What is........"In Posession of"......legal meaning....????
What is........"In Posession of"......legal meaning...???
- Thread starter Sourdough
- Start date
Help Support Homesteading & Country Living Forum:
Possession is 'having control over' a person or item. Possession does not always mean ownership and it is not always immediate.
Soooo...............it is "Kind'a" a matter of opinion, or a judgment call.......is that correct...????
A Question about "Illegal" ammo possession.
"******** is charged in federal court with possession of ammunition. Because ******** has previously been convicted of crimes resulting in year-long or greater sentences, it's illegal for him to have ******** or ammunition that shipped or transported in interstate commerce, according to the federal complaint,.
Below is the part I would like clarified.......I am just curious.......what if the ammo was made in State. I would just like clarification. Why is it different if the ammo was made in a different state, as opposed to components assembled or re-loaded in state.
ammunition that shipped or transported in interstate commerce
"******** is charged in federal court with possession of ammunition. Because ******** has previously been convicted of crimes resulting in year-long or greater sentences, it's illegal for him to have ******** or ammunition that shipped or transported in interstate commerce, according to the federal complaint,.
Below is the part I would like clarified.......I am just curious.......what if the ammo was made in State. I would just like clarification. Why is it different if the ammo was made in a different state, as opposed to components assembled or re-loaded in state.
ammunition that shipped or transported in interstate commerce
In terms of arrest/prosecution, it comes down to what the officer or informant observed, what can be seen via body cam or surveillance video, how other evidence proving possession can be tied in, and how well all of that is articulated to the court. Of course if it is found on your person, in your vehicle, or on your property you are almost always legally in possession.
Most Federal statutes involve interstate because the states will charge you separately for anything that happens in state. It's all just a matter of jurisdiction.
Most Federal statutes involve interstate because the states will charge you separately for anything that happens in state. It's all just a matter of jurisdiction.
This is how marijuana can be legalized. Even though it is against federal law, unless the drug has crossed state lines the feds have no jurisdiction.
Say you lived in Chattanooga, TN and were transporting things legal in Tennessee, but not federally, to Nashville, you better not use I24 because for a few miles it dips into another state.
Many states are starting to assert their rights instead of rolling over.
Say you lived in Chattanooga, TN and were transporting things legal in Tennessee, but not federally, to Nashville, you better not use I24 because for a few miles it dips into another state.
Many states are starting to assert their rights instead of rolling over.
But the Feds control banking. And thus marijuana has to be a cash only business, making it a very easy target for thieves and nearly impossible to turn into greater wealth. I know cops in Colorado who are making a fortune guarding piles of cash that the owner has no idea what to do with.
https://www.ktuu.com/content/news/Juan-Camarena-arrested-on-federal-ammunition-charge-565008412.html
Sooo I am trying to understand about the interstate part of this ammo. Am I to understand that that if this ammo was manufactured or reloaded ammo created in Alaska, then he could not be held on "Federal Warrant". Is that correct....???
Sooo I am trying to understand about the interstate part of this ammo. Am I to understand that that if this ammo was manufactured or reloaded ammo created in Alaska, then he could not be held on "Federal Warrant". Is that correct....???
The way I understand it is that if any part of the product be it brass, primers, powder or lead and even the raw materials to make these items comes from another state it comes under the heading interstate commerce.
So if you had everything mined and produced in Alaska but you bought the primers that originated in another state the feds see you as in violation of the law.
It's not just the finished product but any ingredient within that product.
We have a gun manufacturer here in Montana but we don't make the steel here needed for the barrels and such.
OK.......Thank you for that explanation.
BUT........if he meets to standard for being a "Felon" in possession of "ANY" ammo..........why the need for the Federal Warrant based on possession of "Interstate Trafficked" ammo.....????????
Why not hold him on simple felon in possession of ammo...?? However that raises the "Possession of" question.........he was not found near the ammo, infact he was not found, he turned himself in. Now I can understand if they found him with the ammo on his person.
BUT........if he meets to standard for being a "Felon" in possession of "ANY" ammo..........why the need for the Federal Warrant based on possession of "Interstate Trafficked" ammo.....????????
Why not hold him on simple felon in possession of ammo...?? However that raises the "Possession of" question.........he was not found near the ammo, infact he was not found, he turned himself in. Now I can understand if they found him with the ammo on his person.
