Constructive Possession will get you nailed...

**SigForLife** · August 31st, 2009, 09:55 PM

As many are aware, I wrote an article several weeks ago on the issues of constructive possession, but with a different scenario (family members). On Thursday, Mr. Amador of Naples, Florida was arrested for selling his Hk SP89 with "accessories" that included a shoulder stock and vertical front grip, which he says were never installed...Here's more info: http://blog.princelaw.com/2009/9/1/f...sion-of-an-sbr

**bige64** · August 31st, 2009, 10:05 PM

JBT's overstepping bounds... I find this all horseshit. imho

**RandomTask** · September 1st, 2009, 09:46 AM

"Constructive Possession" is bullshit.
Anyone who owns a bottle of vodka and a rag is now a suspect.

**Yellowfin** · September 1st, 2009, 10:06 AM

I suppose we should nail Nancy Pelosi (aka Madam Hell Creature) and Feinslime for prostitution under constructive possession. All the required functional components are there:

A. Female (Presumably...I will not volunteer to check)
B. Spend most of their time with politicians
C. Regularly accept money in exchange for favors
D. Have a paid staff to coordinate their travel and meeting schedules
E. Have little or no demonstrable moral structure
F. Have cosmetic surgery for career enhancement reasons

**1861** · September 1st, 2009, 10:08 AM

Originally Posted by Yellowfin

I suppose we should nail Nancy Pelosi (aka Madam Hell Creature) and Feinslime for prostitution under constructive possession. All the required functional components are there:

A. Female (Presumably...I will not volunteer to check)
B. Spend most of their time with politicians
C. Regularly accept money in exchange for favors
D. Have a paid staff to coordinate their travel and meeting schedules
E. Have little or no demonstrable moral structure
F. Have cosmetic surgery for career enhancement reasons

Had to rep that , too funny .

**liberty556** · September 1st, 2009, 09:42 PM

It would appear that this individual is in some trouble and I have a related question that I can't seem to get a straight answer for.

I have two AR SBR's and a RR M16A1. I only have one upper under 16" per NFA lower. I also have (7) Title 1 AR's. Is that a case for constructive possession?

**Gun Bowanna** · September 1st, 2009, 10:30 PM

Originally Posted by liberty556

I have two AR SBR's and a RR M16A1. I only have one upper under 16" per NFA lower. I also have (7) Title 1 AR's. Is that a case for constructive possession?

Not to worry.
As long as you have at least one >16" upper for each of the title one guns, you're clear.
Haveing the RR/m16, you can have as many <16 uppers for THAT gun as you wish.