-
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.
Belchertown gunmaker pleads guilty to federal firearm violations
- Thread starter Bodhisattva
- Start date
dcmdon
NES Member
An 07 can still possess NFA items without a SOT. They just have to pay the tax on each item.
Lets run through a very specific scenario that would apply to a MA person.
You have an 07 FFL and no SOT. You wish to buy a suppressor to keep in inventory. You buy it, pay your $200. you now get to own and use a suppressor without paying the $500 per year SOT.
Or lets say you pay the SOT and acquire a half dozen cans. You do not pay the SOT the following year. You are not suddenly in violation of the law.
Either way. One significant value of having an 07 without a SOT in MA is the ability to lawfully possess silencers without paying $500 per year.
With that said, when I was an 07 in CT with a SOT I found that doing interstate sales of cans was great business. They take up little space in the safe and you can make $200 easily on a can. Further, after you do the sale, youonly have to hold onto the can for a month or less while the form 3 clears. After that you ship it to the local dealer whohelps the owner file a form 4. Its the local dealer who has to sit on the can for 9 months and who has to take the calls from the buyer. So out of state silencer sales are (were?) good clean money.
that may all have changed. The silencer shop appears to have a workflow that is tough to beat.
GM-GUY
NES Member
I would hope that number would change after the DOJ/FBI/CIA/NSA manufacturing a bogus story on Trump. If I was a defense lawyer, I'd have to ask any agent on the stand if they were involved in the Boston Mob duplicity, if they were on the team that ignored Speedbump & Flashbang, if they were in the department that ignored the shooter in Florida, if they were on the team vetting immigrants like the couple that shot up the Christmas Party in California and finally if they participated or assisted in the attempted coup.
I'm sure they would deny it, and my response would be 'So, the department you're in just hasn't been caught yet?'
If I was on a jury (never will get on one) I wouldn't trust any government agents word - hard evidence, produced by audio or video or I'm not buying.
I'm sure they would deny it, and my response would be 'So, the department you're in just hasn't been caught yet?'
If I was on a jury (never will get on one) I wouldn't trust any government agents word - hard evidence, produced by audio or video or I'm not buying.
AHM
NES Member
Back in the day, it was thought that the Bronx had a big problem with juries
nullifying criminal cases. (I think I read that in an article that contained stats
showing that the fear was groundless, but let that go...).
As the Russian Collusion Hoax began to taper off, it's occurred to me
that the G-Men may have really screwed the pooch with their Deep State antics.
I've actually done web searches 2-3 times for Federal jury trip reports
(grand jury or petit) that corroborated that suspicion. So far, I got nothin'.
No groundswell of jury nullification, and almost as important,
no voir dire anecdotes to the effect that,
"I ain't got time to sit on some lengthy Federal trial,
so after the Judge confirmed that the evidence would include
testimony by the FBI, I just laughed in his face,
and he cut me loose before lunch".
Because with all the silly, earnest, and venal scams that people use
to keep from being empaneled, it can't be long before the "FBI Laugh"
is used by some wag...
Gun violations lead to 18 months in jail for South Hadley shop owner
SPRINGFIELD — A Belchertown man who co-owned a South Hadley gunsmith shop was sentenced Friday in federal court in Springfield for gun charges, including receipt and possession of unregistered firearms, the making of a firearm in violation of the law, and false or incomplete record keeping.Max Gaj, 30, was sentenced to 18 months in prison and three years supervised released by U.S. District Court Judge Mark D. Mastroianni, according to a statement from the U.S. attorney’s office.
Gaj, who owned Dark Horse Gunsmithing, previously pleaded guilty to a number of charges. William Scott, who worked at the store, pleaded guilty in federal court in September to gun charges, including possession of unregistered firearms and false or incomplete record keeping.
A federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) inspection of the shop in 2018 found violations, including “an AK 47-type firearm bearing no serial number or marking as required under the Gun Control Act,” court documents state.
“Over the course of the inspection of Dark Horse, ATF determined that Dark Horse had failed to record, or failed to properly record, the acquisition and/or production of approximately 151 firearms,” the document reads. “Notably, 21 firearms were transferred without any entry being made in the A&D Record [Acquisition and Disposition Case Record], making such firearms potentially untraceable. Another 98 firearms were found on site at Dark Horse during the February 2018 inspection with no record of their acquisition in the A&D Record.”
Court filings also say that Gaj illegally transferred pistols to customers.
“In October 2015, the Defendant transferred a Glock 17 pistol to a customer, despite knowing that the transfer of such a Glock firearm is prohibited in Massachusetts,” the Feb. 1 filing reads.
