Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

gunderwood, the matter of law you are talking about would come in to play if you were being compelled to produce the paperwork on the sale of the firearm, such as if you were being charged for not having it or something. But that is not at all what we are talking about.

We are talking about a matter of fact decided by the jury. Your defense is that you couldn't have committed the shooting crime because you sold the gun in question before the crime occurred. The prosecution will argue that you did indeed own a gun of that type at one time and that since you cannot produce the name of the person you sold it to or any paperwork indicating you sold it before the crime, that your story about the sale of the gun is false. It will therefore come down to which party the jury believes most: you and your lack of paperwork, or some evidence or eye witness that puts that type of gun in your hand at the time of the crime. And if your response to the prosecutions claim that your story doesn't hold water is that such a demand is TYRANNY, I doubt you'll win any fans on the jury.

LFS wrote:gunderwood, the matter of law you are talking about would come in to play if you were being compelled to produce the paperwork on the sale of the firearm, such as if you were being charged for not having it or something. But that is not at all what we are talking about.

We are talking about a matter of fact decided by the jury. Your defense is that you couldn't have committed the shooting crime because you sold the gun in question before the crime occurred. The prosecution will argue that you did indeed own a gun of that type at one time and that since you cannot produce the name of the person you sold it to or any paperwork indicating you sold it before the crime, that your story about the sale of the gun is false. It will therefore come down to which party the jury believes most: you and your lack of paperwork, or some evidence or eye witness that puts that type of gun in your hand at the time of the crime.

Now you have added evidence, so I'll quote my self.

Your perspective is wrong.

You are arguing that it is my responsibility to prove my innocence rather than the states responsibility to prove my guilt. If the only thing they have on me is that at some point in the past I owed the gun and claimed to have sold it, my word, under oath, should end their case right there in a free society.

Anything else is tyranny and should not be allowed in a free society.

The fact that I owned that exact gun at some point in the past does not prove my guilt, you need other evidence. Without it, your case is sunk in any society where justice prevails.

LFS wrote:And if your response to the prosecutions claim that your story doesn't hold water is that such a demand is TYRANNY, I doubt you'll win any fans on the jury.

Again, re-read what I have actually written. I never said I would claim that at trial, I stated it as fact. It is tyranny to convict anyone based solely on the fact that at some point in the past they owned a piece of property. We the people should not allow our public servants to behave in that way. What you are arguing is contrary to the very concepts of liberty and freedom, which brings me too...

Daholt757 wrote:

gunderwood wrote: Anything else is tyranny and should not be allowed in a free society.

there are plenty of places in the free world where you are required to prove your innocence

Which is a contradiction in terms. You are not free if the government can pull you in and demand that you prove your innocence. The fact that the English language allows you to string them together in a sentence does not make it true.

gunderwood wrote: Now you have added evidence...

No, it was mentioned before such as the reference to a 4473 or some other evidence the prosecutor would have to say you owned the gun. They couldn't just make that sort of thing up without proving it somehow.

gunderwood wrote: The fact that I owned that exact gun at some point in the past does not prove my guilt, you need other evidence. Without it, your case is sunk in any society where justice prevails.

Because, no criminal case has ever been won on circumstantial evidence, right?

Keep raging, brotha! Keep raging!

LFS wrote:

gunderwood wrote: Now you have added evidence...

No, it was mentioned before such as the reference to a 4473 or some other evidence the prosecutor would have to say you owned the gun. They couldn't just make that sort of thing up without proving it somehow.

WTF? Did you even read the post and the underlined portion of your post? I guess not so let me make it simple for you.

LFS wrote:eye witness that puts that type of gun in your hand at the time of the crime.

The OP, nor any other post mentioned any other evidence at all until you manufactured it to bias the argument. In a free society you can not justly convict a man of anything simply because he owned a piece of property in the past and you know it, but instead of arguing the actual statements you have manufactured evidence to make your point. If your manufactured evidence were true the ownership of the weapon is nearly irrelevant.

The OP asked about gun registration. That was answered. The comment was made that ownership proves nothing but ownership, which is a true and valid statement in of itself. The defendant may or may not in fact still own the firearm, that doesn't make them a murderer or anything else besides the potential owner.

At this point you are trying to justify your invalid assumptions to save face. It's making you look foolish.

LFS wrote:

gunderwood wrote: The fact that I owned that exact gun at some point in the past does not prove my guilt, you need other evidence. Without it, your case is sunk in any society where justice prevails.

Because, no criminal case has ever been won on circumstantial evidence, right?

No, it happens, but just because it happens doesn't make it OK, nor does it make it just. A free society which believes in justice should consider that a travesty. Thank you for finally reaching your absurd conclusion.

LFS wrote:Keep raging, brotha! Keep raging!

Ah yes, ad hominem attacks...the defense of a weak mind with no valid arguments. Congrats.

@jrod648

The whole point of this discussion is more than just to answer your direct question. Do not buy into the prosecutions preconceived notions of how to interpret the evidence. Their job it to prove you client guilty and if you accept their presumptions so will the jury.

If the only thing the prosecution has is circumstantial evidence, you can win the case, but it is up to you to challenge them. You can not win by backing down on their points. If you do that, the jury sees the circumstantial evidence only from the viewpoint of the prosecution. Obviously, you need to be more shrewed than is required for an Internet forum. Never forget that it is tyranny to convict a man simply because he owned a piece of property currently or in the past. However, you must read your audience (the jury) and approach the subject in a way they will receive.

