SFPD officer arrested for allegedly possessing banned assault rifle

[yuiyoshida]

SAN FRANCISCO (KTVU) - San Francisco Police Department says an officer was arrested on firearms charges. 50-year-old Thomas Abrahamsen, a Berkeley resident, surrendered Tuesday for alleged possession of a banned AR-15-style assault weapon and receiver components.

SFPD is said to be investigating the matter based on information gathered from other Department members.

Abrahamsen, an 18-year veteran, was booked on one felony count of manufacture of an assault weapon and one felony count of possession of an assault weapon.

“In the spirit of the Not on My Watch initiative, Department members will continue to hold each other accountable and will act swiftly to report any behavior that might bring dishonor to the Police Department,” said Acting Chief of Police Toney Chaplin.

http://www.ktvu.com/news/181919791-story

[anoNY42]

1. I want to be the first

to point out that an AR-15 is not technically an "assault rifle".

While I am correct, I am doing this merely in jest and to tweak some noses around here! Love you guys, even the ones who want to ban all guns (which is really the only true solution to the gun violence problem, I admit).

[beergood]

2. this person makes some interesting points

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2016/07/26/san-francisco-cop-arrested-for-manufacturing-possessing-assault-rifle/ scroll down to the comments section and read Duane Mowrer's comment.

Duane Mowrer Rank 0
"It would be helpful to have reporting that is as accurate as possible when it comes to these things, though it is understood that no reporter can be an expert on every single issue they report on. There is a huge difference, legally speaking, between the definition of an assault "rifle" vs. an assault "weapon". For the story to make sense to those of us who understand the law and know about weapons, such definitions are imoortant.

By definition, an AR-15, which is semi-automatic, cannot be an assault "rifle" (which has to have either burst or automatic fire, among other things). It seems then, that he must have been charged under California's assault "weapon" law, which does raise some questions about what he did wrong (it is not illegal to build what California considers an assault weapon, as long as you follow proper guidelines).

In other words, the story is either worse than it sounds (i.e., he built a federally-illegal automatic assault rifle), or much less than it sounds (he maybe didn't do the proper paperwork under California's law). I understand that the vast majority of folks do not understand the nuances of the many gun laws in our state, but for stories like this one to accurately provide the information that the public deserves, such nuances do matter".« less