Submitted Today to MSP & ATF

swinokur · Oct 4, 2014

Fabs-you're right-I pulled it from COMAR. But MSP's letter is written to make it look like an SBR must be on the roster to be manufactured, which it clearly is not. It does need to be on the roster to be manufactured for sale.

MSP gets it wrong yet again.

fabsroman · Oct 4, 2014

swinokur said:
Fabs-you're right-I pulled it from COMAR. But MSP's letter is written to make it look like an SBR must be on the roster to be manufactured, which it clearly is not. It does need to be on the roster to be manufactured for sale.

MSP gets it wrong yet again.

Yeah, I don't think they MSP is are close to right on this one, but I am betting somebody from up above is telling them to spin it this way.

Then again, I don't even think the politicians were close to right on SB281. As far as I am concerned, the Form 77r was working just fine in Maryland for handguns and assault weapons, and they took it way too far with the ban and the HQL because something that happened in Connecticut gave them the political capital, so they think, to do such a thing. Anyway, that is a discussion for another thread.

pilotguy299 · Oct 4, 2014

More conflicting/incomplete information...

I just re-read the letter, and in the 3rd paragraph it says that a short barrel rifle under 29" meets the definition of a copycat under 4-301.

But on the web site:

https://www.mdsp.org/Organization/S...Division/MainLicensingPage/HandgunRoster.aspx

it says:

With regard to short-barrel rifles included on the Handgun Roster, please note that a semi-automatic rifle with:
1) an overall length of less than 29" and/or
2) any two of the following:
1. a folding stock;
2. a grenade launcher or flare launcher; or
3. a flash suppressor
is a "copycat weapon" and is not eligible for sale to the general public (unless the purchaser had a purchase order for, or a completed application to purchase, the firearm prior to October 1, 2013). See, Sections 4-301 through 4-303 of the
Criminal Law Article, Annotated Code of Maryland.

Can it get any more confusing?

swinokur · Oct 4, 2014

I think the reason for that was Engage's letter only addressed that portion of the copycat provision dealing with OAL. Hence that is all that is mentioned in the letter. The MSP site cites the entire copycat provision, including the features test.

Just a guess however.

dgtaurus · Oct 4, 2014

pilotguy299 said:
I just re-read the letter, and in the 3rd paragraph it says that a short barrel rifle under 29" meets the definition of a copycat under 4-301.

But on the web site:

https://www.mdsp.org/Organization/S...Division/MainLicensingPage/HandgunRoster.aspx

it says:

With regard to short-barrel rifles included on the Handgun Roster, please note that a semi-automatic rifle with:
1) an overall length of less than 29" and/or
2) any two of the following:
1. a folding stock;
2. a grenade launcher or flare launcher; or
3. a flash suppressor
is a "copycat weapon" and is not eligible for sale to the general public (unless the purchaser had a purchase order for, or a completed application to purchase, the firearm prior to October 1, 2013). See, Sections 4-301 through 4-303 of the
Criminal Law Article, Annotated Code of Maryland.

Can it get any more confusing?

So does this mean SBR'S are subject to the copycat test and if they are why are we allowed to make them on post Oct. 1 receivers? Im not complaining I have a form 1 in the pipeline. I keep getting the feeling that we are subject to whatever these guys happen to say day to day and they could pull the rug out from under us any time they wanna interpret the law that way.

swinokur · Oct 4, 2014

If they have an OAL <29" they are copycats and therefore not legal no matter when the lower was purchased. But if 29" or greater they are legal.

I agree we could get a different opinion tomorrow from MSP but previous approvals would work in our favor.

IANAL

W_Donahue · Oct 5, 2014

"Dear MSP, please restore my right to pay a 200 dollar tax stamp to the ATF to have a shorter barrel on my rifle."

Man I hate this place.

Vile Shadow · Oct 5, 2014

W_Donahue said:
"Dear MSP, please restore my right to pay a 200 dollar tax stamp to the ATF to have a shorter barrel on my rifle."

Man I hate this place.

But make sure it's on the Handgun Roster first, because that rifle is a handgun too. :rolleyes:

jkeys · Oct 5, 2014

Sling Blade said:
But make sure it's on the Handgun Roster first, because that rifle is a handgun too.

That gun is now legal to conceal carry with permit or open carry since it's both a rifle and a hand gun. Imagine all these super scary concealable assault weapons on the streets of Maryland spraying 30 bullet clips a second.

Sveiks · Oct 6, 2014

Money for the cause

zenMonkey said:
. Do you have a legal fund donation jar in your shop?

Seriously, has a legal fund been established? This is a fight for many many people and I would like to contribute. I would love to sue the guys myself however my lawyer says I don't have "standing". Her explanation makes sense but I hate that fact that legally, not considered 'an injured party'

if one is set up, can you do something a little easier to fund than a cookie jar?

swinokur · Oct 6, 2014

If you attempted to build an SBR <29" and BATFE rejected it, wouldn't that give you standing?

fabsroman · Oct 6, 2014

Sveiks said:
Seriously, has a legal fund been established? This is a fight for many many people and I would like to contribute. I would love to sue the guys myself however my lawyer says I don't have "standing". Her explanation makes sense but I hate that fact that legally, not considered 'an injured party'

if one is set up, can you do something a little easier to fund than a cookie jar?

