Form 1 SBR "disapproved" because AW are Illegal in MD??

bobthefisher · Dec 12, 2014

Wayne1one said:
What I find amusing is that they allow us to keep submitting these applications knowing that they are not going to approve them. Why don't they just issue a statement that they are freezing MD applications for SBRs until they get some sort of clarification.

After these latest denials I would recommend no one submit an eForm Form 1 SBR application until we know more. In the past the examiners would at least be in contact about any problems. However, now they seem to be denying applications no matter how much documentation is provided and no contact with the applicant whatsoever. Save your money and stand by, something is afoot and it doesn't smell right.

rbird7282 · Dec 12, 2014

Wtf is going on over there? I was thinking of submitting a Form 1 for an SBR, apparently I should have done it before now. I don't know how in the world they are denying Rimfire but this stinks all the way.
Perhaps it's O'Malley's last f*ck you to Maryland. Frosh can't have anything to do with it as he has no legal standing as AG until January. Assholes.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ironpony · Dec 13, 2014

Confusing, so worst case is just no more Form 1 SBR's in MD?

SWO Daddy · Dec 13, 2014

ironpony said:
Confusing, so worst case is just no more Form 1 SBR's in MD?

No SBRs at all...I see no reason why the paper Form 4's would be decided any different....it's just that it will take them longer to find out since the paper system is slower.

Captnstabn · Dec 13, 2014

What about all the ones they have approved since 10/2013?

fabsroman · Dec 13, 2014

Captnstabn said:
What about all the ones they have approved since 10/2013?

Ain't that one heck of a question. What about all the ones they approved since October 2013 that have been built? What happens if Frosh or the MSP come back now and say "Those guns are banned under SB281!" What happens to all those people that have built them? They are in possession of a banned firearm, but at the time they built them they were told by the government agencies that it was just fine.

The General Assembly is just wonderful. They passed a law that has the MSP and ATF completely confused, and then expect honest people to actually be able to figure it out themselves. Then again, maybe they want the ambiguity just so we are all too scared to even look at firearms anymore.

bobthefisher · Dec 13, 2014

fabsroman said:
Ain't that one heck of a question. What about all the ones they approved since October 2013 that have been built? What happens if Frosh or the MSP come back now and say "Those guns are banned under SB281!" What happens to all those people that have built them? They are in possession of a banned firearm, but at the time they built them they were told by the government agencies that it was just fine.

The General Assembly is just wonderful. They passed a law that has the MSP and ATF completely confused, and then expect honest people to actually be able to figure it out themselves. Then again, maybe they want the ambiguity just so we are all too scared to even look at firearms anymore.

There's nothing in any of the state or federal laws that say SBR's are illegal. MSP's advisory is already a very strict interpretation of the law. What we're seeing now is a bunch of stall tactics by either some higher ranking officials at the ATF or the MD government. At this point it seems the ATF examiners want something in writing by the state government (e.g. AG Office) as to cover their lame asses. We'll just have to wait and see, but so far no one at the ATF is talking.

Captnstabn · Dec 13, 2014

bobthefisher said:
There's nothing in any of the state or federal laws that say SBR's are illegal. MSP's advisory is already a very strict interpretation of the law. What we're seeing now is a bunch of stall tactics by either some higher ranking officials at the ATF or the MD government. At this point it seems the ATF examiners want something in writing by the state government (e.g. AG Office) as to cover their lame asses. We'll just have to wait and see, but so far no one at the ATF is talking.

Right, and does anyone in their right mind actually think frosh is going to write the ATF a letter helping us? The answer is - **** no.

SWO Daddy · Dec 13, 2014

I'm really surprised we haven't heard anything from a dealer with respect to this. If I were a dealer, I would have been on the phone with the ATF last week.

Isn't there a lawsuit challenging the MSP's current interpretation? Any chance this has something to do with that?

Captnstabn · Dec 13, 2014

SWO Daddy said:
I'm really surprised we haven't heard anything from a dealer with respect to this. If I were a dealer, I would have been on the phone with the ATF last week.

Isn't there a lawsuit challenging the MSP's current interpretation? Any chance this has something to do with that?

I would imagine, it's because they don't have a lot of skin in the game. I mean, form 1's people can do at their house, with a lower they already own. Dealer don't have much to do with it.

I guess for form 4's they do, but I wouldn't think there is that many people buying SBR's. Most are making them.

Just a guess.

