Another Constructive intent question

[schwaky18]

While reading other threads I was wondering, what is the case law on constructive intent? Seems like to me it could never be proven in court. (actual cases would be helpful)

 

[mconley]

I was wondering the same question you just beat me to posting it

 

[bigcraig]

Thats a tall order/question.

The words "constructive intent" are thrown around quite a bit in regards to NFA items, but in reality there are very few cases that have sufaced where that was the actual charge, because it is in fact BS.

Some of us that are in the title II game just go with the flow and try and answer the questions in regards to "contructive intent" with SAFE/LEGAL responses that would not get any body in a situation to make a bad decision.

When dealing with NFA items it is best to lean on the side of caution.

Remember this, even if your intentions are clearly in the good/right, an ATF agent or a ill-informed LEO can send you on a very expensive legal roller coaster.

 

[JosephR]

All the have to do to prove "constructive intent" is prove that you had the unregistered lower and the short upper in your possession. By definition, CI involves possession, not so much your state of mind or actual intent.

 

[schwaky18]

Thats a tall order/question.

The words "constructive intent" are thrown around quite a bit in regards to NFA items, but in reality there are very few cases that have sufaced where that was the actual charge, because it is in fact BS.

Some of us that are in the title II game just go with the flow and try and answer the questions in regards to "contructive intent" with SAFE/LEGAL responses that would not get any body in a situation to make a bad decision.

When dealing with NFA items it is best to lean on the side of caution.

Remember this, even if your intentions are clearly in the good/right, an ATF agent or a ill-informed LEO can send you on a very expensive legal roller coaster.

Thats what I figured and I agree with leaning towards the side of caution. I was just curious on the fact. And honestly thought there in no way the ATF could get away with such BS.

Also, I plan on getting a SBR AR upper and was wanting to know for my legal protection. My plan is to just ship it to my parents and have them keep it there locked up until I get the stamp. I figure 4 lowers at my house could cause problems. But if they go as far as saying with contructive intent they could push it as far that I bought it and own it and although I keep it at my parents I still have intent. (although I do find it all BS you are right on the costly fight)

 

[JosephR]

No actually they can't push it THAT far. To meet the definition of CI, it has to be in your possession...