How many prosecutions under the 1994 Federal AW ban?

[wilit]

Does anyone know how many prosecutions there were for people violating the Fed AW ban? I seem to recall reading something a couple of years ago saying that some ridiculously low number, like 6, were actually prosecuted. I can't find anything on-line to confirm nor deny that number. Anyone actually know the real number?

[Window_Seat]

Hmmmm... good question, and this is something I wouldn't mind knowing about either.

Erik.

[taperxz]

What i would also really like to know is how many crimes have been prosecuted where a RAW was used in the commission of a crime? (in CA)

[wilit]

Bump. Anyone? Anyone know where I can maybe find the information? Would the Federal DOJ have stats on how many times charges were filed under that particular PC?

[CCWFacts]

What i would also really like to know is how many crimes have been prosecuted where a RAW was used in the commission of a crime? (in CA)

I can imagine the answer to that would be...



But I would also be interested if there have been any.

[Librarian]

I seem to recall some preliminary data that came out about 1996, but I can't find it now.

Was a pretty small number, IIRC.

[GOEX FFF]

It must be a very small number. It if were large it would be easy to find.

[Cato]

..and the current California AWB?

[wilit]

..and the current California AWB?

I would imagine that CA would have more prosecutions because it's basically an outright ban on possession of an unregistered AW. The Fed ban didn't require registration and was basically an evil features ban on new manufacture. Transfer of pre-ban firearms was still allowed under the Feds.

[Kharn]

For most criminals it was an add-on charge bargained away to get a plea, but there were a handful of people caught (usually had a fight with their SO, SO called it in as "he's got a bunch of machine guns", ATF showed up and he has a telestock on a 1999 Bushmaster, etc) and charged for just AWB violations. I'd say less than a hundred.

[Flintlock Tom]

It was my understanding the the 1994 AWB was only a ban on manufacture and import. If that is the case how could someone be charged, under that statute, for simply possessing one?

[Noonanda]

the ban should have affected the 2 north hollywood bank robbers. oh wait they are dead, and they were already criminals for converting weapons to full auto, bank robbery, discharging a firearm within city limits, attempted murder, resisting arrest, assault with a deadly weapon. Lots of worse charges that they would have been guilty of, but the Federal ones would have been the ban and converting weapons to fire full auto

[Kharn]

It was my understanding the the 1994 AWB was only a ban on manufacture and import. If that is the case how could someone be charged, under that statute, for simply possessing one?

The 1994 AWB included possession.

[Kreature96]

Bringing up the West Hollywood Bank Robbery reminds me, did they not use illegal drum magazines with a capacity over 100 and yet only they died. So the extended/large/huge capacity magazines do not actually kill?

[Carnivore]

The 1994 AWB included possession.

But only if they were purchased after the ban. You could keep and have what you already owned just couldn't make or buy etc new ones.

For the Fed ban there were/was no person prosecuted for violations of the ban it's self. A few companies were raided for supposedly importing new weapons but nothing ever came of it. In California there has been 5 cases I know of personally for violation of the AW ban. It was just cases where people didn't register their weapons and were caught after the fact. None of them went to jail, they all pled out with probation and community service. The total number for Cali I don't have a clue.

I know one guy last year had 10 or so AWs in the back of his truck and was stopped at LAX picking up a friend. He was out of AZ and didn't "realize he couldn't bring the weapons into CA". I know he was arrested but didn't hear anything more about it.