Charges against Cordell Jackson

[Robin]

WHAM NEWS:
Jackson was charged with three counts of felony first-degree criminal sale of a firearm, one count of felony second-degree criminal Sale of a firearm, and two counts of felony manufacture, transport, disposition and defacement of weapons and dangerous instruments and appliances.

Democrat & Chronicle:
Jackson, 40, of Henrietta. He was charged with four felony-level counts of criminal sale of a firearm, and two felony counts alleging illegal transport and disposition of weapons.

Formal charges as listed:

Rochester First:
Three charged for illegal sales of assault weapons

Charges listed by news agencies, and the Town of Henrietta are all SAFE act violations. Nothing more.
Robin

 

[Robin]

So, where are all these other charges? There may be more, but right now it is all SAFE Act and nothing more!!! Where is all the outrage from our vaunted defenders of the Second!
Robin

 

[Phauxtoe]

Our state government is way out of bounds! (as we all know)

 

[Defilade]

Unreal, This poor guy is made out to look like something worst than Capone while the next State over they are playing "Please pass the 30 rounder"

 

[DeltaEliteMan]

I wonder if the rifles were modified at all when he sold them? Like bullet buttons, ARMagLocks, etc.

 

[Robin]

I don't think so Delta. There was a fellow, I think. on the other forum that had bought one of those guns and made it safe compliant, the state police took it. Last I remember he didn't think he would ever see it again.
Robin

 

[meketrefe]

I wonder if the rifles were modified at all when he sold them? Like bullet buttons, ARMagLocks, etc.

So they are arresting people based on modifications done for compliance with the ban? It doesn't make any sense.
There has to be something else.

 

[Robin]

Mek, the fellow that had his rifle taken by the SO wasn't arrested. They claimed it was evidence.
Robin

 

[meketrefe]

I don't think so Delta. There was a fellow, I think. on the other forum that had bought one of those guns and made it safe compliant, the state police took it. Last I remember he didn't think he would ever see it again.
Robin

So the guns sold were no compliant? In other words, they had pistol grips and/or flash hiders/compensators and/or collapsible stocks and/or forward grips?
and they people who bought them didn't know it? or if they converted them they mean they knew about this?

so many questions.. i guess...

 

[Robin]

My understanding was they were compliant under the existing AW ban, not SAFE.
Jackson Gun and Ammo is in deep
Robin

 

[meketrefe]

So they took finished firearms that were no compliant and didn't make them compliant before selling them?
That is nuts. Specially when it takes less than 10 dollars worth in parts and labor to make them compliant with the BS SAFE.
What I am more surprised with is that people bought them.
Now people might not see their firearms nor the money ever again.

 

[Chuck D]

The firearms were sold in a non compliant form after the passage of the Safe Act.

The purchasers were told they were ok to purchase because the firearms were either in inventory or ordered prior to the passage of the Safe Act .

People were led to believe their firearms were going to be legal of course they were not. Now their are out the firearm which were confiscated by the NYSP and the purchase price which of course they can sue JGS in civil court for but good luck getting blood from a rock.

A real "honest" guy who shafted himself and his customer base for the price of a spur grip, muzzle cap, and/or a Thordsen FRS15 stock.

 

[Robin]

10-32 stove bolt, 10-32 nut, dab of epoxy, total about .75 cents. What the SAFE act has done to hundreds of thousands of honest American citizens that have residence in New York State, beyond measure.
Robin

 

[Chuck D]

Preaching to the choir....

No one I know of Supports Unsafe.

That being said ...he continued to sell items that other dealer distributors took off their shelves until they could reasonably determine what would assure compliance not because they supported the law but to protect themselves, their business, and their customer base against unnecessary risk.

In JGS case, greed was the prime motivator in their "roll the dice" business decision to continue selling what after passage of Unsafe couldn't be sold. Anyone with MSRs in inventory could name their price after the bill was passed. Smart businesses erred on the side if caution.

My guess is if you ordered an MSR and paid for it in full at JGS before the ban, you would never get your money back as that cash was spent the day it was received.

People....be they smart or dumb were taken advantage of.

 

[kev74]

The firearms were sold in a non compliant form after the passage of the Safe Act.

