More equal animals??? This will make you scratch your head, or yell in anger.

W

Wildcard

Moderator
Police chiefs say gun charges against troopers should be dropped

BELLEVILLE, Ill. Many Downstate police chiefs are urging federal prosecutors to drop charges against three Illinois state troopers accused of illegally possessing machine guns.
Troopers Greg Mugge of Jerseyville, John Yard of Collinsville and James Vest of O'Fallon were charged in federal court in East St. Louis last month with illegal possession of automatic weapons.

Belleville Police Chief Dave Ruebhausen presented a letter to the Belleville News-Democrat yesterday saying that the men should be punished administratively if they're guilty.

The letter was signed by nine police chiefs, two state senators and two sheriffs. But interim U-S Attorney Edward McNally says the trooper must be treated the same as any other citizen.

The men face up to 10 years in prison.


http://www.wqad.com/Global/story.asp?S=4471083&nav=1sW7


more:


3 Illinois State Police officers charged
By Michael Shaw
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
Tuesday, Jan. 17 2006

Three Illinois State Police officers, who could legally handle submachine guns
for their jobs, have been charged with violating federal firearms regulations
for allegedly having them at home, officials announced Tuesday.

The troopers - two assigned to District 11 at Collinsville and one to District
18 at Litchfield - were placed on paid leave while their cases are handled in
federal court in East St. Louis.

Also charged is a doctor, formerly of Glen Carbon, who allegedly lent one of
the weapons to a trooper who said he test-fired it and gave it back.

There is no allegation that the men trafficked in illicit weapons or committed
any crime beyond illegally possessing them. Authorities would not say what
launched the investigation or how federal agents found out about the weapons.

U.S. Attorney Ed McNally said the fact that three defendants are law
enforcement officers does not matter.

"Teddy Roosevelt said, 'No man is above the law and no man below it,'" McNally
said at a news conference. "If the United States obtains sufficient evidence
that the law has been violated, whether by a law enforcement officer or any
other public official or a private person, they will be prosecuted."

One of the defendants, Special Agent John Yard, 36, of Collinsville, had
recently worked with federal agents investigating public corruption at East St.
Louis City Hall. He's a nine-year veteran of the State Police.

Charges say Yard admitted borrowing a Colt AR-15 rifle that could be switched
to fire in a fully automatic mode.

According to court documents, Dr. Harold Griffiths, 69, of Spaulding, Ill.,
formerly of Glen Carbon, told federal agents the gun had been converted into a
fully automatic weapon. Spaulding is near Springfield.

Griffiths was among those charged in complaints Jan. 11 that were unsealed
Tuesday.

The others are Sgt. James V. Vest, 39, of O'Fallon, who like Yard works in the
Collinsville district, and Senior Master Trooper Greg Mugge, 51, of
Jerseyville, who is assigned to Litchfield. Both admitted keeping rifles
altered for automatic fire in their homes, according to the affidavits.

Vest, a 16-year State Police veteran, said he bought his M-4/M-16 rifle in 1998
in California, according to court documents. Mugge, with 21 years in the
department, told officials he bought his AR-15 rifle from a now-deceased
licensed dealer in Harrisburg, Ill., in the late 1970s or early '80s.

Under federal firearms laws, not even police officers can own weapons that can
fire a steady stream of bullets with one squeeze of the trigger.

All four entered pleas of not guilty Tuesday and were released without having
to post bail. None of them could be reached for comment.

They had agreed to be interviewed by agents from the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, according to affidavits filed with the
charges, and all consented to searches of their homes. The three weapons cited
in the charges were all seized.

The charge of illegal possession of an automatic weapon carries a maximum
penalty of 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine, although federal guidelines
suggest substantially less punishment for people with no previous criminal
background.

A State Police spokesman said that if the troopers are convicted, a merit board
would decide the fate of their jobs.

State Police Director Larry Trent attended the news conference and described
his accused employees as "three otherwise good officers with good records."

"I'm very disappointed and I deeply regret the judgment used by three of our
officers," Trent said.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/5B733AE3727F1949862570FA001EF501?OpenDocument
 
Three Illinois State Police officers, who could legally handle submachine guns for their jobs, have been charged with violating federal firearms regulations for allegedly having them at home, officials announced Tuesday.
Click to expand...

That's the key quote here.

The author obviously wants them off.

The problem is that I can legally handle FA weapons if under supervision of the owner of that weapon. Police are allowed to have them without special permits by proxy of the concept that they are subject to oversight while on the job.

I would expect that SWAT members keep their FA weapons with them at all times for rapid response if necessary. If these guys are SWAT then I don't see a problem.

If the department policy is to return them at the end of a shift, then I say they stole them and the BATFE should go after them all the way.

If there is any paperwork demonstrating that they were issued that particular gun (like for their service pistol), then they did nothing wrong in my book.
 
