Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 ... 18   Go Down

Author Topic: (30) PREP FOR HARD TIMES  (Read 119466 times)

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2795
Re: Oathkeepers +CSPOA [Illinois Gun Dealer Convicted]
« Reply #90 on: April 09, 2013, 01:40:39 pm »

I just heard about this recent Illinois case near my home town of a gun dealer getting a 2 year prison sentence for selling a firearm to someone he supposedly knew had been convicted of using cocaine, so it was without doing a background check, or whatever the law supposedly requires. I plan to inform Oathkeepers and maybe CSPOA of this situation and contact the gun dealer and see if anything might be done to try to overturn the conviction and maybe sue the plaintiffs. Notice at the bottom that 6 different agencies were involved in the case, including the local idiots. My guess is that the govt spent a million dollars or more to convict this terrible gun dealer. Can anyone else make a better estimate on that? I'm no expert.

Jerseyville gun dealer admits illegal sales
Posted: Friday, March 22, 2013 3:54 pm
[Alton] Telegraph staff report

EAST ST. LOUIS - The former operator of a Jerseyville gun store pleaded guilty to federal charges of selling firearms to someone he knew to be a regular user of cocaine, U.S. Attorney Stephen R. Wigginton announced Friday.

John L. "Jay" Jones II, 33, of Jerseyville, pleaded guilty Tuesday in U.S. District Court in East St. Louis to a charge of sale of a firearm to a prohibited person. The one-count information charged that in May 2010, Jones sold five firearms to another person, knowing and having reasonable cause to believe that the purchaser was an unlawful user of a controlled substance.

The crime is punishable by as much as 10 years of imprisonment, a $250,000 fine and a three-year term of supervised release.

Jones formerly was the operator of Discount House Inc., 711 S. State St., in Jerseyville, a federal firearms licensee, and was working in that capacity when he sold the firearms illegally.

Jones' sentencing currently is set for June 28.

Authorities had been pursuing the case for some time, but it only came to court this week.

As a result of his conviction and as one of the conditions of his $10,000 bond, Jones is prohibited from possessing any firearms or ammunition and can have no involvement in the sale or purchase of firearms or ammunition at Discount House, which remains in business.

Wigginton, who is U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Illinois, was granted a motion to seal three documents in the case because they contained "the full name of an unindicted individual.

"Although (the law) does not require the name to be redacted, its inclusion in the public record nevertheless raises privacy concerns," federal prosecutors argued.

They noted that Jones' defense attorney did not oppose the motion.

As a result of the seal, many details of the case were not available on Friday.

This case was investigated by agents of the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, working in concert with agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Internal Revenue Service, officers of the Jersey County Sheriff's Department and the Illinois State Police.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2013, 01:42:29 pm by Luck »
Logged

Auspicious Aspect

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 250
Re: Oathkeepers +CSPOA [Illinois Gun Dealer Convicted]
« Reply #91 on: April 09, 2013, 03:40:11 pm »

I just heard about this recent Illinois case near my home town of a gun dealer getting a 2 year prison sentence for selling a firearm to someone he supposedly knew had been convicted of using cocaine, so it was without doing a background check, or whatever the law supposedly requires. I plan to inform Oathkeepers and maybe CSPOA of this situation and contact the gun dealer and see if anything might be done to try to overturn the conviction and maybe sue the plaintiffs. Notice at the bottom that 6 different agencies were involved in the case, including the local idiots. My guess is that the govt spent a million dollars or more to convict this terrible gun dealer. Can anyone else make a better estimate on that? I'm no expert.

Jerseyville gun dealer admits illegal sales
Posted: Friday, March 22, 2013 3:54 pm
[Alton] Telegraph staff report


This article leaves out most of the information needed to understand the case, but what is your overall objection to what is described?

