JS-Kit/Echo comments for article at http://smallestminority.blogspot.com/2008/05/well-hell-im-felon.html (18 comments)

  Tentative mapping of comments to original article, corrections solicited.

jsid-1210309099-591851  juris_imprudent at Fri, 09 May 2008 04:58:19 +0000

I say to conservatives you thought forfeiture was a great idea when it came to drugs - the chickens have come home to roost.

jsid-1210337199-591858  geekWithA.45 at Fri, 09 May 2008 12:46:39 +0000

BATFE Delenda Est.

jsid-1210337798-591859  ParatrooperJJ at Fri, 09 May 2008 12:56:38 +0000

Don't get me wrong, the AR15 case is a miscarrage of justice but was there not M16 fire control parts in the gun?

jsid-1210338239-591861  GrumpyOldFart at Fri, 09 May 2008 13:03:59 +0000

I think of myself as both conservative and libertarian. And no, I didn't think forfeiture/seizure was a good idea, nor do I now.

But then don't go by my opinuion, because I don't think much of seat belt laws, sobriety checkpoints, or a host of other things that are accepted as standard nowadays, either.

jsid-1210339277-591862  Kevin Baker at Fri, 09 May 2008 13:21:17 +0000

Don't get me wrong, the AR15 case is a miscarrage of justice but was there not M16 fire control parts in the gun?

So? Was it semi-automatic or not? If Olofsen was in possession of an unregistered machine gun, why was he not charged with "possession of an unregistered machine gun"?

No, the BATFucks screwed up, but are going to take him down no matter what, and our legal (not "justice") system is going to help them.

jsid-1210344102-591866  Phil at Fri, 09 May 2008 14:41:42 +0000

Hey Kev, you forgot the "E" at the end of "Always Think Forfieture".

The "E" stands for "Entrapment".

jsid-1210346699-591874  Randy at Fri, 09 May 2008 15:24:59 +0000

The problem isn't lack of uniform testing standards, the problem is ATF arrogance.

And, apparently, the legal concept of Mens Rea is DOA when the Feds are involved.

jsid-1210346787-591875  juris_imprudent at Fri, 09 May 2008 15:26:27 +0000

Hey Kevin, interesting point. Was he charged with an NFA violation or a FOPA, or both? Rock Island should sink the NFA charge. It would be amusing if that was the only charge (but I recall two listed).

jsid-1210347485-591877  Justin Kardel at Fri, 09 May 2008 15:38:05 +0000

That scares the living shit out of me. I had the sear go out on a PPK/s at the range once--in the SF Bay Area no less. To think that our Government sees him as a felon simply due to unforeseeable mechanical wear is beyond belief. Disgusting.

jsid-1210349745-591879  Kevin Baker at Fri, 09 May 2008 16:15:45 +0000


He was convicted of "transferring".

From this site:

Neither Olofson nor his friend was charged with possession of an unregistered machinegun or with illegally manufacturing, modifying, or otherwise making a machinegun. Obviously ATF did not believe they could convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Olofson or his friend had intentionally altered the rifle to fire full-auto so they prosecuted on the easier charge of transferring. Everyone agreed that the gun belonged to Olofson and that he had loaned it to his friend. That meant that the only issue in question in the case was whether the gun was a machinegun. Since ATF is the final arbiter in determining whether a gun is a machinegun, and the law defining machineguns tends to be selectively interpreted by them, the government had a distinct advantage.

As a matter of fact, when the ATF Firearms Technical Branch (FTB) examined the rifle they concluded that it was not a machinegun. They did find that if the Safety switch was moved beyond its normal range of motion, the gun would fire once and jam, leaving a loaded round in the chamber. They determined that moving the Safety in such a way interfered with the trigger disconnector causing the hammer to follow the bolt as it returned to battery rather than being stopped by the sear; a fairly common malfunction known as hammer-follow.

At the request of the local ATF agent, the FTB tested the gun a second time using a brand of .223 ammunition known for having sensitive primers. Those tests resulted in intermittent, unregulated, automatic fire and jamming due to hammer-follow, but this time the FTB concluded that, under strict interpretation of the law, the gun’s malfunction did make it a machinegun.

jsid-1210357212-591890  DJ at Fri, 09 May 2008 18:20:12 +0000


My brother worked as a gunsmith for many years back in the '70's. He describes a malfunction in the Ruger 10-22 that he came across several times. If the firing pin sticks in a forward position, either through not being clean. or to a burr on the pin, or to a malformed pin, one can simply let the bolt fall into battery and it will fire off the whole clip.

It's a simple fix. Just replace the firing pin and spring and test it. But why the hell should the owner spend time in prison for it?

Not surprisingly, I keep my 10-22 spotless inside. So does he with his.

jsid-1210359675-591896  Kresh at Fri, 09 May 2008 19:01:15 +0000

So, how many more of these before the camel collapses?

Just askin.

jsid-1210359861-591898  straightarrow at Fri, 09 May 2008 19:04:21 +0000

Two things, all the conservatives I know were against forfeiture of assets before conviction. So, juris you must be thinking of liberals who all love prior restraint and pre-punishmnent in case a crime was going to be committed.

Two, ATF's testing wasn't fouled up,the original test documented that the rifle was "just a rifle" in the Olafson case. It was sent back for retesting by the field agent with instructions to use soft primered ammo and to not clean the weapon. It finally slam fired under ATF's supervision and charges were pursued.

That is not incompetent testing, that is criminal conspiracy.

jsid-1210378248-591903  juris_imprudent at Sat, 10 May 2008 00:10:48 +0000


I have seen plenty of conservatives (not libertarians) that have no problem with any [pre-]punishment visited upon 'druggies'.


They convinced a jury of this bullshit - beyond a reasonable doubt and all? That scares me more than the mere fact that the govt conceived the charge and lied about the nature of the gun.

And since when did transfer mean letting someone shoot one of your guns while on the range? Jesus H. on a pogo-stick - what kind of idiots in the jury box fell for that?

jsid-1210387556-591909  Tom at Sat, 10 May 2008 02:45:56 +0000

"what kind of idiots in the jury box fell for that?"

The kind that think "he beats me because he loves me" regularly and that have been educated by the government.

The last time I headed over to see a buddy in PA I took my ar. At a local range he took me to I had 2 slide through. Next time that happens I could get nailed with God knows what, not getting prior approval to take my malfunctioning (but now considered a machine gun) across state lines without proper approval.

Oh, and where I come from "forfeiture" is just a fancy way of saying armed robbery.

jsid-1210388441-591911  Randy at Sat, 10 May 2008 03:00:41 +0000

"what kind of idiots in the jury box fell for that?"

Ones that have been carefully vetted to ensure that no one on the jury had any knowledge of firearms or firearms law. I'm sure NRA members bounced twice on the way our the jury selection door.

jsid-1210388445-591912  Kevin Baker at Sat, 10 May 2008 03:00:45 +0000

That's government sanctioned armed robbery.

jsid-1210713266-591999  -B at Tue, 13 May 2008 21:14:26 +0000

If things aren't getting very clear about where this whole thing, in a very wide sense, is headed, to a great many of us, then we are willing accomplices to this whole disaster.

Honestly, do we all need to reread the DofI?

 Note: All avatars and any images or other media embedded in comments were hosted on the JS-Kit website and have been lost; references to haloscan comments have been partially automatically remapped, but accuracy is not guaranteed and corrections are solicited.
 If you notice any problems with this page or wish to have your home page link updated, please contact John Hardin <jhardin@impsec.org>