Charges say Yard admitted borrowing a Colt AR-15 rifle that could be switched to fire in a fully automatic mode.

Vest, a 16-year State Police veteran, said he bought his M-4/M-16 rifle in 1998
in California, according to court documents. Mugge, with 21 years in the
department, told officials he bought his AR-15 rifle from a now-deceased
licensed dealer in Harrisburg, Ill., in the late 1970s or early '80s.
Click to expand...
It seems clear from the description that these were not agency weapons.

The fact that 9 police chiefs and 2 sheriffs signed a letter trying to get them off is disgusting; I only wish the police chiefs and sheriffs could be charged for abuse of their respective offices.
 
If they are guilty of a crime that would send you or me to jail then they should be judged the same as us. If their job allowed them to keep auto weapons at home then they would not be guilty.
 
The article is unclear. One weapon sounds like it was illegally transfered by a Class III dealer.

One weapon sounds like a registered Class III that was loned by the doctor to a friend.

But the rest of the references sound like they were keeping department weapons at home.

Wonder which it is?


I have to wonder if this activity was officially condoned/encouraged by the department, which explains their handwringing. If so, the officers are only partly to blame - but they did break the law.
 
The others are Sgt. James V. Vest, 39, of O'Fallon, who like Yard works in the
Collinsville district, and Senior Master Trooper Greg Mugge, 51, of
Jerseyville, who is assigned to Litchfield. Both admitted keeping rifles
altered for automatic fire in their homes, according to the affidavits.

Vest, a 16-year State Police veteran, said he bought his M-4/M-16 rifle in 1998
in California, according to court documents. Mugge, with 21 years in the
department, told officials he bought his AR-15 rifle from a now-deceased
licensed dealer in Harrisburg, Ill., in the late 1970s or early '80s.

Under federal firearms laws, not even police officers can own weapons that can
fire a steady stream of bullets with one squeeze of the trigger.
Click to expand...

Vest, a 16-year State Police veteran, said he bought his M-4/M-16 rifle in 1998
in California, according to court documents. Mugge, with 21 years in the
department, told officials he bought his AR-15 rifle from a now-deceased
licensed dealer in Harrisburg, Ill., in the late 1970s or early '80s.
Click to expand...

Somehow, I dont think these were department issue weapons. Sounds like these cops bought them and converted them later. That would land a citizen in jail, thats were the cops need to be.
 
Well not the last one, certainly.

But the other two are "keeping" rifles, not owning. And who altered them for full auto? No dealer is going to do that without letterhead or the registration paper work. If they did it, why not a charge for the mod?:confused:
 
I dont think a LE agency would purchase a weapon, the have it "altered" to auto fire, when they can just purchase a full auto weapon.
 
. Sounds like these cops bought them and converted them later. That would land a citizen in jail, thats were the cops need to be.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Neither the cops nor any otherwise law-abiding citizen needs to be jailed for this act. It's an unjust law, and I hope that if any of you were on a jury in a case like this that you would vote 'not guilty.' Why? Because the law is illegitimate.

I hope they fight the charges vigorously. I hope they win, because it would be a major victory for our 2nd Amendment rights.

I agree with part of the basic premise, though - they should be charged, just as any of us would be charged.
 
Being cops, the reason they will win is because the court will give them consideration they wouldn't give a farmer. It will not establish precedent or change the law.
 
Beren@THR wrote:

It's an unjust law, and I hope that if any of you were on a jury in a case like this that you would vote 'not guilty.' Why? Because the law is illegitimate.
Click to expand...

Care to provide some grounds as to why such a law is unjust or illegitimate?
 
But I don't think fully automatic weapons were covered in the 2A. Even militia or military weapons of the day weren't auto's right? I admit, I am not 100% sure on this, so I will definately be re-reading the 2nd....
 
Of the day? You mean, the day they wrote the bill of rights?

No, autos weren't available. Only black powder muzzle loaders.



Want to rethink that?
 
Wrong. Neither the cops nor any otherwise law-abiding citizen needs to be jailed for this act.
Click to expand...
I dunno... I think the 9 police chiefs, two state senators, and two sheriffs need to be jailed for acting like cops are special, when we all know they wouldn't lift a finger to defend you or me if we had illegal full-auto weapons.
 
Yeppers, tyme.

The law barring ownership of full auto is inherently unjust as an infringement of a God-given, and Constitutionally enumerated, right. The most recent jurisprudence to address the issue in its own muddled way suggested the "arms" spoken of in the 2nd Amendment were arms suitable for use by the militia. And that, dear friends, would be full-auto military battle rifles.

'Course, Beren isn't speaking of how it is, "just" about how it should be.

I'd like to dope-slap the signers of that repugnant letter. "Good enough for thee, but not for me."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top