Logged

Sam Adams

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 550
Re: Oathkeepers +CSPOA [Illinois Gun Dealer Convicted]
« Reply #92 on: April 09, 2013, 09:11:33 pm »

    Fed,s always use an unindicted individual for all their testimony and alledged evidence. This time they even sealed his identity? Wonder why? Maybe its Bin Laden? He,s unidicted which means he is a criminal and should be in prison and the court coerced him into lying, I mean testifying because he was promised a better future. Dealer picked 2 years vs a jury giving him 10 years. People should start trusting juries NOW, as the govt has declared war on its voters.
Logged

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2795
Re: Oathkeepers +CSPOA [Illinois Gun Dealer Convicted]
« Reply #93 on: April 11, 2013, 10:52:55 am »

Quote
AA said: what is your overall objection to what is described?

I object to the govt interfering with people's second amendment rights, as well as pretending to have the authority to control what drugs people may use or sell.

Richard Cornforth seems to have good info for how to defend oneself in court from govt abuse.

Quote
Sam said: People should start trusting juries NOW, as the govt has declared war on its voters.
I think it's even more important to trust learning the law and defending yourself in court and countersuing the bastards. Cornforth's info may help and Fred Graves' Jurisdictionary.com info seems very good too.
Logged

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2795
Re: Oathkeepers +CSPOA [2nd Amendment Rally Apr 19 in E & W MA.]
« Reply #94 on: April 11, 2013, 10:59:23 am »

2nd Amendment Rally _ W. Springfield, Mass _ April 19
At the 2nd Amendment Rally at West Springfield, Massachusetts [] Stewart will give his second public address of the day.

>>Info for the Lexington Green event is at this link -
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2013/04/04/oath-keepers-to-muster-on-lexington-battle-green-ma-on-april-19-2013-stewart-rhodes-will-conduct-oath-renewal-ceremony/ 

Immediately after giving the Oath ceremony at Lexington Green on April 19, 2013, Stewart Rhodes will then appear at the Town Commons in West Springfield, Massachusetts, to speak for the 2nd Amendment Rally.  The fliers below will provide all the details and contact info.
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/wp-content/uploads/2a-rally-flyer-Springfield-Mass-2013_crop2-486x500.png
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: Oathkeepers +CSPOA [Illinois Gun Dealer Convicted]
« Reply #95 on: April 11, 2013, 01:42:29 pm »

Quote
AA said: what is your overall objection to what is described?

I object to the govt interfering with people's second amendment rights, as well as pretending to have the authority to control what drugs people may use or sell.

Richard Cornforth seems to have good info for how to defend oneself in court from govt abuse.

Quote
Sam said: People should start trusting juries NOW, as the govt has declared war on its voters.
I think it's even more important to trust learning the law and defending yourself in court and countersuing the bastards. Cornforth's info may help and Fred Graves' Jurisdictionary.com info seems very good too.

The dealer would have been arrested on commerce restrictions. They didn't arrest him for having a gun in his possession (keeping and bearing arms).
Logged

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2795
Re: Oathkeepers +CSPOA [2nd Amendment Rally Apr 19 in E & W MA.]
« Reply #96 on: April 12, 2013, 06:56:35 pm »

Quote
The dealer would have been arrested on commerce restrictions. They didn't arrest him for having a gun in his possession (keeping and bearing arms).
I believe the right to bear arms means also the right to trade for arms.
Logged

Auspicious Aspect

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 250
Re: Oathkeepers +CSPOA [Illinois Gun Dealer Convicted]
« Reply #97 on: April 12, 2013, 07:10:13 pm »

Quote
AA said: what is your overall objection to what is described?

I object to the govt interfering with people's second amendment rights, as well as pretending to have the authority to control what drugs people may use or sell.


