The Olofson Case - Merged Threads

Are you kidding? They don't have to prove that he knew or not! The law does not restrict them in that regard and thats why he now has a felony conviction along with the rest of his civil and criminal raps! Clearly, if this lad had been reasonably clean he'd not be in this predicament. Mind you I'm not throwing stones here, I'm just pointing to the obvious. I don't wish this poor guy any further ill, it's just that the past always comes back to haunt us, and in he's case the USA felt they could prove their complaint over his proclaimed ignorance. And any man or woman who's had to deal with the Fed will tell you, it's not what they did, it's what they can prove they did, the truth has nothing to do with it.
 
what a story

I'm from Wisconsin and have never heard of this case or read any thing in any of the new papers of this case. To the best of my knowledge the state of Wisconsin does not have any military boot camps so I don't see why there would be any Drill Instructors. We do have some Reserve and National Guard bases but I'm pretty sure the only place anyone is called a Drill Instructor is basic training. I think anything like this would have hit the local news media pretty fast and heavy had it happened.
 
Let the appeal run its course and then we can all speak in an educated fashion
Click to expand...

So on your argument, once a trial concludes, there can be no public debate about the quality of the decision, or it's implications for the general public, and we must all crawl away and assume the Court/Jury was always right?
 
So on your argument, once a trial concludes, there can be no public debate about the quality of the decision, or it's implications for the general public, and we must all crawl away and assume the Court/Jury was always right?
Click to expand...

Public debate is one thing. Stating that the jury didn't get it right simply because it is a gun issue or coming to conclusions without knowledge of what the jury heard, or who this guy is not public debate. Its just kneejerk rantings.

The fact that everything got real quiet once it was found out that this guy has had massive legal problems pretty much proves exactly what WA was saying.
 
Irony: Hey, don't worry be happy. :p If he's arrested and convicted he MUST have been guilty! :rolleyes:

Yes, we need to study the legal process... ALL of us.
No, gov't isn't correct merely because they are gov't.
 
Mr. Dobbs needs to do a little more research. Olofson has a number of convictions including one for carrying a concealed firearm in WI. He's been a defendent on the losing end 18 out of 19 times since 1994.
Click to expand...
Do you care to explain how this has any relevance to his current case? If I'm convicted of not paying child support, does that automatically mean if I'm accused of murder I'm by default guilty?

His rifle malfunctioned. Expert witnesses testified to that. The government presented absolutely no evidence that he tampered with the rifle or knowingly transferred a machinegun. The ATF tests originally concluded the rifle wasn't a machinegun. After a supervisor ordered a retest and instructed the tester to use soft primed ammo, they eventually got it to malfunction (and that's exactly what it was). But because he didn't pay his bills and got pinched for a concealed weapons charge, all of a sudden the facts of the case are irrelevant?

Interesting concept. ...and before you say "that's not what I said", it's clearly what you're implying. That is, unless you care to elaborate.
 
Public debate is one thing. Stating that the jury didn't get it right simply because it is a gun issue or coming to conclusions without knowledge of what the jury heard, or who this guy is not public debate. Its just kneejerk rantings.
Click to expand...
That's why they have transcripts and they're public record.
 
Wild, you miss the point entirely. He shouldn't be in prison in the first place. At worst his firearm should be inspected; held until he purchases parts to repair or the weapon sent to the manufacturer for repair; tested and returned.

Appeals can take years which is long enough to be seriously injured or killed in prison at worst and several years of your life destroyed. Surely you know this.
 
Do you care to explain how this has any relevance to his current case? If I'm convicted of not paying child support, does that automatically mean if I'm accused of murder I'm by default guilty?

His rifle malfunctioned. Expert witnesses testified to that. The government presented absolutely no evidence that he tampered with the rifle or knowingly transferred a machinegun. The ATF tests originally concluded the rifle wasn't a machinegun. After a supervisor ordered a retest and instructed the tester to use soft primed ammo, they eventually got it to malfunction (and that's exactly what it was). But because he didn't pay his bills and got pinched for a concealed weapons charge, all of a sudden the facts of the case are irrelevant?
Click to expand...


