Flintlock from 1700s could land elderly NJ man in prison

a reply to: Krakatoa

I would like to just say that this is not a firearm according the BATFE's definition of a firearm. Directly from the BATFE:

1. Can a person prohibited by law from possessing a firearm acquire and use a black powder muzzle loading firearm?

The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA) prohibits felons and certain other persons from possessing or receiving firearms and ammunition (“prohibited persons”). These categories can be found at 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) and (n) in atf.gov... atf - p - 5300 - 4.pdf .

However, Federal law does not prohibit these persons from possessing or receiving an antique firearm. The term “antique firearm” means any firearm (including any firearm with a matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system) manufactured in or before 1898. The definition includes any replica of an antique firearm if it is not designed or redesigned for using rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition, or uses rimfire or conventional centerfire ammunition which is no longer manufactured in the United States, and which is not readily available in ordinary channels of commercial trade. Further, any muzzle loading rifle, shotgun, or pistol which is designed to use black powder or black powder substitute, and which cannot use fixed ammunition, is an “antique firearm” unless it (1) incorporates a firearm frame or receiver; (2) is a firearm which is converted into a muzzle loading weapon; or (3) is a muzzle loading weapon which can be readily converted to fire fixed ammunition by replacing the barrel, bolt, breechblock, or any combination thereof. See 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(3), (a)(16).

Thus, a muzzle loading weapon that meets the definition of an “antique firearm” is not a firearm and may lawfully be received and possessed by a prohibited person under the GCA.

(Bolding mine for emphasis on definition)

BATFE PDF Link


So according to this, it should be thrown out of court unless New Jersey state law has redefined the legal definition of "firearm" according to the BATFE, which I seriously doubt they took the time to do.

a reply to: Krakatoa

Shows just how stupid the people that are supposed to be protecting and serving are in NJ. This is liberal progressive mindset in it's pure form. I feel so sorry for them because some things can not be fixed.

a reply to: daskakik

Again, thanks for expressing your legal opinions. It really helps.

I would point you to the term, and idea of, discretion.

Though it's clear that it would be pointless.

Whats Crazy about these gun laws is that you can Make in your own garage a real gun that works almost as well as any store bought gun and That gun is Legal to possess and use in Any state in the USA.

I urge folks to look up the very real free instructions found on the net to make your own real weapons if you want or need a gun.

As for NJ, that action should be criminal theft on the part of the State. An antique weapon especially one that doesn't work should Not be in the same class as modern weapons.

There used to be a concept called the 'spirit of the law' that was used when literal interpretation proved to be excessive or unusual. Its a shame that no one bothers with it any more. 'Zero tolerance' has won out over common sense. And that is a loss for all of us.

When the only source to the story is the NRA video there were sirens going off in my head as to the validity to the claims so I did some searching.

When asked to comment, Austino deferred to the pending court case but alluded to there being more to the incident.

"It's a pending case and there's more to the story than what he's saying," Austino said.

Longtime Millville Educator Arrested

It genuinely sounds to me like someone who may have broken the law and is hiding behind the gun charge to trump up his defense. I mean, he went straight to the NRA with his story and followed it up with a defense fund.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
I would point you to the term, and idea of, discretion.

Though it's clear that it would be pointless.

Correct, because discretion is actually what your example was about and not one of spirit of law.

Although discretion is used when applying the spirit of law, that whole concept does not apply in this case because this law does not leave any ambiguity as to its intent.

a reply to: daskakik

Again, thank you for your interpretation of things. It really helped clear it up.

For some reason I always thought that police discretion fit under the umbrella of "spirit of the law." I have seen the error of my ways though.

originally posted by: usmc0311
This story is just absurd. I sincerely hope that when he appears before a judge his case will be immediately dismissed. There can be common sense applied to situations like this. He might not have been transporting it legally as I don't know NJ transportation of firearm laws but that is no reason for him to be facing the charges he is. I hope it all works out for this man.

