Entrapment? Yea or Nay?

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • delaware_export

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 10, 2018
    3,143
    iirc, and there was a thread here, delaware got 31 bumpers and 1 crank trigger.

    from recollection, that count maybe be +/- a couple, but it's very close.

    *** add link to other post...

    https://www.mdshooters.com/showpost.php?p=5394400&postcount=12

    ...
    Delaware was paying $100 for a bumpstock and $15 for a GAT , of course DE residents only. They had a $15K pool, no idea how many took the offer.
    ...
     

    Bob A

    όυ φροντισ
    MDS Supporter
    Patriot Picket
    Nov 11, 2009
    30,691
    Define Entrapment By Estoppel

    This defense focuses on the actions of government officials and not on the predisposition of the accused. In order to successfully assert this defense, one must actually rely on a point of law misrepresented by a government official and such reliance must be objectively reasonable given the identity of the official, the point of law misrepresented, and the substance of the misrepresentation. The misrepresentation must be made directly to the accused rather than to others.

    When The Defense Applies

    This defense exists where a government official tells the accused that certain conduct is legal, the accused relies on that representation in engaging in that conduct, and the accused is then later prosecuted for engaging in that conduct.
     

    RoadDawg

    Nos nostraque Deo
    Dec 6, 2010
    94,187
    Define Entrapment By Estoppel

    This defense focuses on the actions of government officials and not on the predisposition of the accused. In order to successfully assert this defense, one must actually rely on a point of law misrepresented by a government official and such reliance must be objectively reasonable given the identity of the official, the point of law misrepresented, and the substance of the misrepresentation. The misrepresentation must be made directly to the accused rather than to others.

    When The Defense Applies

    This defense exists where a government official tells the accused that certain conduct is legal, the accused relies on that representation in engaging in that conduct, and the accused is then later prosecuted for engaging in that conduct.

    But can it... or a reasonable argument be made that shows a case for it when no law has been changed... but the Federal LEA changes a policy to cause an otherwise legal item to become illegal?
     

    Bob A

    όυ φροντισ
    MDS Supporter
    Patriot Picket
    Nov 11, 2009
    30,691
    But can it... or a reasonable argument be made that shows a case for it when no law has been changed... but the Federal LEA changes a policy to cause an otherwise legal item to become illegal?

    All that is way outside my knowledge base. I was lucky to find the link to "entrapment by estoppel".

    Hopefully we'll hear from a real lawyer.
     

    Bigsawer

    Ultimate Member
    Dec 22, 2017
    4,513
    Cecil
    I don't believe that the GOA/FPC/VCDL lawsuit will be successful...... ATF has deviated from it original ruling.

    The Supreme Court just agreed to take on a case about how bureaucracies interpret the rules of their own making. Finally, someone will be looking at how they make up things without going through the elected legislature and then change their minds when the political winds shift.

    Here's to hoping the Justices put on their big boy britches and smack all these regs down.
     

    nedsurf

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 8, 2013
    2,204
    How can an official BATFE opinion letter saying something is legal not be seen as something someone reasonably relied on in good faith that they were following the law?
     

    Allen65

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 29, 2013
    7,063
    Anne Arundel County
    How can an official BATFE opinion letter saying something is legal not be seen as something someone reasonably relied on in good faith that they were following the law?

    Good faith is omly relevant when the statute requires mens rea (criminal mindset) for conviction. Unlawful machine gun posession is strict liability. The fact you have it makes you guilty, regardless of intent.
     

    Odarlin1

    Ultimate Member
    Zero “entrapment” foundation to sue because there is no fraud, just complaints that an overreaching bureaucracy has changed the rules.

    I have great faith in the GOA/FPC/VCDL lawsuit to throw a wrench into the gears of this action—and even win.

    Count me among those that see the NFA law as the ORIGINAL infringement.

    That’s said, I predict that the lawsuits—if they don’t completely block the bump stock ban—could result in grandfathering and inclusion into the AOW registry where bump stock owners file for $5.

    That will moot the takings outcry—which is weak— because it is not a classic “taking” but a ban on possession the way the way drug paraphernalia used to be legal but is now a possession crime.

    By some estimate there are a hundreds of thousands of bump stocks in circulation with millions of dollars invested by this class of owners.

    So, as much as I believe bump stocks can’t be regulated or outlawed, I think the AOW registry is where this is headed.

    Final thought: anyone here who continues to comment that bump stocks are anything other than a LEGITIMATE choice of accessory for firearm owners is a gutless pillow fighter when it comes to standing for 2A.

    Shame!

    Yup. What Jeff said.
     

    outrider58

    Eats Bacon Raw
    MDS Supporter
    Jul 29, 2014
    49,818
    Zero “entrapment” foundation to sue because there is no fraud, just complaints that an overreaching bureaucracy has changed the rules.

    I have great faith in the GOA/FPC/VCDL lawsuit to throw a wrench into the gears of this action—and even win.

    Count me among those that see the NFA law as the ORIGINAL infringement.

    That’s said, I predict that the lawsuits—if they don’t completely block the bump stock ban—could result in grandfathering and inclusion into the AOW registry where bump stock owners file for $5.

    That will moot the takings outcry—which is weak— because it is not a classic “taking” but a ban on possession the way the way drug paraphernalia used to be legal but is now a possession crime.

    By some estimate there are a hundreds of thousands of bump stocks in circulation with millions of dollars invested by this class of owners.

    So, as much as I believe bump stocks can’t be regulated or outlawed, I think the AOW registry is where this is headed.

    Final thought: anyone here who continues to comment that bump stocks are anything other than a LEGITIMATE choice of accessory for firearm owners is a gutless pillow fighter when it comes to standing for 2A.

    Shame!

    Ya had me right up until I got here(red), but I'll re-direct back to the green, which in MHO, renders the red moot. I have no opinion on bump stocks one way or the other, other than never having an interest in one. I don't ride horses but I don't believe they should be outlawed and confiscated.
     

    pcfixer

    Ultimate Member
    May 24, 2009
    5,948
    Marylandstan
    Ya had me right up until I got here(red), but I'll re-direct back to the green, which in MHO, renders the red moot. I have no opinion on bump stocks one way or the other, other than never having an interest in one. I don't ride horses but I don't believe they should be outlawed and confiscated.

    yep. you got it.:thumbsup::thumbsup:
     

    outrider58

    Eats Bacon Raw
    MDS Supporter
    Jul 29, 2014
    49,818
    Mods should change this thread title to "Leave your popular opinions here"



    Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,930
    Messages
    7,259,470
    Members
    33,350
    Latest member
    Rotorboater

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom