JPFO intereview with Len Savage, 10 Jan. 2008

[alan]

http://www.jpfo.org/filegen-n-z/talkamerica.htm

An audio of the interview can be found at the above link. Transcript not yet available, it appears.

For those with qualms, the following might be noteworthy.

1. Relations between BATFE and JPFO could well be described as "strained" or "tense", to say the very least. JPFO is, in any case, no friend of BATFE, and never has been.

2. Len Savage also has a "record" with BATFE, having testified as a defense witness in the case of John Glover, where the BATFE came off looking less than competent. He also, is no friend of BATFE, in particular with respect to their antics and management policies.

3. My own view of BATF, for whatever that might be worth is that their antics re firearms enforcement should long since have been checked, and that The Congress has historically failed to apply such checks is an outright disgrace.

At this point, I can only offer the following. Allowing for the fact that people's time is limited, I'm retired, so I have more time than many might, the following remains. It will, I believe, prove worth while for every gun owner who comes upon the above, to spend the 30 minutes the interview runs listening to it, and perhaps taking some notes for future reference or other uses. The rest is in your hands.

 

[44capnball]

I took a dive and read that page then listened to that interview. First when I saw the affidavits from the BATFE I thought it was pretty clear, this guy had a 3 round burst that was illegal. But, when I heard the other side of the story I begun to wonder.

Like Len Savage said, if your granddaddy's double barrel shotgun malfunctions and shoots both barrels with one trigger pull, under their standards its a machine gun. Looks to me like they even admitted as much.

But, the worst thing comes out of this is, they can block evidence that would help your innocence. I thought that was illegal but I guess they do it anyway. I guess nobody can pretend surprised at that. Question is why are they allowed to get away with it as they please.

 

[alan]

44capnball wrote:

I took a dive and read that page then listened to that interview. First when I saw the affidavits from the BATFE I thought it was pretty clear, this guy had a 3 round burst that was illegal. But, when I heard the other side of the story I begun to wonder.

Like Len Savage said, if your granddaddy's double barrel shotgun malfunctions and shoots both barrels with one trigger pull, under their standards its a machine gun. Looks to me like they even admitted as much.

But, the worst thing comes out of this is, they can block evidence that would help your innocence. I thought that was illegal but I guess they do it anyway. I guess nobody can pretend surprised at that. Question is why are they allowed to get away with it as they please.

======================

44capnball and anyone else who might be interested:

Re the above referenced interview, Mr. Savage, as I recall offered that the judge was stuck. Frankly, I’m NOT willing to accept this, for the following reason(s). The BATFE and U.S. Attorney denied material information, not only to defense counsel, but to the trial judge. His honor, being faced with this circumstance, could have settled the matter immediately, with the following four (4) words,
Case Dismissed, With Prejudice. He did not so speak. As for the trial jury, I wonder how it was that this august body managed to find their way to the courthouse, so deeply did it seem that their heads were planted in their posteriors.

As to other aspects of this case, denial of information to defense counsel, it would seem that under the Rules of Discovery, and what might well be my limited understanding thereof, that the governments action would constitute a prima facie grounds for appeal, of course I could be all wrong there.

One final point made by Mr. Savage is the following, and deals with the antics, some years back, and continuing onward to this day, of The Peoples Employees, our elected things, and the piss poor manner of their writing legislation. For instance, according to Savage, and also my limited understanding of the law, a firearm is a “machinegun” under virtually any circumstances, if it can be made to fire multiple shots with a single actuation of the trigger. Seemingly, this would cause a “malfunctioning semi-automatic rifle” , or Worn Double Barreled Shotgunto, be classified as a machine gun, such erroneous classification bringing on an innocent owner, consequences that are serious, to say the least. Seemingly, there is, in the law, no reference whatever to the fact that a malfunctioning firearm is a malfunctioning firearm. It has not magically become a machinegun. Mechanical things, guns are such, sometimes break, they get sloppy due to wear or improper maintenance and so forth. They do not become machineguns or anything else. How is it that the work product of The Peoples Emp-loyees, our elected things, seemingly fails to recognize this?

Something from the Personal Experience Section. Once upon a time, it happened twice with two different 1911 Pistols, I had the damned things go “full auto”, the result of overly ambitious trigger jobs. I managed to hang on to the pistols, and was able to keep them pointed down range, so no harm was done to anyone/anything. Things did get a bit exciting. I suppose that I’m lucky, as was the owner of one of the two pistols that went full auto, that there were neither hot dog police officers or AFT Agents about to witness this rip raring illegality, an “illegality” that was plainly a “malfunction”. I’ve also had a Kimber Custom Classic Target pistol spit out a couple if rounds (2) with a single actuation of the trigger. As this has happened twice in 6 years of steady summer time shooting, I assumed it was caused by some errant particle of dirt getting into the “wrong place, at the wrong time”. “Stuff” happens, but “stuff happening” does not, in my view, a machinegun make, especially when, according to “the government” multiple discharges required the selection and use of “special ammunition”, that with “soft primers”, according to points mentioned in the interview.

 

[SteelCore]

1. Relations between BATFE and JPFO could well be described as "strained" or "tense", to say the very least. JPFO is, in any case, no friend of BATFE, and never has been.

That's good, because a friend of the BATFE is an enemy of the Constitution.

JPFO has some good, uncompromising, politically-incorrect positions. They're not the most politically influential group, but there's no doubt that they speak the real truth on what the Second Amendment is about.

First when I saw the affidavits from the BATFE I thought it was pretty clear, this guy had a 3 round burst that was illegal. But, when I heard the other side of the story I begun to wonder.

Not to be picky or sanctimonious, but according to the Second Amendment, there's really no such thing as an illegal 3 round burst. When the BATFE goes after someone for having such a mechanism, they have the legitimacy of a street punk who robs a man and takes his wallet. They frequently have "might" on their side, but they sure don't have "right."

 

[Cochise3Texas]

BATFE shennaigans

If you read the JPFO supplied documents from the case you might get the idea that the BATFE is more likely trying to make a bit of an example out of the guy, since he buys, repairs and sells guns. I didn't see any mention of an FFL but it seems that he is skirting a fine line if his business falls under the legal def of a dealer. But the stuff that the gov't lawyers was slinging was awful rank.There is some sort of prededant that they are trying to set that makes my ulcers act up.
I wold urge yall to send emails to your senators suggesting a serious review of the operations and sh they are doing. Even if your senators don't care to hear from gun people, it is our responsibility to speak up, and not just in the forums. IF they get enough voices speaking up, they will have to respond, or get un-elected.

 

[alan]

Cochise3Texas:

I copied and pasted my post, link included, to a discussion site at the Pittsburgh TribuneReview. Others might consider doing the same re newspapers in their towns.The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette is strongly anti gun and has been for as long as I can remember.

Obviously, I posted comments and the link on this site, and a couple of others. Passing the same on to "elected things" could be worthwhile, who knows.