PDA

View Full Version : BATF raid Sabre Defense



Stickman
17 February 2010, 11:20
http://www.nashvillepost.com/news/2010/2/17/feds_raid_defense_contractor



Law enforcement officials were seen escorting employees one by one of the company out of their 35,000-square-foot facility on Allied Drive. Each employee was searched next to their personal vehicle, had their vehicle searched and, when cleared, were allowed to leave the premises. No individuals were witnessed being arrested.


The obvious question to me is why were vehicles and employees searched, and if the warrant was written to cover each individual employee and their respective vehicles.

I'm not going to buy the Officer Safety line, and recent court rulings have made vehicle searches a tighter angle. I hate to believe too much of what the media writes, but I do find this interesting.

Optimus Prime
17 February 2010, 11:31
Saw on Say Uncle (http://www.saysuncle.com/2010/02/17/sabre-defence-raided/) that there's rumors of employee theft, which would explain the vehicle searches. Also rumors of Sabre showing interest in buying up Cav Arms stuff now that they went under, if that would have any sway in things.

Stickman
17 February 2010, 11:49
Saw on Say Uncle (http://www.saysuncle.com/2010/02/17/sabre-defence-raided/) that there's rumors of employee theft, which would explain the vehicle searches.


No, I doubt that. You don't get to search everyone because you think a few people are involved. At least that isn't how the law is supposed to work.

Its possible that they hit a liberal judge and got him to sign off on a really wide angled warrant, but it still doesn't smell right to me.

TripleBravo
17 February 2010, 12:43
What's this whole thing about anyway? Is it about manufacturing/ffl type violations?

Optimus Prime
17 February 2010, 13:32
At least that isn't how the law is supposed to work.

When has that stopped the ATF from doing something?

joffe
17 February 2010, 14:51
Who needs to ban guns if you can just put the ones who make them out of business?

First Cav, then the very public SHOT razzias, and now this.

Anyone want to make a raid pool? Who's next?

Stickman
17 February 2010, 15:43
What's this whole thing about anyway? Is it about manufacturing/ffl type violations?


I just got off the phone and found out more info, but it was made real clear that it wasn't anything that I could post or talk about at this point.


However, I didn't find anything out about the searches, which is something that I doubt we'll ever know. The media won't ask about it because of two things. One, they don't understand the law. Two, its a firearm company, so they don't care.

Cavalry Arms
17 February 2010, 22:29
Also rumors of Sabre showing interest in buying up Cav Arms stuff now that they went under, if that would have any sway in things.

We just want to clarify two things, 1) Cavalry Arms is not "going under", we are just ceasing firearms manufacturing and sales, 2) Sabre Defence is not buying the CAV-15.

Stickman
17 February 2010, 22:53
We just want to clarify two things, 1) Cavalry Arms is not "going under", we are just ceasing firearms manufacturing and sales, 2) Sabre Defence is not buying the CAV-15.



You guys take care of yourselves. I don't want to see you or your shop go anywhere but up.


Thankyou for taking the time to post the clarification.

TripleBravo
18 February 2010, 03:43
I just got off the phone and found out more info, but it was made real clear that it wasn't anything that I could post or talk about at this point...


Please let us know more when you can.

rob_s
18 February 2010, 03:56
Any chance they could search the vehicles if they thought that whatever was going on was malicious, and that the employees may have been making off with evidence?

Also, this whole thing about employee searches is coming from the same media that everyone always says not to trust. Who knows if it really even was "every" employee and not just those in certain positions or ranks? Reporters will show up, watch something for 5 minutes, and then "report" that those events are typical of a whole situation.

I wonder if the Saber issue doesn't have something to do with the Aug line they're producing for Steyr.

Policetacteam
18 February 2010, 18:08
This was additionally posted on the Nashville Post


Statement from Sabre

Sabre Defence Industries LLC, an established manufacturer of firearms and weapon systems to the United States military, state and local law enforcement, and worldwide commercial markets, is fully cooperating with federal agents in an ongoing investigation into potential criminal misuse of certain non-saleable firearms produced by Sabre and purchased by some of its employees. Sabre has received information that employee(s) involved in inventory control may have obtained and re-sold some items without appropriate licenses. Sabre is and has been cooperating with federal agents in this investigation.


I would be very curious as well about the circumstances of that warrant! I'm always amazed at what FED's are able to get away with in regards to warrants as compared to local LE agencies.

jeeves915
19 February 2010, 09:00
So, I'm reading that press release as basically some shady employees may have gotten their hands on Post-86 (dealer sample) machine guns, and misbehaved with them (resold, etc).

Anyone else take it that way?

Narco
20 February 2010, 13:23
In search warrants of that nature, if the agents listed the entire property i.e. curtilage and were specifically looking for parts of machine-guns, US v Dunn would apply... Being that they are a manufacture receiving federal funds one would think that a disclosure to the employees is in place for search and whatnots.

Stickman
20 February 2010, 23:51
Dunn was private property IIRC.


Search of each person would require PC shown in the warrant, not blanket authority from the way I see it. While each employee could have a part concealed on them, so could each person walking down the street, and you don't get to search them. There is also an expectation of privacy in the vehicles.


I know this is talking in generalities, but I don't see Dunn working in this application. I could very well be wrong, but I've got a hard time without them being able to tie persons into a crime.