US v. Crooker

Filing 920100618

Opinion

var gAgent = navigator.userAgent.toLowerCase()
var gWindows = ( (gAgent.indexOf( "win" ) != -1 ) || ( gAgent.indexOf( "16bit" ) != -1 ) )
var gIE = ( gAgent.indexOf( "msie" ) != -1 )
var bInlineFloats = ( gWindows && gIE && ( parseInt( navigator.appVersion ) >= 4 ) )
var floatwnd = 0

var WPFootnote1 = 'John R. Gibson, of the Eighth Circuit, sitting by\
designation.\
'

var WPFootnote2 = 'Commercial silencers--more accurately described as\
suppressors since they do not nullify all noise, Wikipedia,\
"Suppressor," http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suppressor (last visited\
June 1, 2010)--come in various forms, but in general they are\
crafted metal cylinders that attach to the barrel of a gun and\
possess various internal apparatus and/or materials for dispersing\
more quietly the gas generated by the discharge (in the case of a\
firearm, the gas resulting from ignited powder).\
'

var WPFootnote3 = 'The government makes a similar argument comparing the\
silencer provision to the destructive device provision, but that\
provision poses the same kind of language difference problem. 18\
U.S.C. § 921(a)(4) (stating that "destructive device" means, inter\
alia, "any type of weapon . . . which will, or which may be readily\
converted to" expel a projectile by action of an explosive and\
which has a barrel of greater than a specified size).\
'

var WPFootnote4 = 'E.g., United States v. Carter, 465 F.3d 658, 667 (6th Cir.\
2006) (per curiam) (the silencer provision "focuses on the intended\
application of a silencer, not its actual demonstrated operation"\
and "indicates a concern for the purpose of the mechanism . . . not\
the function" (first emphasis added)), cert. denied, 550 U.S. 964\
(2007); United States v. Syverson, 90 F.3d 227, 232 (7th Cir. 1996)\
(reading the silencer provision language to require the government\
to "prove that the cylinder was made for the purpose of silencing\
a firearm, not that this purpose was realized," because "Congress\
has indicated that it intends to regulate all devices purporting to\
serve as silencers, not just those devices that actually work to\
silence firearms" (emphases added)), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 982\
(1996). But see United States v. Kavoukian, 354 F.3d 117, 120 (2d\
Cir. 2003) (per curiam) (suggesting that a silencer is "defined by\
its functionality" (emphasis added)); Hall, 171 F.3d at 1151\
(stating that the crime of possession of an unregistered silencer\
"require[s] a finding that the defendant knew that the relevant\
item could in fact function to diminish the sound of a gun"\
(emphasis added)).\
'

var WPFootnote5 = 'The device was apparently home-made at Crooker\'s request and\
made to fit to an airgun that Crooker also possessed. The evidence\
is very thin--and anyway the government did not try to prove--that\
Crooker expected this device to be fitted with an adapter or used\
in any way except as a muffler for the airgun with which it was\
shipped.\
'

function WPShow( WPid, WPtext )
{
if( bInlineFloats )
eval( "document.all." + WPid + ".style.visibility = 'visible'" );
else
{
if( floatwnd == 0 || floatwnd.closed )
floatwnd = window.open( "", "comment", "toolbars=0,width=600,height=200,resizable=1,scrollbars=1,dependent=1" );
floatwnd.document.open( "text/html", "replace" );
floatwnd.document.write( "\r\n" );
floatwnd.document.write( " p { margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:1px; } \r\n" );
floatwnd.document.write( "\r\n" );
floatwnd.document.write( WPtext );
floatwnd.document.write( 'Close');
floatwnd.document.write( "