For example, if the prosecution is pushing hard on who owned the firearm, challenge their presumption. They are interpreting ownership to imply guilt, but it doesn't. It proves nothing but ownership. Don't let them get away with presumptions that bias the interpretation of the evidence. Don't let the prosecution poison the jury's minds with nonsense.

Remind the court that these legal concepts go way back, even before the founding of this country. E.g. Innocent until proven guilty, etc. Circumstantial evidence requires the prosecution to violate those ancient legal concepts to get a conviction by definition. I.e. if it proved what they claimed it did, e.g. ownership proves murder, it wouldn't be circumstantial. A video clip, assuming it is real, of your client shooting the victem isn't circumstantial is it? The fact that your client owned a silver BMW like one seen at the crime is...unless they can prove that the silver BMW at the crime was specifically your clients car. Even that doesn't prove guilt, it simply says someone with access to your clients car, legally or otherwise, was present at the scene. If you don't challenge them and show why they violate those precepts of law, you will loose. Remind the court that these are fundamental concepts to Western civilization and the rule of law. The state can not violate them for convenience.

Also, don't forget that the jury is already biased towards accepting the prosecutions viewpoint..."why bring a case to trial unless your client is guilty?" Unfortunately, some people think like this (LFS?).

After a purchase for the first time from any type of firearms dealer of a brand new weapon the weapon will show up as registered to John Doe for the first buyer.If the weapon is sold through PRIVATE transactions 25 times over the next 10 or 20 years it will only show up as being purchased by the original buyer John Doe the very first time and 10 to 20 years of history on the weapon are gone.

around where I live, there were under the counter dealers for many years, & others that sold guns at flea markets for years without license, 20+ years, the dealers have since retired or gone out of business, & the BATF shut down the flea market in the last 2 years. but everyone knew if you wanted a gun just stop by flea market & ask, & look, as not just private dealers were set up, but many normal citizens would have 1 or 2 for sale occasionally, or ask, & they would know where to find what you wanted, cash only sales. no records. this is what I grew up around all my life.

no telling how many untraceable guns were sold there. no questions, just hand cash, & most people were only concerned that you were over 18, & poof you could buy a gun. I bought my wife her first gun there a few years ago, but dont have it anymore.

police had come there several times in past checking serial numbers of the "wanna be gun dealers" guns, & had found a couple of stolen guns, but nothing was done other than to confiscate the gun.

I know a few people that have a small collection, they dont sell anything ever, never have, & all no records to tie them with numberes to any gun, they bought from the flea market for & if "SHTF" times, so no records exist anywhere for their ownership.

for the under the counter dealers, they would take a used gun in trade, & sell it without going through the books & registering it, once we had 3 that did. but, they died, closed, & retired. that covers the 3. the couple places we have today do it by the book & unfortunately are pains to deal with. I have to go out of town to talk to a polite dealer. We do not have but 2 real gun shops, & 1 "catalog shop" they have normally a zero gun inventory & only order after you pay a deposit.

Randy

SgtBill wrote:Yes the form is a #4473 if my memory is correct and I did have to turn in all my paperwork to the A.T.F. when I gave up my weapons Lic. many year's ago.
Bill

Yup and FFLs are required to keep those forms unless/until they give up their license...then all those forms go to the BATFE...who knows what happens to them...

It has been a while since I bought a firearm from an FFL who used the phone to call in the information, but I swear I remember them reading off the serial number.

Anyone have clarification on that?

I am an FFL, and may be actually be able to shed a little light.

When you purchase a firearm, the information is filled out on a 4473, and in Virginia an sp-65 also. The serial number is on the 4473 and that is the only place it is recorded. When I look over the 4473 and the 65, I send in the information to the VA state police via the internet. Personal information only, very basic. They do not know whether you used a CCW for second id, nor do they care. Just personal info, and number of firearms. So when folks complain that VA is causing trouble for CCW's don't buy it, it does not come into play unless you are buying more than one handgun in 30 days, even then only when background done on the phone. Internet checks are so easy!

1 copy of the 65 is sent in the end of the week to VA, personal info, but nothing relating to the firearm other than the number of firearms for the transaction. I keep the original for 2 years minimum.

The 4473, which has the firearm information, stays with me for 20 years. If I go out of business, I am required to send in all of my 4473s to the ATF in martinsburg WV.

When a crime is committed, and gun seized... ATF goes to manufacturer, finds out where gun went, most likely a wholesaler, then tracked to the FFL, who would give you as the next in line. If you sold it to another party, the trail is lost forever, unless you have their info. on and on it goes.

Hope this helps, Doug

gunderwood wrote:It has been a while since I bought a firearm from an FFL who used the phone to call in the information, but I swear I remember them reading off the serial number.

Anyone have clarification on that?

When I've done call-ins it was never more specific than firearm type (pistol, rifle, shotgun, etc.).

If I missed this already posted sorry, but on ATF Form filled out to purchase a firearm Section D has to be filled out by the seller. Section D records the Manufacturer, Model, Serial Number, Type, and Caliber of the firearm. Also the seller must keep a bound book indicating when the firearm was received and to whom it was transferred to.

If a firearm is recovered in a crime the serial number can be traced thru the manufacturer to the wholesaler to the dealer. Thus allowing the trace to the original buyer.

In the case of the OP the prosecution would have to prove that the gun used was the gun the defendant bought and was in fact the murder weapon. As said earlier just type and caliber could one of thousands of firearms. Also need motive and opportunity.

IANAL just my opinion.

fireman836 wrote:In the case of the OP the prosecution would have to prove that the gun used was the gun the defendant bought and was in fact the murder weapon. As said earlier just type and caliber could one of thousands of firearms. Also need motive and opportunity.