"Bail tripled for South Plainfield man accused of bringing loaded rifle to construction site": http://www.mycentraljersey.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=200990508022

 

While the accused is certainly in the wrong here. The biggest issue in this article that I'm concerned with is "Toth is also charged with ......"possession of a weapon that's adaptable for use as a machine gun, without being licensed to do so,'' Ferraro said.

 

 

Am I reading this correctly? If so, then any owner of a semi-automatic firearm could be charged with the same "offense". In the paper version of this article the author of the article was kind enough to include her phone number and e-mail address. I'll post that info later when I get home in case anyone would like to contact her regarding any other ridiculous points in the article.

If that's accurate then I'm in trouble. :roll:

I never heard of that charge on a state level. That sounds like something that is more suitable on a Federal level which to my knowledge this case has not gone to at this point.

 

But the press at times gets the facts wrong.

Unspecified volatile chemicals were also found in home, though Ferraro said he did not know what they were for.

:roll:

 

Well, thank GOD they don't go in my garage. Between the various 'volatile chemicals' I have stored for use on the cars, boats, toys, etc, I'd be in totally deep doo-doo.

I think anything is capable of being used as a machine gun that is a semi auto. Heck, you can bumpfire a pistol.

 

Only thing safe is a bolt action rifle... though if you can find a way to cycle the bolt.... it can be a machine gun too. lol

 

Sad part is... any member here could have the same ammount of firearms.

 

This guy is a moron for firing into the air in the middle of a populated city!

 

As far as having them available around children? Dang shame if they werent locked around kids. Stupid parents = stupid kids.

Never heard of such a charge. Very strange.

I am not sure he was charged with that when you read the article it says they found a machine gun at his home, i think the writer is confusing the story.

i see three charges according to the story.

1.unlawfull discharge in city limits.

2. deadly threat with a weapon.

3. access to minors.

and they can come up with a whole bunch of crap off of those charges.

"they" want gun control, but no control over people like this Cait Callahan, who cant even write a proper story. How did this make it past an editor?

The charge is correct.

 

2C:39-5. Unlawful possession of weapons. a. Machine guns. Any person who knowingly has in his possession a machine gun or any instrument or device adaptable for use as a machine gun, without being licensed to do so as provided in N.J.S.2C:58-5, is guilty of a crime of the second degree.

 

The actual basis for the charge is contained in the body of the complaint and the investigation reports which I doubt were released to anyone just yet.