If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Historically, you have that exactly backwards.The feds absolutely prohibit subjects from recording their "interview" and my understanding is that the only record is notes backed by the word of the agent(s) present.
^This.My understanding is that the FBI has finally deigned to start videotaping their interviews. In the past, the FBI has refused to videotape their interviews claiming that would disclose their super duper interview techniques.
I heard one criminal defense attorney say that he would tell the FBI that his client would answer all their questions provided that he would have the interview in his office with a court reporter videotaping the interview. The FBI always declined.
I wonder how it made the ATF radar screen in the first place?
Given the involvement of the ATF, I wouldn’t communicate with the seller in any way going forward. I would just write off the money and walk away.
I wonder how it made the ATF radar screen in the first place?
I wonder how it made the ATF radar screen in the first place?
3) Martha Stewart never committed insider trading. She wasn't guilty of the crime for which she was being investigated.
Yup, but it is very difficult to successfully "not lie" even if you have nothing to hide and are not intentionally lieing. "Where were you on July 30?" "Oh, I think I was in the office that day" then it turns out you worked from home that day but didn't remember because it is not important to you. You lied! Off to jail for you!
Keep the 3 Ups at all times
Shut Up
Pony Up
Lawyer Up
That's not how perjury works. You have to lie about a material fact, not some random thing like was it raining that day or whether you worked from home or not. If you were accused of being in the office that day killing your boss and they have you on video but you said you were working from home, that'd be perjury because its a material fact. Not that they'd really bother with a perjury charge at that point but you get the gist.
You forgot "demand proof" and "attack the credibility of the witness"I'm not a lawyer mind you (but you all probably already know that )
but this advice to live by...
Admit nothing... deny everything... make counter accusations.
Ruger Mini-14 REPLICA "READ" - Semi Auto Rifles at GunBroker.com : 805077092
Not a bad buy for $71 IMO. Worth fighting over? Nope.
Ruger Mini-14 REPLICA "READ" - Semi Auto Rifles at GunBroker.com : 805077092
Not a bad buy for $71 IMO. Worth fighting over? Nope.
Ruger Mini-14 REPLICA "READ"
Renegade2014
Add Favorite Seller
Used Condition
FFL is required
Well, there's why the OP used an FFL to receive it.
Definitely something hokey about the seller. The buyer... not enough info.
You are bidding on a REPLICA Ruger Mini 14 (Does NOT Fire)
This is a used REPLICA Ruger Mini 14, This is a FAKE gun, it does NOT FIRE. This was made to be a collectors item, it functions, looks and feels like the real thing. This will require a FFL as that's how it was brought to us.
I'm so confused.
Why would the OP as a licensed gun owner be buying a replica Mini 14?
As for how the ATF got involved it's anyone's guess.
It does not fire. It functions like the real thing. Requires an FFL because something something.