Zero tolerance is by default zero common sense.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
For some reason I always thought that police discretion fit under the umbrella of "spirit of the law."

It can, but only when the law has gray areas.

A police officer can let you go for whatever reason, he might think you look like a stand up person, but that doesn't mean that he is interpreting the corresponding law and coming to the conclusion that the intent of that law doesn't apply to the situation at hand. That is discretion without being a question of the spirit of law.

Letter of the law is that the US Constitution is the supreme law of the land.

The problem is that the Second Amendment was meant to be a Sword of Damocles for all elected and appointed officials. Instead morons argue if guns belong in the hands of recognized militia (police and national guard units) or individuals. Unfortunately in their ludicrous banter they skip over Article 1 in which Congress calls forth and arms the militia when needed (because having a standing Army in time of peace is unconstitutional--Be all you can be, I guess).

So ultimately the entire New Jersey law could be thrown out because it fails to allow the individual of that state to not have the same freedoms of the individuals of the several states. Which is an irony that the same equal protection clause used for advancing hay marriage would also end Draconian gun laws. Which is a situation of not having your cake and eating it too.

Obviously, gangbangers are known for their use of antique flintlock pistols. I just wanted the opportunity to use "gangbangers" in a sentence. Anyway...

This is laughable, but not for this poor gentlemen of course. I've traveled with firearms similar to this all over the states for different shows and, thank God, never had to deal with this problem. 10 years, I guess I should consider myself lucky. I already avoid going near New Jersey for a variety of reasons, this just adds another.

I don't see a how this is breaking the law. It's a non-working flint lock pistol with no flint and secured inside a locked glove compartment.

originally posted by: SpaDe_
I would like to just say that this is not a firearm according the BATFE's definition of a firearm. Directly from the BATFE:

So according to this, it should be thrown out of court unless New Jersey state law has redefined the legal definition of "firearm" according to the BATFE, which I seriously doubt they took the time to do.

I was thinking the same thing. I hope the NRA and other groups pay for this mans legal expenses because if taken to court this case has the potential to get portions of the NJ guns laws overturned.

WOW!!!!...

A cop that "let's me go free" because of his discretion....

There was a time in the thing we call the past that these "cops" tended to get along with their subjects..

Now, all they are doing is intimidating the general population because of their self emulating status...

A cop use to be a friend, someone you looked up to...

Now they are nothing more than azzhole controllers that have a pin in their azz cause they were beat up in high school...

I doubt most of you know what "illustrious power" you get by havin g a badge and a weapon....
I did it...You become "superman" overnight...I still have a badge and flash it ever now and then to get into concerts and stuff.,....It expired years ago.....Something about a badge though...."I am special...I am above you".....

kinda like military uniform...."I am TRAINED"..hahahahah

lol

a reply to: oxidadoblanco

What exactly is your point?

It was just a fictional scenario to illustrate an idea.

Guys? Guys?

I'm appalled. This person has a murder death weapon and could easily go to some school and KILL CHILDREN. I think you are all downplaying this situation. He might EASILY have converted this to a fully automatic military grade machine pistol, and KILLED CHILDREN. After all, it was once a MILITARY weapon, designed for nothing but the murder of humans, INCLUDING CHILDREN.

You aren't FOR murdering children, are you? There is no place in the world for military death machines, much less in the hands of untrained people who might have committed MURDER. Of children.

So unless you WANT children to die, maybe women, THINK OF THE CHILDREN. Put this terrorist in jail, FOREVER.

I usually look at American gun laws (or lack thereof) with incredulity and disbelief, and I'm not shy about saying so here on ATS and elsewhere, but even I'll admit that this is beyond ridiculous. It's an antique flintlock for crying out loud, not loaded and purchased by a collector. No sane judge would convict this man - at least that's the hope.

a reply to: oxidadoblanco

Your badge expired? And you still flash it to get free stuff?

Methinks shenanigans.

If not, your reports must've been a real treat

a reply to: Bedlam

Oh...yes...I forgot. What about the children!!!

/sarc