ATF Prosecutes man for pistol brace

[Dave]

Why would this particular brace be chosen for a case study vs say the sig brace that actually looks & can somewhat function / perform as a rifle stock??

I see no logic for the charges & surprised the suits higher up allowed the advancement unless some 411 is missing?? I see even less logic for anyone to support the prosecution with the current laws. Criticizing the written laws if you disagree with the definitions would be a better angle. To promote prosecution for the very laws as they are currently worded??

There is a reason the jury didn't take long for a decision. What a bizarre deal

He modified it by putting the cane butt on the end. That didn't come with the original brace. The ATF has been very clear that you can not modify a brace from it's original form or function.

[Artos]

Thanks Dave...one thing I don't keep up with is tacticool AR pistols.

My thinking is the defense showed the Sig brace / other similar approved items to where this modification really didn't alter it to a point worthy of incarceration??

[philcam]

I won't type it all here, but if you want some of the facts of this case, more can be found here:

No the Gov. never alleged he shouldered the gun. Their main argument was the length of pull was over 13.5 inches.

Mr. Wright claims he added the cain tip to help store the pistol upright in his safe.

Oh, and he threw his cell phone at his wife, cops get called for a domestic disturbance and seize all the weapons in his home.

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2018/11/daniel-zimmerman/atf-suffers-rare-court-loss-in-ohio-short-barrel-rifle-prosecution/

[tvc184]

Thanks Dave...one thing I don't keep up with is tacticool AR pistols.

My thinking is the defense showed the Sig brace / other similar approved items to where this modification really didn't alter it to a point worthy of incarceration??

The defense attorneys convinced a jury that the guy did not meet the required culpable mental state of the claimed crime and/or that the claimed crime never existed as the claim did not meet the legal definition.

That is kind of a standard answer but it is true. Most crimes require a culpable mental state in addition to physical facts. An example is that you did something the book says is against the law however it requires that you did it “recklessly”. A jury comes to the conclusion that you did in fact commit the act claimed but you were only negligent and not reckless. That means... not guilty.

That is all a defense must do. An acquittal doesn’t mean the crime was never committed but a crime was never proven. A conviction requires that every fact (required elements of a crime) be proven beyond a reasonable doubt including mental state. If a particular crime has 10 elements and a jury find true on 9 of the 10 but not on any one of them, then the verdict should be not guilty.

[35remington]

The defense attorneys convinced a jury that the guy did not meet the required culpable mental state of the claimed crime and/or that the claimed crime never existed as the claim did not meet the legal definition.

That is kind of a standard answer but it is true. Most crimes require a culpable mental state in addition to physical facts. An example is that you did something the book says is against the law however it requires that you did it “recklessly”. A jury comes to the conclusion that you did in fact commit the act claimed but you were only negligent and not reckless. That means... not guilty.

That is all a defense must do. An acquittal doesn’t mean the crime was never committed but a crime was never proven. A conviction requires that every fact (required elements of a crime) be proven beyond a reasonable doubt including mental state. If a particular crime has 10 elements and a jury find true on 9 of the 10 but not on any one of them, then the verdict should be not guilty.

In this *actual* case, there was no team of defense attorneys. Dude rolled the dice with a public defender and won against a Harvard-trainer DOJ lawyer. That’s how bad the facts were here. ATF measured the LOP with a wonky kangaroo ruler, and once the public defender figured that out it only took the jury an hour to come back with an acquittal.

[tvc184]

In this *actual* case, there was no team of defense attorneys. Dude rolled the dice with a public defender and won against a Harvard-trainer DOJ lawyer. That’s how bad the facts were here. ATF measured the LOP with a wonky kangaroo ruler, and once the public defender figured that out it only took the jury an hour to come back with an acquittal.

Gutsy.

But the explanation is still good.

[TexasRough1256]

But do you even operate bro?

[TacticalCowboy]

But do you even operate bro?

Only operationally during operations

[cuttingedge]

The NFA is a total buttload of crap. If one has no criminal history and passes a background check, he or she should be able to own whichever guns he or she chooses to.

I feel the same about the freakin tax stamp for a suppressor. A suppressor is just about as dangerous as a can of soup, or a rock without the part that goes bang.