One of Gaj’s lawyers, Brad Bailey, called the sentence “reasonable and fair.”
He wrote in an email on Sunday that “our client, who accepted responsibility for his actions very early on in the process, is grateful and appreciative. He looks forward to putting this behind him and moving forward with his life.”
Daily Hampshire Gazette
The Daily Hampshire Gazette is the essential daily news source for the Pioneer Valley from Northampton, MA, in Franklin County.
www.gazettenet.com
CrackPot
NES Member
Incomplete information. He may have failed to record the transaction properly and mentioning glock is just for effect. Someone might have confused a cmr violation with mgl violation. Shoddy reporting only informs on shoddy reporting, not actual details.
I’d you read the actual plea agreement he pled to transfer in violation of state law which is a federal offense. Since he had dozens of transfers in violation of federal law for failure to record in his bound book its safe to assume he failed to fa10 said transfers also. So he broke state law which means he broke federal law again.
To be clear, if I as a ffl sell you a ma resident a gun and fail to record this with the state or feds, I have broken at least two federal and one state law. The state is failure to record in MIRCS. The federal are failure to record in bound book and violating state law. Yes it is a double dip on the state violation but following state law is a condition of your federal license so there it is.
Thanks for the explanation. I kinda "figured" most of that, just could not put it into words nearly as well as you did.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2008
- Messages
- 7,347
- Likes
- 12,574
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,530
- Likes
- 33,561
There is an interesting gray area here. MGL requires one to be a federally licensed manufacturer of firearms to possess a silencer, but does not mention one needs to be federally licensed to manufacture silencers. Excellent catch on your part ... assuming the commonwealth does not claim that the clear intent of this clause meant "silencer manufacturer". Thanks.
What is also interesting about this carve-out is that it hinges on federal licensure, not state (like the exemption to possess post ban AWs and normal cap mags does)
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,530
- Likes
- 33,561
Chapter 140 Section 131M exempts persons licensed under Chapter 140 Section 122.
Chapter 140 Section 122 provides for the licensing of firearms dealers and gunsmiths.
General Law - Part I, Title XX, Chapter 140, Section 122
malegislature.gov
Unfortunately, holding an FFL does not trigger this exemption.
dcmdon
NES Member
Yes, MGL explicitly references FEDERAL licensing for possession of a silencer. Also, the law is uncharacteristically clear and concise.
malegislature.gov
Section 10A. Any person, other than a federally licensed firearms manufacturer,. . . ., who sells or keeps for sale, . . . .any instrument, attachment, weapon or appliance for causing the firing of any gun, revolver, pistol or other firearm to be silent or intended to lessen or muffle the noise of the firing of any gun, revolver, pistol or other firearm shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than five years in state prison or for not more than two and one-half years in a jail or house of correction.
General Law - Part IV, Title I, Chapter 269, Section 10A
malegislature.gov
Section 10A. Any person, other than a federally licensed firearms manufacturer,. . . ., who sells or keeps for sale, . . . .any instrument, attachment, weapon or appliance for causing the firing of any gun, revolver, pistol or other firearm to be silent or intended to lessen or muffle the noise of the firing of any gun, revolver, pistol or other firearm shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than five years in state prison or for not more than two and one-half years in a jail or house of correction.
I guess, to me it is retarded because you can't move a can on a Form 4 via efile. So without SOT you're in groin-self-punching land.
It would make sense for some guy who magically has an 07 in his front yard that has no overhead and has no desire to get more stuff, I guess... but it just reeks of skinflint land to me. Someone has gone 90% of the way there and doesn't get the juice....
ETA: this is useful info however for another reason I always wondered if in 07 could still own a can but not necessarily have it formally in inventory for auditing purposes..... I would guess that somehow you could form 4 it out to yourself and pay the tax at that point, and not have it in inventory.... ?
Last edited:
dcmdon
NES Member
Yes, but there is no reason to ever move something like that out to yourself. When you give up your FFL, the ATF lets you move everything over to yourself at no cost. So no reason to pay the 200 per item ahead of time. Unless you really want it in your name for some reason.
For a home based FFL, and they do exist in MA, skipping a class 2 SOT every year or 2 is not a big deal. In most cases it doesn't make sense. Just because it is so easy to make money in interstate sales of cans, and no hassles.
For a home based FFL, and they do exist in MA, skipping a class 2 SOT every year or 2 is not a big deal. In most cases it doesn't make sense. Just because it is so easy to make money in interstate sales of cans, and no hassles.