The purchasers were told they were ok to purchase because the firearms were either in inventory or ordered prior to the passage of the Safe Act .

People were led to believe their firearms were going to be legal of course they were not. Now their are out the firearm which were confiscated by the NYSP and the purchase price which of course they can sue JGS in civil court for but good luck getting blood from a rock.

A real "honest" guy who shafted himself and his customer base for the price of a spur grip, muzzle cap, and/or a Thordsen FRS15 stock.

Do we know this as fact, or were the guns modified in a way that might seem to be compliant but the State Police didn't think were kosher?

I can't see someone putting their livelihood on the line over something so stupid and easily avoidable.

 

[Chuck D]

The fact that the NYSP took almost a year tracking down these MSRs and confiscated them without charging the purchaser speaks volumes. They believe JGS misrepresented the MSRs to the purchasers as being legal/compliant with the Safe Act. If they didn't place any credibility in the victims accounts of the transactions there would be numerous purchasers charged as well.

I did hear some were sold with bullet buttons or AR-MR2 kits installed. I can't verify that but I can see that mistake being made on some of the rifles sold later on after passage of Unsafe but not all of them.

Sooner or later people will see this for what it really is....

 

[Robin]

It is a SAFE act case and must be fought on the illegality of the SAFE Act.
Robin

 

[Chuck D]

This is not a 100 percent Safe Act case. Regardless of what is posted here and elsewhere you still REFUSE to admit there are other aspects of the case.

You and I both know Safe is unconstitutional. Having said that NYS Courts upheld it , the 2nd Circuit upheld it. His only hope is jury nullification. A Rochester area criminal Court won't vacate the law and SCOTUS in a 4-4 split if they hear it will solidify it. Besides my last 10 bucks says he takes a plea anyway. They threw the kitchen sink at him for that very reason.

To each their own....

 

[Gunright]

The fact that the NYSP took almost a year tracking down these MSRs and confiscated them without charging the purchaser speaks volumes. They believe JGS misrepresented the MSRs to the purchasers as being legal/compliant with the Safe Act. If they didn't place any credibility in the victims accounts of the transactions there would be numerous purchasers charged as well.

I did hear some were sold with bullet buttons or AR-MR2 kits installed. I can't verify that but I can see that mistake being made on some of the rifles sold later on after passage of Unsafe but not all of them.

Sooner or later people will see this for what it really is....

If these were sold with bullet buttons or AR-MR2 kits installed, then it is even more important to fight the case.

 

[kev74]

Going solely on the information in the complaints above, some of the guns probably weren't converted to be compliant, in particular the Hi-Points, the Sub-2000 and the Siaga shotgun. It will be interesting to see if any of the ARs were converted to be "compliant". If the rifles were converted, we might at least get some clarity as to what is and isn't legal. If the rifles weren't converted, he's screwed.

Whatever other issues are going on, it doesn't matter until charges are filed. I don't know this guy, but from what I've seen, it seems like the the State Police are out to vet him - either for other issues I don't know about, or as a Safe Act test case.

 

[meketrefe]

thanks for explaining @Chuck D
I knew this guy was bad news. He stiffed several people but I would not think he would knowingly expose customers and his business to something like this.
But hopefully, out of this suit some of the non-sense will surface and will work for us although in NYS we are against the most radical liberal forces everywhere.
The SAFE is not about public safety, it is about control.

 

[spat]

Interesting that the complaint includes language that the weapons were deemed to be operable, but none that they were deemed to be AWs.

 

[Robin]

An unconstitutional law, enacted illegally. It must be fought!
Robin
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” ― Edmund Burke

 

[Chuck D]

I don't disagree for the millionth time. What I'm attempting to say is that the application of Unsafe isn't the ONLY factor here. It's a significant factor but it isn't the only factor.

 

[Robin]

Never quit!
Robin

 

[nortatoga]

Where are the ATF charges? Or are they letting NY go first so they can claim a Safe-Act arrest that is not a add on to some other charge!

 

[GOYABEAN]

Dec /6 /1957 a day that could have been prevented if someone would have used contraceptives FUAC

 

[JosERW]

Could this case be taken to SCOTUS to overturn unsafe?