TyFromMD · Dec 13, 2014

I think one too many people pushed the SBR is a handgun issue and now they're treating SBRs are banned rifles. The more questions everyone asks, the more opportunities they have to say no.

So don't go asking about SBRs approved after 10/2013 or they'll just say "you know what, we'll Go back and cancel all of those approvals as well."

rbird7282 · Dec 13, 2014

I just don't see how Maryland can keep getting away with "it's a handgun and a rifle" at the same time. There is also no interpretation of the law where a Rimfire SBR is banned. This crap cannot stand.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

clandestine · Dec 13, 2014

I bet the MSP Lawsuits are the reason. Until its cleared up then the NFA Branch is saying no.

drfroglegs · Dec 13, 2014

Didn't someone say they pulled this in the past?

I'm curious why they are just flat our disapproving them now. Seems like if they wanted to wait to clear up something with MSP they would just keep them pending.

Disapproving a ton of applications is only going to create more work for them in the future; reimbursing everyone, then dealing with the re-applications.

I think it's pretty telling that they are disapproving all of them, might be the start of something bad, very bad...

Wayne1one · Dec 14, 2014

Captnstabn said:
I would imagine, it's because they don't have a lot of skin in the game. I mean, form 1's people can do at their house, with a lower they already own. Dealer don't have much to do with it.

I guess for form 4's they do, but I wouldn't think there is that many people buying SBR's. Most are making them.

Just a guess.

I don't think so, even though dealers don't directly dabble in Form 1 ventures there has been an uptick in pistol purchases solely to Form 1 them into SBRs. That is why dealers have been submitting everything under the sun to get them on the roster. Form 1s are good for business!

TyFromMD said:
I think one too many people pushed the SBR is a handgun issue and now they're treating SBRs are banned rifles. The more questions everyone asks, the more opportunities they have to say no.

So don't go asking about SBRs approved after 10/2013 or they'll just say "you know what, we'll Go back and cancel all of those approvals as well."

MSP stated that Pistol/ SBRs are one in the same, damn it's written on the Handgun Roster. No need to ask questions about that.......

There is a Handgun Roster meeting coming up on the 19th maybe someone can squeeze some info out of the MSP while they are face to face.

erwos · Dec 14, 2014

clandestine said:
I bet the MSP Lawsuits are the reason. Until its cleared up then the NFA Branch is saying no.

That doesn't really make sense to me. The lawsuit isn't going to change whether the previously-legal stuff is still legal.

Most likely scenario is some kind of internal communications screw-up at the BATFE, especially given how they're training up new examiners.

outrider58 · Dec 14, 2014

Wayne1one said:
What I find amusing is that they allow us to keep submitting these applications knowing that they are not going to approve them. Why don't they just issue a statement that they are freezing MD applications for SBRs until they get some sort of clarification.

$200 a shot is why. Anyone get their refund yet? I haven't. :shrug:

ironpony · Dec 14, 2014

outrider58 said:
$200 a shot is why. Anyone get their refund yet? I haven't.

Friday I received my refund from a Form 1 SBR "withdrawal" signed Oct. 8th 2014, so 2 months 4 days? It was a paper submission I cancelled because I built something else. I'll post this info in the ATF time thread as well.

schnejerator · Dec 16, 2014

SWO Daddy said:
My efile for a 29.6" (pre-Oct 1st purchase, if it matters) SBR was submitted one month ago today. I also attached the MSP notice to my application earlier this week and sent an email to ask-the-experts asking if this was sufficient to demonstrate compliance, so I should have news soon.

SWO, you get an answer yet?

Didnt see anything on the wait time thread, so who else is resubmitted in the pipeline after disapproval? I resumbitted 12/10. froglegs?

SWO Daddy · Dec 16, 2014

schnejerator said:
SWO, you get an answer yet?

Didnt see anything on the wait time thread, so who else is resubmitted in the pipeline after disapproval? I resumbitted 12/10. froglegs?

Nothing. No response to my "Ask the experts" question either. Hopefully, they're looking closer at this. There are eforms being approved (in other states) with submittals after mine, so I should get something this week I would think.

Form 1 SBR "disapproved" because AW are Illegal in MD??

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Durka ninja

Ultimate Member

Member

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Durka ninja

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

AR-15 Savant

TheFrogAssassin

gun aficionado

The Hebrew Hammer

Cold Damp Spaces

Member

dabbled in pacifism once

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics