Skip to comments.State trooper pleads guilty to possessing machine gun
Posted on 07/26/2006 4:47:07 PM PDT by bad company
Illinois State Police trooper Gregory Mugge pleaded guilty to one charge of possessing an unregistered machine gun in federal court on Tuesday, according to an announcement from the U.S. attorney's office.
Mugge, 52, of Jerseyville, was indicted in January, along with Illinois State Police Sgt. James Vest, 39, of O'Fallon, and John Yard, 36, an Illinois State Police special agent assigned to the Collinsville office, each face separate charges of illegal gun possession.
Mugge faces up to 10 years in prison, a fine of up to $250,000 and a maximum three years of supervised release.
He is scheduled to reappear in court for sentencing on Oct. 27.
On Dec. 29, authorities seized Mugge's unregistered Colt .2234 caliber rifle from his home in Jerseyville. In his plea, Mugge admitted to knowing his possession of the rifle was unlawful.
In February, a group of 12 local police chiefs and sheriffs, and two state senators, Sen. Bill Haine, D-Alton, and Sen. James Watson, R-Greenville, endorsed a letter of support for the three state troopers.
At that time, the backers pushed for administrative punishment for the three troopers rather than prosecution.
Why not show a real spine AND CHANGE THE GODDAMN LAW?
Good to know that their editors were hard at work...
Did these State troopers steal money out of my pocket?
Or was it our gun-grabber governor who also grabbed my money?
We need to return to a concept of crimes that have victims being more serious than victimless crimes.
Was it a rifle or a machine gun? Dumb ass liberal media don't know squat about things they oppose.
Ah, the dreaded Colt .2234 caliber rifle...
Because that would allow people not like them (i.e., common, law-abiding citizens) to be able to own things that they feel they alone are entitled to. And we can't have that, you understand.
Fat chance. They would have to let tens of thousands out of people out of prison, and shrink the criminal justice industry (cops, courts, lawyers, jails) considerably. Just think of all the jobs it would cost.
He had it, he knew he had it, he knew it was illegal; and people think the law should be ignored because he's a "Trooper"?!? What other laws can he ignore? We either have laws, or we do not. If we have laws, they are enforced equally across the board; or we have anarchy. I'd say he made a STUPID decision.
Almost as dreaded as the mysterious .223456789 caliber rifle, known only to liberal reporters.
A Colt in .223 - it's a guess, but perhaps it was an AR-15.
The caliber of pi.
Glad to hear that the Illinois boys got tangled up in their own state laws.
The ones they LOVE to enforce.
Somebody needs to calibrate their metal detectors.
EXTREMELY tight tolerances for improved accuracy. Course you have to replace the barrel after every magazine.
There don't appear to be many fully automatic rifles in the inner cities where they're most likely to be used if available, and I have a hard time thinking that's a bad thing.
I'm a member of the NRA and own many guns myself. I'd prefer that fully automatic rifles be highly restricted in this country.
How I want a drink, alcoholic of course, after the heavy chapters involving quantum mechanics. One is, yes, adequate even enough to induce some fun and pleasure for an instant, miserably brief.
"...possessing an unregistered machine gun in federal court...
Good to know that their editors were hard at work"
WOW a machine gun in court. Good thing the judge didn't have a gun or it coulda been a wild west shootout.
lets ignore that machines guns (except gatlin guns) didnt exist in the wild west, or that shootouts didn;t really happen, or that guns dont make people dangerous.
State senators cannot change a federal law.
Or the transcendental .31838309886 (1/pi) and .367879441 (1/e) caliber rifles! :-)
I dont have an issue with them having the guns. I have an issue with them getting special treatment. The rest of us would in chains.
Since that the area under one lobe of the sine curve is 2 units, I opt for the 1/2 calliber rifle. A Barrett will do.
This is weird.
I'm a member of BMW Car Club of America and own many vehicles myself. I'd prefer that high speed cars (that go over 65 MPH) be highly restricted in this country.
Are you seeing the problem in your arguement? Fast cars kill ALOT more people IN ONE DAMN DAY than all illegal machine guns have since 1933.
"I'm a member of the NRA and own many guns myself. I'd prefer that fully automatic rifles be highly restricted in this country."
I agree totally. Only sane adults who do not have a criminal record should be allowed to have one.
