Machine Guns, Explosives Seized After Arrest In Pacific Beach

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.10news.com/news/19414061/detail.html

POSTED: 10:45 pm PDT May 8, 2009

SAN DIEGO -- A Lake Elsinore man was in custody today after investigators found him in possession four unregistered machine guns, explosives and thousands of rounds of ammunition, authorities said.

Jason Hillard, 36, was arrested Wednesday in the Pacific Beach area, according to Special Agent Michael Hoffman of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives' Los Angeles Field Division. snip

Searching Hillard's vehicle, officers discovered six guns, hundreds of rounds of ammunition, a ski mask, duct tape and a large overcoat, Hoffman said.

The officers contacted the ATF, who determined that four of the guns in Hillard's vehicle were formerly semi-automatic weapons that had been converted into machine guns, Hoffman said.

AFT investigators then searched Hillard's residence at 15156 Anchor Way and found nine more guns, thousands of rounds of ammunition, a silencer and two pipe bombs.

[villager]

1. But but but... the Founding Fathers, with the 2nd Amendment, clearly intended he have all that shit!

Antonin Scalia said so!

[Raskolnik]

5. Really? Who do you believe thinks that?

And could you please point out in which portion of Heller "Scalia said so?"

[villager]

8. Wait - you mean, Raskolnik, you agree there should be reasonable limits on personal weaponry?

And that such limits may serve community safety and stability?

Do I have that right?

[Raskolnik]

10. Yes, just like nearly every other person on DU and the real world.

No one on DU thinks that there should be a complete absence of laws regarding firearm possession and ownership. I believe you'll find that most "pro-gun" people on DU generally think that the lines drawn by the 1934 N.F.A. are appropriate, and the recent Heller decision is correct, for the most part.

I, and I believe the majority of "pro-gun" people on DU, also believe that restricting a Constitional right is not to be taken lightly, and an unconstitutional law is an unconstitutional law no matter how supposedly well-intentioned.

Now, could you please answer my questions?

[villager]

13. Glad to see, then, it's only a matter of degree, in terms of where we differ

...but not a matter of concept, or precept.

And while your dogged defense of Scalia (and in this case Thomas), remains, well, either regrettable or all-too-predictable (the "pro gun" folk you cite do like to pick and choose when they agree with rightwing extremists, or not) here's a great article on the tortured logic Scalia brought to his Heller "reasoning:"

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=justice_scalias_dueling_opinions

[Raskolnik]

14. You still didn't answer my questions.

So, again, I'll ask: (1) who do you believe thinks "the Founding Fathers, with the 2nd Amendment, clearly intended he have all that shit!" and (2) in which portion of Heller did "Scalia say so?"

Apparently you are either unable or unwilling to discuss this without ridiculous strawmen. I am not defending Scalia, doggedly or otherwise, I am a strong believer in the civil rights protected by the Constition.

And yes, you should pick and choose when you're going to agree with someone, whether they be right-wing extremists or otherwise. If you reflexively disagree with anything that comes out of a conservative judge's opinion, you are being extremely intellectually lazy. I disagree with about 90% of Scalia's judicial opinions, but a broken clock can be correct a couple times a day.

[konnichi wa]

17. I'm discovering that there are a few people who won't be happy until all guns are banned...

meanwhile they accuse RKBA supporters of wanting zero control over firearm ownership. They know full well they are lying but also well know tried and true propaganda methods (repeat the lie again and again...)

[villager]

21. please -- illuminate us on your RKBA support of reasonsable firearm control!

n/t

[villager]

19. can you read the linked article

or do I have to excerpt it for you, in order to stop your harangues about my not answering your question?

[Raskolnik]

22. I don't want to put words in your mouth, and I don't see anything in that article that answers

either of my questions.

[villager]

23. well, you wouldn't

n/t

[Raskolnik]

24. That's all you've got? Really?

Even by your standards, villager, that was a pretty poor effort at even the appearance of intellectual honesty.

[villager]

25. Ah, the inevitable Raskolnik snark

Can't be bothered to read links when they're provided, allows self to dismiss such links out of hand (though heaven forfend someone whose pro-control does the same with a pro-gunner's link!), refuses to discuss them, then gets irked when person doesn't fall for the bait.

For someone whose avatar is supposedly named for a dissenter or freethinker, Raskolnik, you are, unfortunately, all too predictable.

[Raskolnik]

26. I've read the link you cut & pasted, and it does not answer my questions.

The article you link to discusses Scalia's inconsistency between Boumediene and Heller. I agree that there is inconsistency there, and I believe Scalia was dead wrong in Boumediene. You are apparently unaware of the irony of supporting an approach to civil rights embraced by Scalia in Boumediene.

The article does not address your two ridiculous statements. I can only assume that your tap-dancing to avoid actually addressing those statements is evidence that you cannot support them. I accept your retraction.


edit typo

[villager]

36. Well, I don't retract. And do you even bother with anything on DU other than gun

threads, and defending your precious weapons?

