ar15 copy

rickyp · Sep 8, 2015

What does MD consider a copy of an AR15?
is it a copy of an ar15 if it is different caliber?
if it is missing the bayonet lug and flash hider is it a copy?
Barrel Contour: 0.875" under handguard, 0.750" Gas Block, 0.725" forward to muzzle?

Pinecone · Sep 9, 2015

There is a letter of interpretation from the AG floating around here.

In that letter, it says if the parts are interchangeable. Typically that is as any one part on one can be changed for the like part on the other and still function.

So, IMO, a .300 BO can be a copy, as the only part that is different is the barrel. But a .458 SOCOM would not, because you need to change the barrel and the bolt.

rickyp · Sep 9, 2015

But if the h bar is not considered an assault rifle because of the size of the barrel and everything else sane why would this not apply to a 300 b.o.?

outrider58 · Sep 9, 2015

H-bar rifles are not considered 'copy-cat' rifles. .300Bk suffices as an H-bar AFAIK.

dblas · Sep 9, 2015

rickyp said:
What does MD consider a copy of an AR15?
is it a copy of an ar15 if it is different caliber?
if it is missing the bayonet lug and flash hider is it a copy?
Barrel Contour: 0.875" under handguard, 0.750" Gas Block, 0.725" forward to muzzle?

HBARs are exempt by name in the statute.

Pretty much any caliber other than .223/5.56 is considered HBAR/Heavy Barreled and thus not a copy.

swinokur · Sep 9, 2015

here is the AG ruling on copies.
.
.

Pinecone · Sep 9, 2015

Most .300BO barrels are HBAR, but IIRC there is at least one that is a medium weight barrel.

usmcdad · Dec 30, 2015

swinokur said:
here is the AG ruling on copies.
.
.

Just to be clear, this letter is dated May 24, 2010 (not after the latest law) and it concludes "for a firearm to be considered a copy of a listed assault weapon, and therefore governed by the regulated firearms law, there must be a similarity between the internal components and function of the firearm in question and
those of one of the listed weapons. A determination as to whether a particular firearm bears such similarity is a factual question entrusted in the first instance to the Department of State Police."

Does anyone know if there has been any further clarification by the AG or MSP regarding what "copy" means?

swinokur · Dec 30, 2015

not that i am aware of. i try to keep up with this stuff as best I can

Magnumst · Dec 30, 2015

dblas said:
HBARs are exempt by name in the statute.

Pretty much any caliber other than .223/5.56 is considered HBAR/Heavy Barreled and thus not a copy.

I purchased one chambered in 762x39 in 13' and it was not considered HBAR and required the 7 day wait, so I'm not sure if this is true?

outrider58 · Dec 30, 2015

Magnumst said:
I purchased one chambered in 762x39 in 13' and it was not considered HBAR and required the 7 day wait, so I'm not sure if this is true?

If it was before the ban, then it was still(as all AR 15s were) considered a regulated firearm.

zoostation · Dec 30, 2015

I have been told by MSP that any caliber other than 5.56/.223 is not considered a copy and is fine, regardless of barrel contour.

Besides, obviously if it's a different caliber barrel the parts aren't interchangeable. There's no requirement for two or more parts to not be interchangeable, and for God's sake we don't need to go inventing one on MDS. Just my opinions.

Oh, and I am not a lawyer!

kalister1 · Dec 30, 2015

outrider58 said:
If it was before the ban, then it was still(as all AR 15s were) considered a regulated firearm.

I bought my H-Bar as Cash and Carry the first year Obummer was elected.

kalister1 · Dec 30, 2015

zoostation said:
There's no requirement for two or more parts to not be interchangeable, and for God's sake we don't need to go inventing one on MDS. Just my opinions.

Oh, and I am not a lawyer!

Are you trying to say NO LETTERS?

RoadDawg · Dec 30, 2015

kalister1 said:
I bought my H-Bar as Cash and Carry the first year Obummer was elected.

HBARs were always exempted from the beginning. The law was written to exclude them from regulation and the later laws kept that status. If not for that exemption, the HBAR would also be banned here.

IANAL

Drmsparks · Dec 30, 2015

As far as IANAL that's MSP's perspective as well. Check nates thread on writing the MSP where they basically said "we are just guessing what's banned and what's not so check with your FFL- they know more than we do"

Pinecone · Dec 31, 2015

zoostation said:
I have been told by MSP that any caliber other than 5.56/.223 is not considered a copy and is fine, regardless of barrel contour.

Besides, obviously if it's a different caliber barrel the parts aren't interchangeable. There's no requirement for two or more parts to not be interchangeable, and for God's sake we don't need to go inventing one on MDS. Just my opinions.

Oh, and I am not a lawyer!

It depends. Between a .300 BO and 5.56 AR, you can interchange any one part and the rifle will still function. If that part is the barrel, of course you would have to use the appropriate ammo.

A piston rifle and a DI rifle, not so. You have to interchange multiple parts for either one to work.

Some calibers require more than one part to be changed, like a .458 SOCOM versus 5.56.

And for several others in the thread, "copy" and "copy cat" are NOT the same thing legally. Copy is as we have been talking about. Copy cat, has to with the 29" minimum OAL, and not having more than 1 of the 3 evil features.

ar15 copy

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Eats Bacon Raw

Past President, MSI

In a State of Bliss

Attachments

Ultimate Member

Active Member

In a State of Bliss

Ultimate Member

Eats Bacon Raw

, ,

R.I.P.

R.I.P.

Nos nostraque Deo

Old School Rifleman

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics