I read the linked article, and it contains a number of "facts" that are not necessarily linked to anything, or even relevant. There is simply not enough information provided to even inform us what crime was committed, if any, and how.
All we really know is that he is being charged with ....
The rules for AP (rifle) ammo are a bizarre collection based on the paranoid fantasies of zealots. For close on a century AP ammo was not regulated any differently than other ammo. Today, it is covered by numerous restriction that do not apply to other ammo.
The key information needed to support the charge of "manufacturing AP ammo without a license" is not given to us, at this time.
And, there are, I believe, allowances in the law for certain things, but not others. "Manufacturing" AP ammo might be handloading AP bullets into your own brass. I don't know the current interpretation of the law, but at one time, you could legally do this, make AP ammo by handloading, FOR YOUR OWN PERSONAL USE, without needing a license.
BUT, you could not sell, trade, or even give AP ammo to anyone else without a license being needed. (legal eagles, please correct me if I get anything wrong)
The guy ran a "hobby" ammo business, (apparently) buying and selling ammo, and freely admits he sold ammo to the guy who became the Vegas shooter. (so, finding his fingerprints on ammo the Vegas shooter had is kind of a no brainer, but its good "click bait" headline material.
Same with the article saying how police "seized" AP bullets (and other things) when they conducted a search warrant on his place. It's probably a fact, but does it mean a crime was committed because they found AP bullets (not loaded ammo- IF the reporter used the correct word)??
it does not. Lots of us all over the country have some AP bullets, or even some actual AP ammo
eek:
) it's still, as far as I know, perfectly legal to own. Doing anything else with it can run into some laws, but just having it isn't a crime, yet...
I note that the guy isn't being charged in dealing ammo without a license, or making and selling ammo without a license. Facts are missing, but this implies that he did have the needed licenses for what he was doing.
SO far as we know, right not, he's being charged with making AP ammo without a license. Only that. So far, anyway.
It is not impossible that the charge of making AP ammo without a license is based on the DA using the constructive possession argument to make his case. (he HAD AP bullets, he was a reloader, therefore he could have made AP ammo, and so can be charged...)
We'll have to see where this one goes. Other than sensational sounding headlines, at this point there is almost nothing else.