Neither: "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
The more credence people give to these tyrants the more it legitimizes their position in their minds. It is the same exact situation when a child tells you something that is wrong and you don't correct them.
They are retroactively enforcing the PBJs so draw your own conclusion.
And then they will come out and trumpet how great the new law worked at keeping guns out of the hands of criminals while nothing good happens to actual crime rates.
His opinion is in direct conflict with the second amendment.
But let's take his longstanding prohibition stance for instance. If that was in fact a part of the second amendment then NO gun laws would be in place at all. Because remember that there was a longstanding lack of provisions before...
Bingo! MSP will take the most restrictive position even if the law does not support it. Then it will be up to someone else to bankroll an effort to take it to court.
I wish people would start understanding that what is NOT illegal is legal. Why do people need to keep asking what is legal. Some...
One could also get a CF barrel in a bull or HBAR profile that would weight about the same as the standard lightweight steel barrel. That would keep it in the same light weight range that lends to the 'assaultiness' of the specific firearms mentioned in the Md. statute.
I thought there was some question on the federal form about habitual drinking as well.
I haven't seen the latest revision so maybe it has been changed.
Of course they are going to go with the most strict interpretation they can even though copies are included as regulated/banned or not. The AR15 being the prime example.
I may send them a letter asking for clarification on the weight requirement only for a H(eavy) BAR(rel) AR style rifle.
Those who never did and never intend to follow the 'laws' will do what they want too.
All these BS rulings and interpretations do is make more people who will be less inclined to follow the 'laws'.