Last edited:
If a neighbor leaves his prescription bottle of Tylenol- Codeine on your kitchen cabinet and the police raid for drugs you can be arrested for possession of narcotics... whether your neighbor is still there or not.
It is unlikely but it has happened.
It is unlikely but it has happened.
And it is usually is a "plant" to make sure a search-warrant cannot come out empty-handed.
Even if they are really after some stolen Picasso somebody 'said' that they 'heard' you had
.
That's not how warrants work. Getting judges to sign warrants requires probable cause and probable cause requires more than rumor. And if you think getting warrants signed is easy, I can assure you that you are incorrect. It can take hours of affidavit preparation where you lay out tons of very specific evidence, investigative conclusions, etc., etc. and even then the judge will send you back for more evidence.
And using someone illicit prescription as a plant is all television and movies. Just like having to read Miranda warnings upon arrest or you being entitled to make a phone call as soon as you are booked in.
And using someone illicit prescription as a plant is all television and movies. Just like having to read Miranda warnings upon arrest or you being entitled to make a phone call as soon as you are booked in.
Sentry,
I served on a jury where a patient had given a doctor his prescription for narcotics after an alternative drug base was used to treat his pain. The pill bottle was on the kitchen window sill and was used in the trial as possession of narcotics against the doctor and his wife. The pharmacy board was upset that he was removing patients from long term opiate use for pain to non-narcotic alternatives. He was acquitted of all charges but the feds had already confiscated and sold his clinic and all the equipment. He was reimbursed for his losses and retired to get out of the business of taking people off addictive drugs that the state was using as the "best treatment".
I served on a jury where a patient had given a doctor his prescription for narcotics after an alternative drug base was used to treat his pain. The pill bottle was on the kitchen window sill and was used in the trial as possession of narcotics against the doctor and his wife. The pharmacy board was upset that he was removing patients from long term opiate use for pain to non-narcotic alternatives. He was acquitted of all charges but the feds had already confiscated and sold his clinic and all the equipment. He was reimbursed for his losses and retired to get out of the business of taking people off addictive drugs that the state was using as the "best treatment".
I find this disturbing. And amazing that the pharmacy industry has become so powerful, and rogue.
Last week I had a "Cold Call" from a drugstore attempting to convince me that I should give them verbal permission to contact my doctor, and advise him that generally people on the medication I had been prescribed, are typically also prescribed an additional and maybe related drug for that condition. They were essentially trying to expand their sales of drugs, by suggesting the doctor add additional prescriptions. I was honestly "Shocked" that they would pay employees to do this.
Last edited:
But they did not plant it. He possessed it and made the choice to do so. So of course it was evidence.
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2017
- Messages
- 1,524
Just to throw a wrench in the monkey works(I am trying to find the state and ruling) In one state it was ruled that since the defendant did not purchase said items that we are available across state lines his failure to do so still fell under the interstate clause because the lack of activity still had an effect on interstate commerce????? I kid you not
The pharmacy board is a state agency that governs the industry in the state. It is an appointed position. Doctors can lose the ability to prescribe narcotics if the board believes there is a problem - even though the doctor is still a licensed medical doctor.
MOST cops and MOST judges are good, but I will point to our noted FISA approved spying on a presidential candidate and President Elect as a prime example that this is not 100%. My father was a judge. I can attest that judges are imperfect.
There was a case where a rancher was found in violation of some interstate commerce regulations for raising grain to feed his own stock. The court found that because he didn't buy from someone else that affected interstate commerce. The law is what some bureaucrat says it is and being right doesn't always help.
Manufacture your own brass, primers, powder and bullets? Fine, you better be ready to spend hundreds of thousands to defend that in court, with no guarantee of remaining on this side of the bars. Get a pre 1899 gun to shoot it out of might help as those aren't firearms but that won't stop a charge from being filed. A pre 1899 flintlock where you make your own black powder and buy the lead from a local mine...
There was a case where a rancher was found in violation of some interstate commerce regulations for raising grain to feed his own stock. The court found that because he didn't buy from someone else that affected interstate commerce. The law is what some bureaucrat says it is and being right doesn't always help.
Manufacture your own brass, primers, powder and bullets? Fine, you better be ready to spend hundreds of thousands to defend that in court, with no guarantee of remaining on this side of the bars. Get a pre 1899 gun to shoot it out of might help as those aren't firearms but that won't stop a charge from being filed. A pre 1899 flintlock where you make your own black powder and buy the lead from a local mine...