This looks to me more like a contract dispute. In this case, the dealer had a contract with the government. He agreed to abide by certain rules, and in exchange, he was granted privileges that are withheld from regular citizens. It seems like he broke the contract, so his business partner (ATF) held him to penalties under the contract that he willingly signed and from which he was making a profit.
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: Oathkeepers +CSPOA [2nd Amendment Rally Apr 19 in E & W MA.]
« Reply #98 on: April 13, 2013, 09:58:57 am »

Quote
The dealer would have been arrested on commerce restrictions. They didn't arrest him for having a gun in his possession (keeping and bearing arms).
I believe the right to bear arms means also the right to trade for arms.
I believe if that was what they meant... they would have made it clear.
Logged

Erik The Red

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10
Re: Oathkeepers +CSPOA [2nd Amendment Rally Apr 19 in E & W MA.]
« Reply #99 on: April 13, 2013, 11:32:18 am »

Quote
The dealer would have been arrested on commerce restrictions. They didn't arrest him for having a gun in his possession (keeping and bearing arms).
I believe the right to bear arms means also the right to trade for arms.
I believe if that was what they meant... they would have made it clear.

I'm no lawyer or scholar, but isn't restricting what can/can't be sold and to whom 'infringing' on the RKBA? That infringement was not to happen was pretty clearly stated. Nowhere was it stated that "...shall not be infringed....unless you use drugs, or beat your wife, or WE think you're mental".

I think I am with Luck on this one, if the ability to acquire/trade something is restricted the right to keep and bear that thing is therefore similarly restricted.

just my $.02
Logged

MaineShark

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5044
Re: Oathkeepers +CSPOA [Illinois Gun Dealer Convicted]
« Reply #100 on: April 13, 2013, 01:48:13 pm »

This looks to me more like a contract dispute. In this case, the dealer had a contract with the government. He agreed to abide by certain rules, and in exchange, he was granted privileges that are withheld from regular citizens. It seems like he broke the contract, so his business partner (ATF) held him to penalties under the contract that he willingly signed and from which he was making a profit.

Engaging in free trade is not a privilege - it's a right.

In exchange for signing their contract, he was allowed to exercise his right to trade, while others are having that right infringed.  A contract signed under duress (if he sold guns without signing their contract, which he has every right to do, they would violently attack him) is no contract at all.
Logged
"An armed society is a polite society" - this does not mean that we are polite because we fear each other.

We are not civilized because we are armed; we are armed because we are civilized..

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: Oathkeepers +CSPOA [2nd Amendment Rally Apr 19 in E & W MA.]
« Reply #101 on: April 14, 2013, 03:53:41 am »

I don't know if it would qualify as a Right, since the US Constitution allows for restrictions on it; and depending on the State Constitution the Legislature may have some control over it.
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: Oathkeepers +CSPOA [2nd Amendment Rally Apr 19 in E & W MA.]
« Reply #102 on: April 14, 2013, 03:57:46 am »

Quote
The dealer would have been arrested on commerce restrictions. They didn't arrest him for having a gun in his possession (keeping and bearing arms).
I believe the right to bear arms means also the right to trade for arms.
I believe if that was what they meant... they would have made it clear.

I'm no lawyer or scholar, but isn't restricting what can/can't be sold and to whom 'infringing' on the RKBA? That infringement was not to happen was pretty clearly stated. Nowhere was it stated that "...shall not be infringed....unless you use drugs, or beat your wife, or WE think you're mental".

I think I am with Luck on this one, if the ability to acquire/trade something is restricted the right to keep and bear that thing is therefore similarly restricted.

just my $.02
And you don't think that the populace is smart enough to word it in such a way, should they desire, to make the SCOTUS take the same perception? Since its their ruling that will arbitrate.
Logged

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2795
Re: Oathkeepers +CSPOA [2nd Amendment Rally Apr 19 in E & W MA.]
« Reply #103 on: April 15, 2013, 01:48:01 pm »

Quote
AA said: This looks to me more like a contract dispute [between the govt and the gun dealer].
Forced contracts are void. Acquiescing to contracts involuntarily for the sake of survival is Duress, which makes most similar so-called "contracts" with the govt Void. They're not true contracts.
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: Oathkeepers +CSPOA [2nd Amendment Rally Apr 19 in E & W MA.]
« Reply #104 on: April 15, 2013, 01:53:21 pm »

That might work in court.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 ... 18   Go Up