Kel-Tec plr-16 illegal in Hendersonville, Tennessee

defendant: Antonio Sales

case #8572009

prosecutor:
William Lambeths
Sumner County 18th Judicial District
113 West Main Street, 3rd Floor
Gallatin, TN 37066
Phone: (615) 451-5810
Fax: (615) 451-5836

Sumner County Criminal Court Clerk
Mahailiah Hughes
101 Public Square
P.O. Box 549
Gallatin, TN 37066
Phone: (615) 451-3209
FAX: (615) 451-6027
Office Hours: Mon. - Fri., 8:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.

Valerie Jones (court reporter)
615-699-3261

Resolved April 7, 2011

Antonio Sales has a Tennessee handgun carry permit. He had a legally obtained Kel-tec PLR-16 pistol which was being transported legally. He was charged with a violation of TCA 39-17-1302, which is possession of an illegal handgun. These charges have been pending for two years based upon what in my opinion is an illegal charge. The DA made an offer that if Antonio sold the gun they would drop the charges. Antonio sold the gun and the charges were dropped.



I found the gunshop where the gun was for sale and went and bought it today. I'll post some of the court documents when they are available, I think the judge still has them to write the final order.

rogerdemin wrote:So they claim that that handgun is a sbr?

If they make that claim and they told the defendant to SELL the firearm in question then they broke the law by facilitating a crime of transferring a illegal NFA weapon aren't they?

Of course that also means that the store that bought it form him and you who bought it form the store all have also broken the law as you knew the history and that the state had deemed the firearm a SBR?

Is it just me or is this severely convoluted?

I have two plr-16's now. Does that mean I can be charged with two counts of illegal possession?

MY EYES

wouldn't that be a AOW as it's disguised as a Kitty gun

kwikrnu wrote:

rogerdemin wrote:So they claim that that handgun is a sbr?

If they make that claim and they told the defendant to SELL the firearm in question then they broke the law by facilitating a crime of transferring a illegal NFA weapon aren't they?

Of course that also means that the store that bought it form him and you who bought it form the store all have also broken the law as you knew the history and that the state had deemed the firearm a SBR?

Is it just me or is this severely convoluted?

I have two plr-16's now. Does that mean I can be charged with two counts of illegal possession?

IDK, but I hope you paint the tip of the barrel orange, go for a walk in a park, then get charged, and indicted. Then maybe you will no longer be able to own firearms and make the poor descisions(which based on you previous post here)that you seem to consistently make), then you can't continue to make all of us responsible gun owners look crazy like you seem to be. That is if you bought this gun in order to get charges pressed, and try to sue someone like you seem to enjoy doing. Have a great day, and God Bless!!!

[email protected] wrote:IDK...

Yes, you don't know:!:

kwikrnu wrote:

That is gay beyond all recognition. I am ashamed you own a single firearm

Looks like a toy!! Toys are to play with. Not a good message to kids.

Gun ownership is a heavy responsibility. My girlfriend wanted a pink Keltec pistol. I told her it was cute, and that was a problem, especially with grandkids around. I have trained/instructed my grandkids. But I can't train their friends. Just not worth the risk for something cute.

Sorry, rant over

I thought you treated all firearms are loaded /dangerous etc. Or at least teach newbies the theory.

That's pretty screwed up:

1> That TN has a different definition of an SBR than the Feds
and/or
2> That the judge and cops didn't bother to understand the definition of an SBR prior to charging the guy.

who says a kel tec couldnt get any uglier?!

Silly. They could make the same case against a Ruger Charger, or any other pistol with a "long" barrel.

rogerdemin wrote:So they claim that that handgun is a sbr?

If they make that claim and they told the defendant to SELL the firearm in question then they broke the law by facilitating a crime of transferring a illegal NFA weapon aren't they?

No, they never claimed it was an NFA weapon. These were state, not federal charges.

stevejobs wrote:Silly. They could make the same case against a Ruger Charger, or any other pistol with a "long" barrel.

They could. Their mistake is in the definitions.

tca 39-17-1301(14) “Rifle” means any firearm designed, made or adapted to be fired from the shoulder and to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed metallic cartridge to fire a projectile through a rifled bore by a single function of the trigger;

tca 39-17-1301(15) “Short barrel” means a barrel length of less than sixteen inches (16") for a rifle and eighteen inches (18") for a shotgun, or an overall firearm length of less than twenty-six inches (26");

A handgun is not a rifle because a rifle is fired from the shoulder. Pistols are not fired from the shoulder. A plr-16 is not fired from the shoulder so it is not a rifle. If the state wanted to argue that the plr-16 is neither a rifle or a handgun then there may be some argument, but the indictment is specific in that it claims the plr-16 is a short barreled rifle. It is short barreled (as most handguns are), but it will never be a rifle unless a shoulder stock is added.

silencertalk wrote:

rogerdemin wrote:So they claim that that handgun is a sbr?

