1911Forum banner

Government Wrong: Ex-ATF agent at center of legal dispute over AR-15

2K views 12 replies 11 participants last post by  wccountryboy 
#1 ·
As a firearms expert providing expert testimony in criminal and civil cases involving firearms, especially the 80% receivers, he is creating a problem for prosecutors. He has helped get cases dismissed against defendants regarding blank AR receivers. Claims the government has been misinterpreting the law for 50 years with respect to AR15's and the definition of a receiver.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/07/us/ex-atf-agent-ar-15/index.html
... O'Kelly is using his formidable firearms expertise and institutional knowledge of the ATF to take aim at his former employer.

He's at the center of a brewing legal dispute that federal prosecutors say has the potential to upend the 1968 Gun Control Act and "seriously undermine the ATF's ability to trace and regulate firearms nationwide."
and

In December, a federal judge in Ohio dismissed weapons-related charges against two men after O'Kelly testified that the AR-15 part at issue in their case was not subject to federal law or regulation.
File this under the 'inconvenient truth' folder. ;)
 
#2 ·
Go man go!!!

Sounds way to good to ever happen plus he better cover his six because he’s messing with the REAL gangsters. The mafia of the biggest crime family in the world. He’s liable to end up going on a perminant vacation on Epsteen island
 
#3 ·
I've always wondered how it is the lower on a FAL isn't "the gun" and the "upper" is but on an AR it is the opposite. Same regarding a Ruger Standard and a Luger. I don't know what the upshot of all this is. I have about 6 AR lowers and a dozen uppers. There seems a lot more variety of uppers. Would they become "the gun"?
 
#5 ·
That was my thought. Where you could have a nice lower with your nice custom trigger and stock of choice and could order a couple of uppers tailored to different purposes straight to your door, it could end up as you said. Each upper or each upper/lower combo could end up being considered the firearm.

While it takes the upper to chamber a round and direct it after launch, the lower is still the part that acts as the go switch.
 
#11 ·
There are (according to the BATFE) some 423 million firearms in circulation since the 1986 modification to the 1968 GCA. Which means most of the semi auto pistols and modular rifles manufactured in the past 50 years only have one part serialized, the frame/receiver as we traditionally define it.

So it's going to be difficult to pass a new law requiring all the parts that make the firearm functional to be serialized because of the volume of guns out there that were serialized to the old interpretation. They could change the law which would then have to grandfather in the old guns.

Nevertheless, more hassle, more chances to run into a snafu.
 
#8 ·
At least a former ATF agent actually knows what the laws are. The laws are so confusing, the damn atf don't even know what they are. I called my local office for a question once, and they didn't even know the answer. I can't even remember what it was about now, but anyway, they're a joke.
 
#13 ·
ATFE is about the bottom rung of the Federal LE, not exactly the best and brightest. I've spoken to the NFA Branch in WV a couple times.... called with a question, don't remember what specific. Recieved a less than confident answer. Called again the next day, spoke to someone different, asking the same question. Whas confidently given an answer that directly contradicted what I'd been told the day before....

Someone mentioned serialized parts- this is a carry over from the days when parts were hand fit. Guns produced on a very large scale (particularly in Europe, where a greater degree of precision is the expected norm) serialized all of the parts, because they weren't always fully interchangeable. The tolerance stacking from a large number of small, hand fit parts could quickly render a piston non functional.
 
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top