Scalia and Thomas were wrong in Heller. Period. Their reasoning was wrong.

Interestingly, you can't specifically rebut anything in the article, just wave around your usual generalities.

I realize the last word on gun threads is of utmost importance to you -- you consider it a great victory for your misbegotten cause.

So come back and snark, and that will be the end of this sub-thread.

On the other hand, if you actually want to discuss, instead of accuse...

[Raskolnik]

40. I've invited you, repeatedly, to support your statements, but for some reason you refuse.

The reason I don't rebut anything in the article you clearly haven't really tried to understand is both because it isn't really relevant to what we're discussing (as made clear by your utter inability to point out what it has to do with my questions to you) and because I tend to agree with the premise that Scalia employed radically different approaches in the two cases at issue when examining civil rights.

I think Scalia was very, very wrong in Boumediene. Do you?

Not to put too fine a point on it, but its pretty clear that you either haven't even read the article to which you're referring very closely, or you don't quite understand what its point actually is. If I'm wrong, I trust you can provide some actual basis for how that article addresses either of your rather silly statements.

[Pavulon]

42. Unregistered = Illegal..Did you actually read

or just post an ill informed rant. NFA regulated weapons are never used in crimes. However posession of machine guns or their parts is a 10 year federal term and is enforced. 10 years is more than you will do for most rape or shooting a person and taking a manslaughter plea.

This is clear proof that criminals just dont give a fuck about the law.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

45. No need to lie about a Supreme Court justice.

[slackmaster]

2. Shoot, a feller could have himself a great time in Vegas with all that stuff

Good work, BATFE.

[MindPilot]

6. At least he didn't have any alcohol on the beach.

That would've been REALLY bad.

[Creena]

3. Constituent of the illustrious 49th District.

What say you Mr. Issa?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darrell_Issa
http://www.issues2000.org/Governor/Darrell_Issa_Gun_Control.htm
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/07/02/MN153221.DTL

[sinkingfeeling]

4. But how am I to feel safe if this guy can't have machine guns and bombs?

[Raskolnik]

7. Seems to be a case of laws being enforced appropriately.

Good for everyone involved.

[Richard Steele]

38. As a lifelong gun owner, I agree completely. nm

[aikoaiko]

9. Hey big shout out to Special Agent Mike.

Thanks for getting a bad guy off the streets.

[Adsos Letter]

11. "... a ski mask, duct tape and a large overcoat,..."

:wtf:

[konnichi wa]

15. I have an overcoat, some duct tape and a halloween mask. Should I be worried?

:rofl:
\

[MindPilot]

16. yes because Halloween, like ski season, is months away

[konnichi wa]

18. So I better not let it be known that I have 8 guns

:scared:


:rofl:

[NNN0LHI]

20. Not if 4 of them were formerly semi-automatic weapons that you had converted into full-auto

Like this sportsman had done.

Don

[konnichi wa]

33. Yeah, I really believe that. And in the Easter Bunny.

We shall see.

[MindPilot]

32. See, in Pacific Beach, having 8 guns is not unusual...

but an overcoat...THAT is probable cause. :rofl:

[MindPilot]

12. no criminal history and motive has not been determined

What are the chances this guy is a right-wing loon vs. just a loon getting ready for a big crime spree?

[RaleighNCDUer]

27. I don't believe that - it's not possible.

I have it on good authority from the Gungeon that semi-autos CANNOT be converted to full auto.

[Raskolnik]

28. You are misinformed.

First, the vast majority of semi-automatic firearms are quite difficult to convert to full-auto functioning. Those firearms that are easily converted are essentially as tightly regulated as the full-auto versions. Anyone who tells you that its just a matter of buying a "kit" at the local gun show, or filing down a pin here and there, is full of it.

Second, just because this story said this knucklehead had a bunch of converted weapons does not mean this knucklehead had a bunch of converted weapons that would actually have worked at full-auto.

Third, something being wildly impractical and/or rare is not the same thing as saying it CANNOT be done. The fact remains that criminals use full-auto weapons to commit crimes only in a vanashingly small number of instances.

Does that clear things up for you?

[RaleighNCDUer]

30. Keep grasping. nt

[Raskolnik]

31. Well, you certainly make a good, logical point.

Touche.

[konnichi wa]

34. I hereby repeat my offer: Buy a "kit" to do a conversion like you've described, and I will

give you ten times what you paid for it. (It has to be real, not vaporware)
Nobody has been interested in putting their profit margin where their mouths are so far...in about 2 years.

[RaleighNCDUer]

67. so the police just imagined the four converted weapons.

I'd have never thought that had such good imaginations.

[Raskolnik]

68. For the life of me I can't figure out how your post is reponsive.

No one is saying the police imagined anything. What has been explained (many, many times) is that the urban legends of being able to convert a semi-automatic weapon to full-auto with a fabled "kit" that one can purchase at any gun show is just bunk.

If, in fact, the subject of the OP did possess four (functional) converted full-auto weapons, you can be sure that it involved a hell of a lot of work, and the chances are *very* good that the weapons would not have functioned as intended for very long.