Sure thing, if you had read further in the thread I stated that even though it wasn't admissable in court. This guy has shown a history of not following the rules. After reading his statements and the statements of the person he loaned the rifle to, I personally think it was another instance of him ignoring the rules.
The relavence is that all of these groups who are championing his cause are touting him as a stand up guy, wrapping him in the flag because he's in the ANG and stating on national TV he has no criminal record. None of which is true IMO.
 
As for the charge of carrying concealed in WI, that's like carrying a Bible in the USSR--hardly what I'd call a crime but technically there is some meaningless scribble on paper somewhere outlawing it.
 
As for the charge of carrying concealed in WI, that's like carrying a Bible in the USSR--hardly what I'd call a crime but technically there is some meaningless scribble on paper somewhere outlawing it.
Click to expand...


I don't agree with it either another reason I won't live in WI. Meaningless or not according to their state law it's a crime. He has a proven track record of not doing what is "right" according to the laws he has chosen to be governed by.
 
So you do believe that if you commit one crime you're automatically guilty of another. Please, do everything in your power stay off of a jury. :D

I certainly have never held this guy up as any saint. I could care less about his inability to pay his bills or that he's been pinched for carrying a concealed weapon. To me it's all irrelevant, as it should be. I'm more concerned with the ATF being over zealous in interpreting the laws that can have a VERY real affect on you and me. I've been around guns for over 20 years and I've seen rifles on the line double up, and I've seen handguns double. Do you think these people should be convicted of a crime and lose their rights? That's what's at issue here, not tax bills and unpaid credit cards.

You "think" he got sloppy with the rules. So by that, do you mean he purposely altered his rifle? You think he purposely manufactured an illegal machinegun then knowingly transferred it to someone else? Can you cite evidence of this, or do you just "think" he's guilty because he didn't pay his bills?
 
I don't agree with it either another reason I won't live in WI. Meaningless or not according to their state law it's a crime. He has a proven track record of not doing what is "right" according to the laws he has chosen to be governed by.
Click to expand...
So he's automatically guilty of manufacturing a machinegun and transferring said machinegun.

Got it.

We might as well just charge him with an unsolved murder too. I mean, he didn't pay his taxes and he carried a concealed weapon. He must be guilty.
 
So you do believe that if you commit one crime you're automatically guilty of another. Please, do everything in your power stay off of a jury.
Click to expand...

No, the jury who convicted him thought he was guilty.
Funny you should mention jury duty. I was called for jury duty last month:p


I certainly have never held this guy up as any saint. I could care less about his inability to pay his bills or that he's been pinched for carrying a concealed weapon. To me it's all irrelevant, as it should be. I'm more concerned with the ATF being over zealous in interpreting the laws that can have a VERY real affect on you and me. I've been around guns for over 20 years and I've seen rifles on the line double up, and I've seen handguns double. Do you think these people should be convicted of a crime and lose their rights? That's what's at issue here, not tax bills and unpaid credit cards.
Click to expand...


I've been around them for much longer than 20 years and I've seen them double as well. This rifle did more than double, but the biggest difference betwen the "normal" person who has a firearm malfunctioning and this guy is that a normal person will get it fixed; not loan it out to somebody while they know it is malfunctioning.


You "think" he got sloppy with the rules. So by that, do you mean he purposely altered his rifle? You think he purposely manufactured an illegal machinegun then knowingly transferred it to someone else? Can you cite evidence of this, or do you just "think" he's guilty because he didn't pay his bills?
Click to expand...


At a minimum he knowingly altered the safety selector switch and or FCG. That is the only way to get a 3 position switch in an AR. IMO he knowingly manufactured a gun capable of firing more than one round per trigger pull. He may have stumbled into it by mistake, but knowing that it did it, keeping it in that configuration and loaning it out while giving a warning about it, to me that says he knowingly did it.
 
That's why they have transcripts and they're public record.
Click to expand...

And you assume that everyone here has read said transcripts.


So he's automatically guilty of manufacturing a machinegun and transferring said machinegun.

Got it.

We might as well just charge him with an unsolved murder too. I mean, he didn't pay his taxes and he carried a concealed weapon. He must be guilty.
Click to expand...

Thats baloney and you know it. Because someone has been convicted of things in the past does not make them guilty of the current crime. However, his consistent failure to follow the law, especially when its gun related, does dispute the idea that he had no intent to alter his weapon.

While we don't convict people based on what they have done in the past, its ridiculous to say that it shouldn't be taken into account.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top