If they make that claim and they told the defendant to SELL the firearm in question then they broke the law by facilitating a crime of transferring a illegal NFA weapon aren't they?

No, they never claimed it was an NFA weapon. These were state, not federal charges.

That is correct. From what I understand the ATF was scheduled to testify that the plr-16 was not a SBR by their definition.

tca 39-17-1302 (a) A person commits an offense who intentionally or knowingly possesses, manufactures, transports, repairs or sells:
(4) A short-barrel rifle or shotgun;


There is no law prohibiting the possession of a short barreled pistol or handgun except the law which makes it illegal to
carry a firearm with the intent to go armed.

http://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/2 ... 9-17-1301/

(14) “Rifle” means any firearm designed, made or adapted to be fired from the shoulder and to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed metallic cartridge to fire a projectile through a rifled bore by a single function of the trigger;
(15) “Short barrel” means a barrel length of less than sixteen inches (16²) for a rifle and eighteen inches (18²) for a shotgun, or an overall firearm length of less than twenty-six inches (26²);

It is not a short barrel rifle under TN law.

And even more interesting, if you use a non-metallic cartridge, it is not even a rifle.



Make sure to do a wildcat so that metallic cartridges don't exist.

Thanks for showing that pink kitty gun, its the best laugh I've had in a while.

...my respect for you just went up a tiny notch - you truly did take a gun out of the hands of a gang member and felon, and "off the streets".

PTK wrote:...my respect for you just went up a tiny notch - you truly did take a gun out of the hands of a gang member and felon, and "off the streets".

I bought it to preserve it for him. Dude has a Tennessee handgun carry permit.

kwikrnu wrote:

PTK wrote:...my respect for you just went up a tiny notch - you truly did take a gun out of the hands of a gang member and felon, and "off the streets".

I bought it to preserve it for him. Dude has a Tennessee handgun carry permit.

You realize you are plastering the name of an alleged gang member all over the net? Think he will abide by any laws, or fear the 'suit you threaten him with?

mcinfantry wrote:

kwikrnu wrote:

PTK wrote:...my respect for you just went up a tiny notch - you truly did take a gun out of the hands of a gang member and felon, and "off the streets".

I bought it to preserve it for him. Dude has a Tennessee handgun carry permit.

You realize you are plastering the name of an alleged gang member all over the net? Think he will abide by any laws, or fear the 'suit you threaten him with?

Why would I sue him? What laws did he break?

Hush wrote:Thanks for showing that pink kitty gun, its the best laugh I've had in a while.

I called my wife in too see.....She want's one She said "Here kitty,kitty,kitty." Seriously, you may have a niche market their.

Speed-Racer wrote:

Hush wrote:Thanks for showing that pink kitty gun, its the best laugh I've had in a while.

I called my wife in too see.....She want's one She said "Here kitty,kitty,kitty." Seriously, you may have a niche market their.

Something tells me sanrio would not license the hello kitty image to use on guns. The image is a parody and I'm not involved in manufacturing or refinishing for profit.

kwikrnu wrote: I bought it to preserve it for him.

I HAD TO come back to this...

It is Freaking Hilarious...

Leonard hunted down and bought (Alleged)Gang-Banger Antonio Sales' Ugly Gun(that got Mr. Sales Indicted).........

(Drum Roll!)

TO PRESERVE IT FOR HIM!

Wow...I am 100% confident that just as soon as Mr. Sales is uh, free to travel...He will 'hunt down' Leonard and demonstrate his deep gratitude!

I really hope there are Videos on YouTube!

And then Leonard can change his Signature To...

"Antonio's Bitch!"



WYOGUY

wyoguy wrote:

kwikrnu wrote: I bought it to preserve it for him.

I HAD TO come back to this...

It is Freaking Hilarious...

Leonard hunted down and bought (Alleged)Gang-Banger Antonio Sales' Ugly Gun(that got Mr. Sales Indicted).........

(Drum Roll!)

TO PRESERVE IT FOR HIM!

Wow...I am 100% confident that just as soon as Mr. Sales is uh, free to travel...He will 'hunt down' Leonard and demonstrate his deep gratitude!

I really hope there are Videos on YouTube!

And then Leonard can change his Signature To...

"Antonio's Bitch!"



WYOGUY

Why is Mr. Sales not "free to travel"?