Ask her if you would be able to have standing if you enter into a contract with an FFL, the FFL backs out of the contract because he believes it to be an illegal transaction, and then you sue for a declaratory judgment to have the court decide whether it is legal or not. No idea how Engage would have standing for a legal challenge in court other than through a declaratory judgment action.

Sveiks · Oct 7, 2014

tried this...

fabsroman said:
Ask her if you would be able to have standing if you enter into a contract with an FFL, the FFL backs out of the contract because he believes it to be an illegal transaction, and then you sue for a declaratory judgment to have the court decide whether it is legal or not. No idea how Engage would have standing for a legal challenge in court other than through a declaratory judgment action.

Basically what has to happen is this..

I have to find a FFL who will sell me something he thinks is legal. I have to buy that item. Maryland has to say "no, he can't have it". and the 'banned' firearm sits...

Now I have standing.

but the firearm sits.....
and sits......
the trial goes on..........................
and it sits.....

and my money is wrapped up in that transaction... Sorry guys, I just can't afford to lock up that kind of cash....

What i am thinking about talking to my lawyer about again is this.

Post Oct 1st I submitted a Form 1 to the ATF (note, i bought this lower BEFORE Oct 1st and provided documentation). On the form I stated the OAL of 25". the response:

Permit/Control No: XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Your Reference No:
Submission Date: 2014-01-31-05:00
Form ID: ATF FORM 1 (5320.1) - APPLICATION TO MAKE AND REGISTER A FIREARM

Reason: "MD State Law, Assault Weapon - Prohibited".

I resubmitted the exact form with an OAL of 30"
approved in 3 weeks.

fabsroman · Oct 7, 2014

Sveiks said:
Basically what has to happen is this..

I have to find a FFL who will sell me something he thinks is legal. I have to buy that item. Maryland has to say "no, he can't have it". and the 'banned' firearm sits...

Now I have standing.

but the firearm sits.....
and sits......
the trial goes on..........................
and it sits.....

and my money is wrapped up in that transaction... Sorry guys, I just can't afford to lock up that kind of cash....

What i am thinking about talking to my lawyer about again is this.

Post Oct 1st I submitted a Form 1 to the ATF (note, i bought this lower BEFORE Oct 1st and provided documentation). On the form I stated the OAL of 25". the response:

Permit/Control No: XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Your Reference No:
Submission Date: 2014-01-31-05:00
Form ID: ATF FORM 1 (5320.1) - APPLICATION TO MAKE AND REGISTER A FIREARM

Reason: "MD State Law, Assault Weapon - Prohibited".

I resubmitted the exact form with an OAL of 30"
approved in 3 weeks.

The cash tied up in the firearm would be the least of your cash worries if you decided to take the matter to trial and then all the way through the appeals process. Unless your attorney is working pro bono or for very little fee, the fee to do such a thing would be worth a nice collection of guns, not merely the money you have wrapped up in the single firearms at issue.

erwos · Oct 25, 2014

So, what's going on with this?

NateIU10 · Nov 13, 2014

erwos said:
So, what's going on with this?

Court System: Circuit Court for Kent County - Civil System
Case Number: 14C14010162
Title: In the Matter of Andrew S Raymond, et al
Case Type: Administrative Agency AppealFiling Date:10/24/2014
Case Status: Open/Active

Suit has been filed as to this determination against MSP on behalf of Engage Armament LLC. We will see where/how this goes, but at this point most of this suit will not be discussed publicly. We continue to thank those that stand with us, and we will continue to fight for what we have left as MD gun owners.

bobthefisher · Nov 13, 2014

Get some! Get some! :party29:

This should be an interesting dance in statutory law reading.

erwos · Nov 13, 2014

G-d, I hope they just give up now that shit got real. Keep fighting that good fight, gents.

NateIU10 · Nov 13, 2014

erwos said:
G-d, I hope they just give up now that shit got real. Keep fighting that good fight, gents.

You know we will. Lawsuits get mighty expensive, though, so we have to be very mindful of that, unfortunately.

bobthefisher · Nov 13, 2014

If Engage wins this it will significantly defang SB281 and I believe it has a damn good chance. Nothing like using their own stupid handgun definition against them.

Submitted Today to MSP & ATF

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

In a State of Bliss

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

In a State of Bliss

Active Member

In a State of Bliss

Member

...

Active Member

Banned

In a State of Bliss

Ultimate Member

Banned

Ultimate Member

The Hebrew Hammer

Ultimate Member

Durka ninja

The Hebrew Hammer

Ultimate Member

Durka ninja

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics