FSA2013 Compliant Rifles
- Thread starter TheYetti
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast
Member Benefits:
No ad networks! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Hopalong
Man of Many Nicknames
Remember that for our purposes, the lower of an AR IS the firearm. If an AR lower is a standard, 5.56 magwell lower that is not stamped HBAR, it's banned.
With that in mind, here are my thoughts on this, but take them with a grain of salt:
1. If it's currently "regulated" and not a handgun, it's banned. The two-feature "copycat" test adds more to that list, but it's also very loose so I don't imagine it'll catch many guns.
2. Piston ARs and AR57s (that aren't built on a lower marked "HBAR") would still be banned because their lowers are identical to the AR15.
3. I believe that dedicated 9mm AR lowers (i.e. lowers with a 9mm magwell, NOT a mag block) are still legit. Their lowers are not exact copies of a "standard" AR15. At least some dealers sell these as non-regulated right now. I could see this eventually becoming a test case assuming the ban stands.
4. If you manufacture a lower in MD after the law takes effect and mark it "HBAR", you should, in theory, be good to go.
5. (EDIT) This one is a bit of a stretch, but does anyone know how cosmetically/functionally different an AR lower would have to be to not qualify as a copy? I've seen some billet lowers that look nothing like milspec Colt AR15s. Would it be possible to move some of the less-important screws/fasteners slightly so that it's not an exact copy? I dunno. This one would need some legal wrangling and may make for another good test case.
Last edited:
NateIU10
Ultimate Member
But an AR15 or its copy has been interpreted by the MSP in a very specific way. The lower need not be marked HBAR. A piston AR does NOT meet the test MSP uses under the same regulated firearms list. It would be good to see some guidance on their interpretation, but I would have no problem taking that to court as counsel. A piston AR does NOT interchange parts with the Colt AR15, so it is not regulated now, and should NOT be banned under the new law.
An AR lower should not be treated as regulated right now even, it is not on the list and is not a copy on the list. In the future, removing the regulated firearms from purchase SHOULD make MSP treat them as unregulated all together and sell cash and carry from an FFL to anyone over 21. This is only my opinion though, so take that with a grain of salt and my legislative interpretation.
Hopalong
Man of Many Nicknames
I've thought of that too, but I think that there's some precedent that it has to be marked that way by the manufacturer. Don't quote me on that though.
Having said that, how would anyone be able to prove that it wasn't?
NateIU10
Ultimate Member
I've thought of that too, but I think that there's some precedent that it has to be marked that way by the manufacturer. Don't quote me on that though.
Having said that, how would anyone be able to prove that it wasn't?
You must only be able to articulate that an AR15 is an HBAR to be exempt. There is no marking requirement at all, either way.
Hopalong
Man of Many Nicknames
Agreed. I should have said "for our purposes at the moment". This is an area that is, at least I feel, ripe for legal clarification. We have an interpretation, but no real binding precedent. If legislators want to ban the sale of stripped AR lowers, they should come out and do it, not just assume that it's included in the existing statute. If they want to exempt HBARS, they should specify exactly what qualifies as an HBAR.
Last edited:
So has MSP stated that the lower must be stamped HBAR? Colt 6721 HBAR is stamped HBAR on the barrel but AR6721 on the receiver. All Colt AR6721 stamped rifles are shipped with a HBAR stamped barrel and are listed and sold as a heavy barrel rifle.
Mobile
Active Member
- Dec 30, 2011
- 165
It's funny, the only people who care so much about this stuff are the people you don't need to worry about. The next Adam Lanza will just machine an 80% lower, get a parts kit and mags that he bought in a neighboring state and be good to go. We will again be blamed.
NB1214
Active Member
Can someone explain why the m1a is banned?
Mobile
Active Member
- Dec 30, 2011
- 165
I think they just took the regulated list and said everything on it is now banned.
Don't expect it to make sense.
Markp
Ultimate Member
- Dec 22, 2008
- 9,392
Agreed, these discussions are pointless. What are they going to do, make the MILLIONS of AR's in private hands disappear?
Not likely. The legislature has taken a messed up attempt to regulate firearms which are not generally used in crime, and created more crimes for them specifically. In turn driving both criminals and law-abiding citizens towards more powerful weaponry.
STUPID!
So let me get this right, if I use an "assault weapon" in a crime, I am facing a mandatory minimum 5 year prison sentence. If I use a Machine Gun however, no mandatory minimum, and the same maximum?
What ****ing genius came up with this plan! Oh, that's right, it was a democrat. Attention Criminals, please do not use Assault Weapons, you must upgrade to belt-fed fully automatic weapons requiring a tool to open the action in order to avoid mandatory minimum jail sentences or limit your machine gun to 10 round magazines.
Might I suggest a shiny new M60, M249, RPD, or DShK with modified action that requires a "tool" to open quickly.
Angry, Frustrated, and Incredulous over the stupidity and arrogance of the liberal machine. How f'ing stupid, nice job Annapolis, claim victory in the name of public safety!
- Jan 31, 2009
- 3,285
It is pure stipidity. It has been on the regulated list for a while. I am not sure of the history behind putting it on the regulated list, maybe it was on the federal list during the federal AWB.
By the say, a commercially made M-14 is a copy of the M1A, therfore banned. Go figure.
And before you start jumping up and down about the M14 being a machine gun, there are commercial semi-auto M14's out there. But they are copies of the M1A for purposes of the law and therefore banned also.
Or they would use a double barreled shotgun and bolt action .22lr, like the mass shooter in "gun free" Britain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumbria_shootings
Mobile
Active Member
- Dec 30, 2011
- 165
Anybody make one of those monolithic upper/lower AR's with a piston gas system? Be pretty hard to consider that a copy, I think.
Mike OTDP
Ultimate Member
- Feb 12, 2008
- 3,324
LaRue's policy is that you pay when they ship it. You can order today, no money down. They are trying to get lowers out, for papering to the buyer and shipment back to LaRue for completion.
Markp
Ultimate Member
- Dec 22, 2008
- 9,392
Yep, I have 2 Poltech M14S's, semi-auto. They are not 100% parts compatible with the M1A, but close enough that MSP wouldn't get the humor in it.
Yes, you only need a purchase order, no money need change hands and the purchase order doesn't even need to be submitted to anyone... so I made a form! :p Think of it like a Purchase Order Easy Button, select the firearms you wish, date it, get it notarized and signed, and viola, freedom.
FUMOM2014 Purchase Order
Raineman
On the 3rd box
Umm...did you read dumais' comments in regards to next year?
If we have a list of what is banned, why does anyone need a list of ones that are not?
OH I know full well...
I have two rifles on back order and I run the order tracking spreadsheet in their IP section of ARFCOMM
Users who are viewing this thread
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
-
-
-
Just want to thank the extremely awesome folks at Tyler Firearms (3 Viewers)- Started by GenoBluzGtr
- Replies: 4
-
-
Clearance Liqui Moly Motorbike 4T SAE 15W-50 Street | Full Synthetic Motor Oil | 4 Liter- Started by mpollan1
- Replies: 3
-