[konnichi wa]

69. Nice evasion. Did you learn it from Rove?

...

[Stinky The Clown]

29. Gosh, he sounds like he'd be a swell neighbor!

[konnichi wa]

35. So would that soldier who killed 5 troops.

...

[derby378]

37. But California has the strongest gun-control laws in the nation...

How can this be?

I'm glad Hillard was caught before he did something stupid, but it appears that California's hostile stance towards gun ownership is doing nothing substantial towards reducing gun-related crimes. Maybe it's time for the state to try something different.

[konnichi wa]

39. They should just declare the whole state a 'gun-free zone' like Virginia Tech.

That way nobody would dare bring a gun in.

[quaker bill]

41. Sounds like Glen Beck

has lost an avid listener.

[MindPilot]

43. OK, that one made me LOL!

:spray:

[The Straight Story]

44. Pffft - ban machine guns and explosives and no one will have them

Oh wait....

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

46. Oh wait he broke a bunch of federal laws and got caught. At least get it right.

[The Straight Story]

48. Yes indeed - he broke laws and is to blame. Not the guns

The person broke the laws.

So where is the threat again? The people, or the weapons?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

57. Then we agree.

[nadinbrzezinski]

47. BUT, BUT, BUT, the gun fans keep telling me you CANNOT convert

semi auto to a full auto... what happened?

(I know what happened, but hey... what can I say)

Oh and this boy will be doing some really hard time at the bars hotel

[Raskolnik]

49. You are misinformed as well.

So I'll repeat an earlier post:

First, the vast majority of semi-automatic firearms are quite difficult to convert to full-auto functioning. Those firearms that are easily converted are essentially as tightly regulated as the full-auto versions. Anyone who tells you that its just a matter of buying a "kit" at the local gun show, or filing down a pin here and there, is full of it.

Second, just because this story said this knucklehead had a bunch of converted weapons does not mean this knucklehead had a bunch of converted weapons that would actually have worked at full-auto.

Third, something being wildly impractical and/or rare is not the same thing as saying it CANNOT be done. The fact remains that criminals use full-auto weapons to commit crimes only in a vanishingly small number of instances.

Does that clear things up for you?

[nadinbrzezinski]

51. No you haven't, since the original claim was... that it could simply not be done

this is called moving goal posts... as this gentleman has violated the law in major ways, and it made it to the PAPER.

Have a good day

[Raskolnik]

53. Please point out the "original claim" to which you are referring.

Thanks.

[nadinbrzezinski]

54. Many on these boards, sorry I ain't gonna look for them

suffice it to say that we have moving goal posts

[Raskolnik]

55. Nope, that doesn't cut it.

You made a silly claim, and you can't support it. No one says it is impossible to convert a semi-automatic firearm to full-auto. What has been pointed out on numerous occasions, however, is that such conversion is exceedingly difficult to accomplish, and is so rare as to be essentially irrelevant when discussing firearm crime.

[nadinbrzezinski]

56. No I didn't, but now I see the moving goal posts

and that's ok. I KNOW that even if I FOUND the damn posts, you'd still discount them

I know it

Have a good life

By the way, enjoy the moving goal posts... and the fact that people will DEMAND control

[Raskolnik]

58. Unless you are getting a nickel every time you type the words "moving goal posts"

I'm not sure you're actually accomplishing anything by repeating it ad nauseum. If you can support your claim, do so. Otherwise, just admit you were talking out of your behind and move on.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

61. You have certainly moved the goal post. Congratulations.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

60. In other words you can't back up your claim.

[beevul]

65. Wait, I've got it, Dave!!!!

I know who said that semi-auto firearms CANNOT be converted:

The same people that want to arm EVERYONE!!!!

:rofl:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

66. Including the convicted felons, psychopaths and children!!!

What a joke!

[konnichi wa]

70. Of course. The same ones with an autographed picture of Jebus.

or Bigfoot...


:eyes: :silly:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

59. I have only seen it stated here that it was quite difficult to do and required machining experience.

Where was the original claim made?

[beevul]

50. Cite please.

"BUT, BUT, BUT, the gun fans keep telling me you CANNOT convert"

Cite for that please.

If they keep telling you, it shouldn't be too hard.

Oh, and um...just so's were on the same page, make your cite one that actually is an example of someone saying they CANNOT be converted.

Not one that says that they are highly difficult, or some such.


We'll wait right here.

[nadinbrzezinski]

52. Look at the post above

and have a nice day

I love moving goal pots by the way

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

62. What is a goal pot?

[beevul]

64. In other words, you made a false claim and were called on it.

I guess it never occured to you that doing things such as that and other kinds of blatant dishonesty, is why your side never gets any dialogue with those of us on the other side of th4e issue, and whats gotten your side into the position of power and prestige where it now rests - that being none.

"I love moving goal po(s)ts by the way"


Clearly. And you're good at moving them, too.

[proteus_lives]

63. Scary!

All that gear. What do you think-crazy shooter or gang-related? Possibly milita?