XPost: ba.politics, dc.media, soc.penpals   
   XPost: alt.burningman   
   From: barack.and.barry@dont-email.me   
      
   These are democrats pulling this shit in the nation's capital.   
      
   The District of Columbia has spent almost two years persecuting   
   a good man because they wrongly thought he had guns in the city.   
      
   It wasn’t enough to prosecute Mark Witaschek for having one   
   shotgun shell and a box of muzzleloader bullets. After a three-   
   month trial that ended in a conviction, the city started an   
   investigation into the businessman’s taxes.   
      
   This abuse of power must end.   
      
   On the word of a bitter ex, the police searched Mr. Witaschek’s   
   Georgetown home twice in 2012 looking for guns. They never found   
   the bounty of firearms since Mr. Witaschek, a hunter, keeps his   
   guns at his sister’s home in Virginia.   
      
   The D.C. cops went to Sylvia Witaschek’s home in the   
   commonwealth and demanded she show them the guns, but she   
   refused.   
      
   The District’s unelected Attorney General Irvin Nathan   
   infamously declined to prosecute NBC’s David Gregory for   
   possession of a “high-capacity” magazine in December 2012,   
   claiming it was not in the interest of public safety.   
      
   However, Mr. Nathan refused to drop the ammunitions charges   
   against Mr. Witaschek and instead, sicced two of his prosecutors   
   on the case, which dragged on for 18 months.   
      
   On March 26, Mr. Witaschek was convicted by Judge Robert Morin   
   for “attempted unlawful possession of ammunition” for the box of   
   copper and lead pieces that go in an antique-replica   
   muzzleloader gun.   
      
   The judge did not rule on the shotgun shell, which had misfired   
   at a hunt years ago. The District only allows registered gun   
   owners to possess ammunition.   
      
   The nation’s capital did not think giving this man a criminal   
   record was enough. At sentencing, Assistant District Attorney   
   Oritsejemine Trouth asked the judge to demand Mr. Witaschek   
   register as a gun offender with the police within 48 hours.   
      
   And they still weren’t done. The day after the trial, an agent   
   from the D.C. Office of Tax and Revenue showed up at Mr.   
   Witaschek’s office.   
      
   His employer was given a summons to produce payroll and a   
   multitude of other records for investigators by April 11. No   
   allegations have yet been made in this fishing expedition.   
      
   Mr. Witaschek said he filed D.C. taxes and paid up to the due   
   dates required, until he moved to Virginia last year.   
      
   I asked Mr. Witaschek why he thought this tax investigation   
   suddenly arose.   
      
   “I think the police wanted to confiscate my guns from the   
   beginning. They are really angry that I didn’t comply,” the   
   businessman explained. “They will use whatever government   
   resources they choose to get what they wanted — or make me pay.   
   They already used the U.S. attorney, a grand jury, the D.C.   
   attorney general, and now the Office of Tax and Revenue.”   
      
   He added, “I don’t think they’ll stop here. After two years of   
   this, why would they?”   
      
   Mr. Witaschek feels he has been wrongly convicted. His attorney,   
   Howard X. McEachern, filed a motion for a new trial on Friday.   
   Mr. McEachern will also appeal the ruling both on the   
   technicality of the charge and his client’s Second Amendment   
   rights.   
      
   The basis for a new trial is that muzzleloader bullets are not   
   “ammunition” under the law.   
      
   In the court filing, Mr. McEachern points out that muzzleloader   
   firearms are antique replicas and exempt from the registration   
   laws. They are never used in crimes because they can only fire   
   one shot at a time, and it takes a long time to reload.   
      
   The lawyer explained that the Knight-brand bullets did not   
   contain the gunpowder or primer present in cartridges used in   
   modern firearms.   
      
   At one point during the trial, Judge Morin seemed to be using   
   common sense. He said to the prosecutors, “It would seem   
   somewhat counterintuitive that a replica of a muzzleloader   
   itself would be legal in the District of Columbia, but the   
   ammunition used for those weapons would be illegal.”   
      
   Yet when it came to a verdict, the judge made his decision based   
   on the bizarre notion that there could possibly be another use   
   for a piece of cone-shaped copper.   
      
   This came from the prosecutors’ insistence that there are   
   muzzleloader firearms that could be converted to semi-automatic,   
   which Mr. Witaschek could, in theory, secretly own. He does not.   
      
   But even if he did, the government never explained how a piece   
   of metal with no primer or gunpowder would be propelled from a   
   modern rifle.   
      
   The judge finally just said, “I’m persuaded that they are   
   bullets. And they look like bullets. They are hollow-point   
   bullets … . They’re not musket balls.”   
      
   A new trial could bring back the issue of the single, misfired   
   shotgun shell. Most of the first trial was a debate over the   
   operability of the shell.   
      
   Judge Morin clearly did not understand that primer being struck   
   is what would make the shell most likely inoperable. He held up   
   the green shell from evidence, shook it and told the court: “I   
   can’t hear any powder.”   
      
   When the government asserted that it would be “dangerous” to   
   open the shell any place other than a “lab,” the judge said he   
   could not determine if it was classified as ammunition.   
      
   No matter, operability is irrelevant because shotgun shells and   
   empty casings can only be possessed in the District by residents   
   with registered guns.   
      
   Mr. Witaschek’s trials and tribulations have gotten national   
   attention as an example of how government can become tyrannical   
   and destroy a law-abiding person.   
      
   The Founding Fathers said the most important reason for the   
   Second Amendment was to prevent a government from accumulating   
   too much power. That is why Mr. Witaschek’s case should scare   
   every American.   
      
   Emily Miller is senior editor of opinion for The Washington   
   Times and author of “Emily Gets Her Gun” (Regnery, 2013).   
      
   http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/9/miller-how-   
   government-tyranny-destroyed-a-dc-busin/?page=all   
      
       
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)