Unlawful, but not unconstitutional?
Or be engulfed in flames along with toddlers and children....or having our face blown off while holding a baby standing in a door...or.....oh nevermind....
Well, I'd also make sure politicans aren't packing. Oh, never mind, I guess you covered that one with the "sane" part.
I'd prefer that fully automatic rifles be highly restricted in this country.
"Or be engulfed in flames along with toddlers and children....or having our face blown off while holding a baby standing in a door...or.....oh nevermind..."
Took me a bit but I finally got your reference. I didnt know they had automatic weapons at Ruby Ridge. Thought it was only the shotguns and hunting rifles.
Read the Miller decision....we have MORE of a right to own military firearms than we do semiautos.....bickering and arguing over the RPM just pisses me off...its the intent, responsibility and accountability that needs to be considered in the laws.
No, I don't see the problem with my argument. Perhaps you can further elucidate. I think if illegal, or legal, machine guns were widely available here in the states, we'd see them used far more widely.
They are hard to get, or you have to be a bit of a gunsmith to make the conversion from a kit. Consequently, they're not much a factor in crime here. I think the gangbangers would have them if they could get them. And I'd rather they didn't.
I didnt know they had automatic weapons at Ruby Ridge.
Basically, to a BATF agent, your life isnt worth $hit over inconsistancies of fractions of an inch, RPM, and a $200.00 tax.
If automatic rifles were banned, I'd be disappointed, since they're fun to shoot and a law banning them would be unconstitutional. However, it's comforting to know that a well-trained, well-disciplined citizen with a semi-automatic weapon is more than a match for an undisciplined thug with an automatic rifle.
BTW, Michael Moore, in his anti-gun film Bowling for Columbine, also claimed to be an NRA member. I think he even claimed to be a life member.
True enough, but Illinois has the most asinine and draconian gun restrictions in the country. If these mopes had any courage with their convictions, they'd dump the gun laws and let it be known that in Illinois, the 2nd Amendment is the law of the land, and send nanny-state Governor Blogo down in flames. What a bunch of idiots.
Infringing my 2nd amendment rights because of something gangbangers might do is a very slippery slope.
Furthermore, if I must have somebody shooting at me, I would rather they spray automatic fire than aim.
He is, i think he paid the dues to the NRA in order to make his film when he "interviewed" Heston.
...My $30,000.00 investment in 1988 is doing quite nice ;)
I'm sure you'd also like to see gangbangers deprieved of semi-automatic weapons. What would you do to reach that goal? Pass a law making them illegal, so law-abiding citizens won't have them but criminals, who buy guns illegally on the black market, will? Or would it make more sense to allow law-abiding citizens to defend themselves, and have severe punishments for anyone who commits a violent crime? Would you like your gun confiscated simply because a criminal used a similar gun to commit a crime?
Think about this logic for semi-automatics, and then apply it to automatics. It works the same way.
It also happened becaues the BATF knew he was dumb and desperate for money. They asked him to cut the barrels off.
Well, I'd prefer to aim. But automatic weapons are still fun!
It was a deadly .2234 which is notorious for it's ability to kill.
I can understand allowing pistols, rifles and shotguns. However, would you prefer some gang-bangers opening fire in your neighborhood with a 12 round 9mm Glock, or a fully automatic weapon?
One could argue that a 'need' for a fully automatic weapon isn't valid. However, I see no problem with the semi-automatics. The present system (Class 3 Federal Firearms Permit) for fully automatic weapons has worked very well since the 1940's.
How's about Only children, the insane and criminals should be barred from having one?
It's not that hard. The founders intended that the citizens could be armed, and actively encouraged it. But the weapons of the day didn't include WMD. Would they have intended that the 2nd include your right to create and own chemical and biological weapons? A nuke is probably out of your capability, but it if you could buy one from N. Korea, is that fine with the Founders?
What did they intend, indeed? Machine guns weren't invented yet. They certainly wanted the citizens to be able to defend themselves with guns. But machine guns and WMDs aren't easily classified as defensive weapons.
If you're arguing that no line should ever be drawn, I disagree. There are no absolute rights in the Constitution because the rights conflict with others when taken to the extreme. Somewhere that line is drawn, and people will always argue where it should be.