An online shopping experience four years ago made Mr. Gong in Shiyan, Hubei Province have to face the accusation of "illegal possession of guns". He still doesn’t want to believe that the nail gun he used for decoration will be recognized as a "gun".
The nail gun that Mr. Gong was seized by the police. All the pictures in this article are provided by the parties.
Mr. Gong opened a farm in Fangxian County, Hubei Province in August 2016. He told The Paper that during the renovation, he followed the carpenter’s advice and bought nail guns online twice. Later, the police found out that two nail guns were confiscated, and one of them was identified as a gun.
On September 19, 2018, Fangxian Court sentenced Mr. Gong to control for one year and one month for the crime of illegal possession of firearms. After Mr. Gong appealed, Shiyan Intermediate People’s Court made a ruling on April 26, 2019, arguing that "the facts were unclear and the evidence was insufficient". The original judgment was revoked and sent back for retrial.
On December 30, 2019, the Fangxian Court made a first-instance judgment after retrial, arguing that Mr. Gong was guilty of illegal possession of guns, but was exempted from criminal punishment. After Mr. Gong appealed, Shiyan Intermediate People’s Court made a final ruling on July 16, 2020, and upheld the guilty verdict of Fangxian Court.
It is worth noting that after the criminal case was put on file, the public security organs had identified the nail gun purchased by Mr. Gong for three times, and all of them were identified as "guns". However, there were differences in the data of the previous two identifications. "The specific kinetic energy of the muzzle for the first time was 6.64 Joules, and the second time was 194.14 Joules. I haven’t seen the identification report for the third time during the retrial, and only gave me a conclusion that the nail gun was identified as a gun.
After receiving the final ruling recently, Mr Gong told The Paper that he still believed that he was innocent and "would continue to appeal".
In the third appraisal of nail gun by public security organs, it was still considered as a gun.
Online shopping nail gun, man convicted of illegal possession of gun.
In August 2016, Mr. Gong opened a farm in the depths of a mountain in Fangxian County, Hubei Province. He told The Paper that during the renovation of the farm, because it was located in a deep mountain, he accepted the carpenter’s advice and bought two nail guns online to facilitate workers’ work.
"At that time, I never thought that this thing would actually involve crime." Mr. Gong said that when he first found a shop selling nail guns on the Internet, the merchant once said that the nail guns were decoration tools. After he bought them, the nail guns were damaged due to improper operation, so he bought a second one. "The nail guns were assembled by carpenters. After the decoration was completed, I kept throwing them in the warehouse until the police came to investigate."
Mr. Gong recalled that on November 15, 2017, the nail gun he left in the warehouse was seized by the public security organs. The police found that he had purchased the nail gun through routine inspection of logistics information. After the appraisal by Shiyan Public Security Judicial Appraisal Center, the nail gun he bought "uses gunpowder as the power to launch ammunition, which is harmful. It is a reformed nail gun and should be recognized as a gun".
Although Mr. Gong questioned the appraisal result, the nail gun was still recognized as a gun in the second appraisal.
On September 19, 2018, Fangxian County Court sentenced Mr. Gong to control for one year and one month for the crime of illegal possession of guns. Mr. Gong disagreed with the verdict and the conclusions of the two appraisals. He said that he had dismantled the nail gun by himself when he handed it over to the police. "It was assembled by the police or an appraisal agency at the time of appraisal. The appraisal report said that my nail gun was a reformed nail gun, which is probably related to the assembly principle, but I didn’t assemble the nail gun at the time of appraisal."
After the verdict was pronounced in the first instance, The Paper reported the case on April 24, 2019. Since then, Shiyan Intermediate People’s Court made a ruling on April 26 of the same year, arguing that the facts of the original judgment were unclear and the evidence was insufficient, and ruled to revoke the original judgment and send it back for retrial. According to the ruling, Shiyan Intermediate People’s Court transferred the case to Shiyan City Procuratorate for marking after reviewing the papers, reviewing the evidence and asking the appellant. Due to the need for supplementary investigation, the case was postponed once at the suggestion of Shiyan City Procuratorate. In an interview with The Paper, a court official said that the case was transferred to the procuratorate because "Mr. Gong had doubts about the appraisal results".
Shiyan Intermediate People’s Court upheld the previous guilty verdict in the final ruling.
There are differences in the identification data, and all three trials were found guilty.
Mr. Gong’s doubts about the appraisal results stem from the test data of the nail gun involved in the two gun appraisal reports. According to the two appraisal reports provided by him, there are many differences in each group of data of the two appraisals, such as gunshot data, projectile size, barrel length, barrel caliber and muzzle specific kinetic energy of the final test. According to the regulations on the performance appraisal of firearms and ammunition involved in the case of public security organs, the muzzle specific kinetic energy of the projectile is greater than or equal to 1.8 Joule/cm2, and all of them are considered as firearms. "The first appraisal test result of my nail gun is 6.64 Joule, and the second is 194.14 Joule, which is a huge difference."
In view of the above reasons, after the case was sent back for retrial, Fangxian Public Security Bureau conducted a third appraisal of the nail gun involved. On May 30, 2020, the bureau issued a notice of appraisal opinions, saying, "The BMW X5 nail gun held by Gong was appraised for gun performance, and the appraisal opinion was that it was recognized as a gun."
Mr. Gong said that he did not see the specific contents of the appraisal report from beginning to end. After retrial, Fangxian Court made a first-instance judgment on December 30, 2019, arguing that Mr. Gong constituted the crime of illegal possession of guns. In view of the fact that his criminal circumstances were minor and did not cause serious consequences, and he had the initiative to turn over the case, he was exempted from criminal punishment as appropriate.
The Paper noted that the description of the third performance appraisal of guns in the judgment only stated that the nail gun submitted for inspection "has a muzzle specific kinetic energy greater than 1.8 Joule/cm2" and it was identified as a gun, and there was no specific data.
Mr. Gong believes that his nail gun is a production tool, not a gun. The guilty verdict of Fangxian court is unclear and the evidence is insufficient. His behavior does not constitute the crime of illegal possession of guns, and he appealed accordingly and asked the court to acquit him. After trial, Shiyan Intermediate People’s Court held that although Mr. Gong purchased nail guns through legal channels, he also purchased precision steel balls, high-pressure gas cylinders, magnetic rings, seamless steel pipes and other items, all of which were gun accessories. After three appraisals, it was determined that the nail guns involved were guns, and witnesses said that they had seen Mr. Gong’s guns and could shoot birds.
Based on this, Shiyan Intermediate People’s Court held that the existing evidence can be considered that Mr. Gong knowingly held the nail gun involved in the case as a gun, and accordingly ruled on July 16, 2020 that the appeal was dismissed and the original judgment was upheld.
On August 22nd, after receiving the final ruling, Mr. Gong told The Paper that although his sentence was changed from public surveillance for one year and one month to exemption from criminal punishment after retrial, "I still think I am innocent and I will continue to appeal". (The Paper reporter Chen Leizhu)