Feds Dropping Weapons Charges To Keep Regulations On The Books

[livingston]

Feds Dropping Weapons Charges To Keep Regulations On The Books
U.S. Attorneys have quietly dropped at least two cases against individuals charged with illegally possessing a lower receiver after two different federal judges ruled that the lower receivers do not meet the federal definition of a firearm, according to a new CNN story. The first case was back in 2016, and involved a convicted felon named Alejandro Jimenez who bought a lower receiver in an ATF sting operation. After a judge ruled that the receiver wasn’t an actual firearm under federal law, the case against Jimenez was dropped.

Earlier this year, according to CNN, federal prosecutors also dropped similar charges against a California man named Joseph Roh, who was accused of running an illegal gun factory outside of Los Angeles. While the judge in the case ruled that Roh was guilty of selling finished firearms without a license, the judge also decided that the ATF had improperly ruled that 80% finished receivers as well as the finished receivers themselves were firearms.

He rejected the prosecution’s argument that the ATF’s interpretation of the regulation describing a receiver could reasonably be applied to the device at issue in Roh’s case.
“There is a disconnect,” the judge wrote.
Feds Dropping Weapons Charges To Keep Bad Regulations On The Books

 

[livingston]

Instead of accepting the judge’s ruling, the U.S. Attorney handling the case ended up offering Roh a plea bargain that would keep him out of prison, and keep the judge’s ruling from being used as an argument in future cases.
This is not only going to be an issue for the ATF and U.S. Attorneys around the country going forward, but gun control groups could see some of their preferred policies stymied as well. If, in fact, lower receivers don’t meet the federal definition of a firearm, what does that mean for New York Attorney General Letitia James’ recent order to more than a dozen companies to stop selling unfinished receivers to New York residents. Under the existing definition of a “firearm” in federal code, not only are the unfinished lower receivers not firearms, finished lower receivers aren’t guns either. Can James really ban the sale of a block of metal to New York residents? I’m not an attorney, but it seems beyond a 2nd Amendment challenge there’s a Commerce Clause challenge waiting to be made.

In the meantime, it seems as if the DOJ is continuing to prosecute these types of cases, but will back off if a judge issues a ruling that puts their interpretation of the ATF regulations in jeopardy. Rather than change their regulations to comply with the federal definition of a firearm, it seems like they’re taking this on a case-by-case basis and hoping to avoid any “problematic” rulings in the future.

 

[BDinPutnam]

Sweet.

So if a finished lower is not a firearm, no more NICS for lowers.

I can hear my credit card shredding itself now.

 

[ArmedCorgi]

Sweet.

So if a finished lower is not a firearm, no more NICS for lowers.

I can hear my credit card shredding itself now.

Or your debt to income ratio getting blown out!

 

[livingston]

California man sold illegal AR-15s. Feds agreed to let him go free to avoid hurting gun control efforts

 

[Saltwater60]

They are right. They aren’t firearms so I can’t see how they can charge you with illegal firearms for possessing one.
While it would be great to have this go further it likely won’t.

 

[livingston]

After both sides presented their evidence, the defense filed a motion for acquittal, arguing that the government’s case against Roh was “legally flawed” because the charges were based on a violation of an internal ATF “classification” as opposed to federal law.

Nicolaysen argued that the definition of a receiver under the relevant federal code differed in various ways from the AR-15 component Roh was accused of manufacturing.

Under the US Code of Federal Regulations, a firearm frame or receiver is defined as: “That part of a firearm which provides housing for the hammer, bolt or breechblock, and firing mechanism, and which is usually threaded at its forward portion to receive the barrel.”

The lower receiver in Roh’s case does not have a bolt or breechblock and is not threaded to receive the barrel, Nicolaysen noted.

He called the decision to classify it as a firearm nonetheless, the result of “secret, in-house decision-making.”
Nicolaysen accused the ATF of abusing its authority by pursuing Roh based on his alleged violation of a policy “that masquerades as law.”

He asked the judge to consider recommending that then-US Attorney General Jeff Sessions conduct a review to determine whether there were any similar cases pending around the country or past convictions “sustained on the basis of ATF policy, rather than law.”
California man sold illegal AR-15s. Feds agreed to let him go free to avoid hurting gun control efforts

 

[BDinPutnam]

Or your debt to income ratio getting blown out!

Or my wife's lawyer calling!

 

[livingston]

this is the plaintiffs brief that got the tentative ruling

https://www.scribd.com/document/4298...-receiver-case

USA brief
https://www.scribd.com/document/4298...-receiver-case

reply

https://www.scribd.com/document/4298...-receiver-case

 

[Acer-m14]

who is selling AR lowers engraved " not a firearm " now ..

 

[livingston]

The ATF’s Definition of an AR-15 Lower as a ‘Firearm’ Is In Serious Trouble
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/t...-15-lower-as-a-firearm-is-in-serious-trouble/
First, credit where it’s due. CNN’s Scott Glover has managed to turn out an excellent article about a fairly arcane aspect of guns and firearms law while getting the details right. That’s a notable feat for legacy media these days. Read the whole thing here.

With that out of the way, the criminal prosecution — aborted though it was — that Glover has written about is worthy of note and could make the ATF’s job of regulating AR-15 sales going forward extremely difficult. CNN’s article is titled, He sold illegal AR-15s. Feds agreed to let him go free to avoid hurting gun control efforts.

The aspect that’s worthy of your attention — and is no doubt giving the ATF nightmares — is the argument that Roh’s attorney made in successfully defending his client.

As you probably know, the only part of an AR-15 that’s legally considered a firearm is the lower receiver. That’s the part that’s serialized and requires a background check to purchase (unless you buy an 80% lower and finish it yourself, but that’s another story).
Joseph Roh was smart enough to hire a good attorney, Gregory Nicolaysen. Nicolaysen did his homework and actually read the federal statue that lays out what constitutes — legally speaking — a firearm. As CNN reports, when Roh’s case came to trial in 2018 . . .

Nicolaysen argued that the definition of a receiver under the relevant federal code differed in various ways from the AR-15 component Roh was accused of manufacturing.

Under the US Code of Federal Regulations, a firearm frame or receiver is defined as: “That part of a firearm which provides housing for the hammer, bolt or breechblock, and firing mechanism, and which is usually threaded at its forward portion to receive the barrel.” (emphasis added)

The lower receiver in Roh’s case does not have a bolt or breechblock and is not threaded to receive the barrel, Nicolaysen noted.

And neither does any other AR-15 lower receiver

 

[Acer-m14]

The lower receiver in Roh’s case does not have a bolt or breechblock and is not threaded to receive the barrel, Nicolaysen noted.

ahhhh so the AR series are actually Sammies ( Sandwiches ) ..

 

[livingston]

 

[Acer-m14]

he should have injected .. guess how many factory made guns do not have serial numbers and was sold at the hardware store .. they all can kill too .. .. was it all made pre 68 or something .. havin a brain fart and don't feel like searching ..