008 21:12

From the first thread on this topic, it sounds like this guy has some very questionable habits, and if this is a true accidental malfunction, is highly suspicious......

Fox 02-04-2008 23:02

It is obvious that the ATF and the prosecutors have a political agenda against gunowners here.

I hope this guy wins the appeal.

Bladerunner71 02-06-2008 21:12

http://www.firearmscoalition.org/ind...7#usercomments

New article from Jeff Knox. A shortened version of this will be running both in the shotgun news and in some other firearm periodicals.

AK_Stick 02-06-2008 21:19

Some facts I gleemed from this.

1. He sold how to make silencer/full auto books at gunshows.
2. There were several 80% receivers in the proccess of being made into guns in his home.
3. He had worked on this gun extensively.
4. The selector switch freely rotated past the semi position, and into the 3rd/auto position. And fired full auto.


Now, any of those is legal, save 4, but when you add them all up, it really looks suspicious......

Ender 02-06-2008 21:26

http://members.aol.com/enjolras15/posters.jpg

repost x 18894! :supergrin:

Juell 02-06-2008 22:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by AK_Stick (Post 9819865)
Some facts I gleemed from this.

1. He sold how to make silencer/full auto books at gunshows.
2. There were several 80% receivers in the proccess of being made into guns in his home.
3. He had worked on this gun extensively.
4. The selector switch freely rotated past the semi position, and into the 3rd/auto position. And fired full auto.


Now, any of those is legal, save 4, but when you add them all up, it really looks suspicious......

Plus, when did the Army start using Drill Instructors?:rofl:
And he KNOWS an AR-15 rifle doesn't look remotely like a machine gun? Because he's NG, and KNOWS what a machine gun looks like.
Sadly, I think he, or the guy he lent the rifle to tried converting it and got caught.

Sam Spade 02-06-2008 23:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by AK_Stick (Post 9805538)
From the first thread on this topic, it sounds like this guy has some very questionable habits, and if this is a true accidental malfunction, is highly suspicious......

If you didn't know, Bladerunner is the guy in question. At least, it's the same screen name that the now-convicted NG guy uses on other forums.

So----Chris, is that you?

Dragoon44 02-06-2008 23:42

Your a suspicious kind of guy Sam, Next I suppose you will think it is suspicious that Bladerunner has 17 total posts. and ALL of them are in threads about this case.

:supergrin:

Bladerunner71 02-07-2008 16:45

You all don't sound overly happy to hear from me...:wavey:

Sam Spade 02-07-2008 17:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bladerunner71 (Post 9824975)
You all don't sound overly happy to hear from me...:wavey:

Actually, I'm pretty neutral on that--hearing from you.

We all have our biases--for me, when I don't have first-hand information, I tend to trust what goes into all the different levels of review leading to a conviction by jury. Just sayin', in the interest of open communication.

So, if I understand things rightly, your appeal will center on questions of law, and not on facts already presented. If that's the case, would you answer a few questions?

I'm dying to know how your Oly ended up with a selector that rotates 180*, to the third position.

1811guy 02-07-2008 17:44

From the article:

At the same time Mr. Olofson was being charged with "Unlawful Transfer" because the rifle malfunctioned and had a M-16 trigger, disconnector, and hammer; calling it an AR-15 with M-16 trigger parts (not the parts that make a machinegun). The ATF removed "a machinegun" from the NFRTR or NFA registry, claiming it was an AR-15 with M-16 parts, therefore NOT "a machinegun". I have the documents, I can prove this.

I only point the following out to demonstrate that I don't think we are getting the full story here.

If the AR15 did in fact have certain M16 internals, the gun could very well be considered a machine gun. If the AR15 had been fitted with an M16 disconnector, trigger and hammer (especially if it had an M16 sear on the trigger) it could function like an AR15 if the other select fire components were absent. Anyone who has built an AR15 knows that many M16 internals would turn their build into a machine gun, even though it is only capable of semi-auto fire (exception would be on parts ATF has said can be used such as M16 bolts and bolt carriers). Getting the gun to fire full-auto again was just another piece of probable cause that ATF was adding to prove their case.

The standard of beyond a reasonable doubt still holds true here, and if the gun were an unmodified rifle from a manufacturer, I doubt that there would have been a conviction. I am inclined to think that M16 parts were knowingly put in the gun, probably not to commit a crime but rather to save $35 on a new CMT parts kit. Kind of crummy, but we all know that messing with the NFA is a quit way to get in trouble, and this situation is proof of that.

Then again, the guy could be completely innocent, and the jury was confused by the technical aspects of the case.

Bladerunner71 02-07-2008 18:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam Spade (Post 9825096)
Actually, I'm pretty neutral on that--hearing from you.

We all have our biases--for me, when I don't have first-hand information, I tend to trust what goes into all the different levels of review leading to a conviction by jury. Just sayin', in the interest of open communication.

So, if I understand things rightly, your appeal will center on questions of law, and not on facts already presented. If that's the case, would you answer a few questions?

I'm dying to know how your Oly ended up with a selector that rotates 180*, to the third position.


We are not to the appeal process yet. There are a few things that happened that has caused us to have a hearing scheduled with the judge. At the hearing it will be decided if the jury verdict gets set aside and I go back for a proper trial, or if it is a full acquittal. If he wants nothing to do with it then he has to come up with a sentence. Then we can move several questions of law to the appeals court. I personally do not see this moving forward without getting reversed. Too many things happened that shouldn’t. There is a lot of information that is not out here yet, and I am under a gag order not to talk about it. I will say if you think what you have currently heard about the governments conduct in this case is bad, you haven't heard squat yet.

But back to the basic thing many are asking, is there stuff that has not been publicly disclosed yet? YES. But I can't be the one to bring it up right now. Best person for first hand information is Len Savage; he can say some of the things I can't, but not all.

And as for m16 parts in AR-15's, it was a common practice years ago to use them, selectors included. And this particular gun is one of the same make and models recalled for the use of them in the mid 80's (when it was made). The manufacture has documentation of this, but the government precluded us from showing it to the judge and jury. Len Savage did testify to that though after consulting with Olympic Arms on the issue though. You will see that when the full transcripts come out.

Bladerunner71 02-09-2008 07:39

Looks like Mr. Savage picked up on this report.

Link to original article about the ATF agent forgetting her gun in the airport bathroom.

http://www.fdlreporter.com/apps/pbcs...N0101/80207020

Link to article that was posted today.

Titled ” If the ATF shoe were on the other foot....”

http://redstradingpost.blogspot.com/...ther-foot.html

G36's Rule 02-09-2008 07:56

Bladerunner71,

Both links go to nothing.

Good luck to you in this case. Keep us informed when you can.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:49.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2013, Glock Talk, All Rights Reserved.