I once had a bad sear in a remington 742 semi and it went full auto on me as well. It can happen to any semi rifle, shotgun, or handgun and the owner shouldn't be liable for it unless they could prove tampering. IMHO ,)

That is insane.

If the bureaucracy has the power to decide that a malfunction like that is worth 6 years and 250,000 dollars, then they're pretty much deciding to outlaw semi-auto weapons. I hope that there is much more public outcry about this case.

We'll see if the judge realizes how dumb this is when he gives the sentence.

The feds can't do a thing to you unless they can prove that the gun is an actual fully automatic weapon or if it was purposely modified to fire fully automatic. I'd sue the person who ratted him out, if I were him.

To make the charges stick, they need to prove intent. That requires them to prove that the sear had to have been modified rather than simply worn or malfunctioning. For example, it might look awfully suspicious if an AR that's had 500 rounds put through it has a sear that looks like it's seen 50,000 -- or if they found that his sear looked suspiciously like the instructions on how to modify an AR's sear they found sitting on his workbench at home.

Even if the sear failed legitimately, there could still be pitfalls. For example, if the guy was seen firing several boxes of ammunition through his "malfunctioning" AR, or doing so on numerous occasions, you'd have to wonder where he crosses the line from being a victim of a malfunction to taking advantage of the situation to enjoy an illegal automatic. If a kilo of heroin falls out of a plane and lands in your backyard, that doesn't mean you're entitled to keep it.

Geez, I think breaking into his house, seizing his guns, arresting him and making him face trial falls under the category of doing something.

Doesn't matter that he is innocent, the government is making his life hell.

I recently read a book, Unintended Consequences. It was fiction, but I swear this could have been a chapter in it.

Well, yeah that's true. But, what I meant was that the burden of proof falls on the feds. As is usually the case then government decided to destroy someone and they suceeded. I guess in the end, that doesn't mean they aren't making his life hell. The feds did convict him. We've seen it before where the government decides to destroy Americans by demonizing them first then going in for the kill. Remember Ruby Ridge? How much time and effort was spent demonizing the Weavers?? The media and the feds reported all kinds of faulse stuff about them, all just to justify what the feds were doing to them and gain public acceptance of it. It resulted with two innocent people being killed, a 12 yrd old boy and his mom while holding a baby girl in her arms. To this day most Americans really believe the Weavers were complete demonds unworthy of justice. Then a few years later they were awarded 3million by the government in a wrongful death suit.

I've read parts of the book you refere to and it did make me a bit paranoid. I'm not anti government, but I don't really trust law enforcement and am very skeptical of our judicial system. I've always been a law abiding citizen, no run-in's with the law. But, I do know a number of local cops personally and one retired FBI agent. One thing seems universal with them, ego, adreneline, and exerting power over someone seem to often get in the way of a persons Constitutional Rights. It's more about winning than it is about justice. Just my observation.

You make some very good points.

I just had a conversation with my daughter tonight about Obama. She wanted to know why I didn't support him. I told her about Obama's comments regarding people from rural America being bitter gun and bible clutching people.

I told her that he doesn't want to protect our 2nd amendment rights and that the 2nd amendment protects all our other rights. Government wants to control the people, but we as Americans can protect ourselves - that is until we give up our guns.