That is the question of the day!
SBR's in MD, ATF needs your help!
- Thread starter bobthefisher
- 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:
That is the question of the day!
drfroglegs
TheFrogAssassin
Cpl Edwards is looking into it for us.
fabsroman
Ultimate Member
Secretary of Maryland State Police is Marcus Brown
http://msa.maryland.gov/msa/mdmanual/23dsp/html/msa15831.html
Licensing Division
1111 Reisterstown Road
Pikesville, MD 21208-3899
Captain Dalaine Brady, Commander
410.653.4500
410.653.5441 (FAX)
msp.licensing@maryland.gov
The Licensing Division administers laws and conducts investigations concerning the sale, transfer, and registration of handguns, shotguns, rifles, machines guns, and listening devices.
I would say that Captain Dalaine Brady, Commander of the Licensing Division, is the MSP Secretary's designee.
Whoever is dealing with the ATF on this matter, if you would like me to proofread/edit/change your letter/response, send me a PM and I will give you an e-mail address that will make it easier for us to communicate through.
http://msa.maryland.gov/msa/mdmanual/23dsp/html/msa15831.html
Licensing Division
1111 Reisterstown Road
Pikesville, MD 21208-3899
Captain Dalaine Brady, Commander
410.653.4500
410.653.5441 (FAX)
msp.licensing@maryland.gov
The Licensing Division administers laws and conducts investigations concerning the sale, transfer, and registration of handguns, shotguns, rifles, machines guns, and listening devices.
I would say that Captain Dalaine Brady, Commander of the Licensing Division, is the MSP Secretary's designee.
Whoever is dealing with the ATF on this matter, if you would like me to proofread/edit/change your letter/response, send me a PM and I will give you an e-mail address that will make it easier for us to communicate through.
5.56blaster
Ultimate Member
Maryland sucks!
That helped your post count, but not this thread..........
What I can't understand is why didn't they just reach out to MSP/Cpl. Edwards, seems that he is willing to work with them? Is it our individual burden to show that we can legally posses NFA items? This could have went on for a while if they just kept avoiding the situation and Maryland residents. Just seems unprofessional IMO.
fabsroman
Ultimate Member
Depending on what the ATF and MSP work out on this one, there might be a need for a Declaratory Judgment action on this matter, which would be completely separate from the Kolbe matter.
This stuff really is frustrating. Guess I will build both a .300 BLK and .458 SOCOM with 16" barrels and then see where this goes and whether I will SBR them with a new barrel. Just irritating.
Trying to build on this (IANAL, don't assume I know what I'm talking about)....
MD Code SG § 10-305(a) states (emphasis added):
A "Unit" is defined as such:
So, to summarize:
1. Public Safety §5–101 defines regulated (banned) assault long guns.
2. Public Safety §5–105 empowers the secretary to adopt regulations.
3. State Government § 10-305 allows units to issue declaratory rulings.
4. State Government § 10-301 defines a unit as an officer or unit authorized to adopt regulations.
Does this make sense? Let's get all our ducks in a row before we spam the ATF/MSP and dig ourselves a hole. Note that the MD AG's motion to dismiss in the EA lawsuit cites § 10-305, but I think we're going to cause trouble by citing that.
drfroglegs
TheFrogAssassin
That's why I say we let the MSP (read Cpl Edwards) deal with it as long as they/he is willing.
We can argue all we want, but that just doesn't have the same weight as a MSP representative fighting for us...
So, wait until we hear something back from Cpl Edwards before we start sending the BATFE a bunch of our logical explanations of how we think they have the authority to interpret their own laws?
I'll post the second Cpl Edwards sends me a reply. He has replied to every single email I have sent him and I fully expect him to look into this for us.
We can argue all we want, but that just doesn't have the same weight as a MSP representative fighting for us...
So, wait until we hear something back from Cpl Edwards before we start sending the BATFE a bunch of our logical explanations of how we think they have the authority to interpret their own laws?
I'll post the second Cpl Edwards sends me a reply. He has replied to every single email I have sent him and I fully expect him to look into this for us.
Agreed. This looks like an internal screwup at the BATFE, lets give the licensing division a chance to do the right thing - after all, they need the BATFE to listen to them anyways.
Claybreaker 2
Active Member
I don't want to bring a tinfoil hat into this discussion but I agree with many posters who posit that someone has contacted the ATF with the position that the MSP is incorrectly interpreting SB281 and/or other MD gun laws. I have to wonder if AG elect Frosh has let it be known that he intends to challenge MSP's interpretations, or even its authority to make interpretations. If he did reach out to higher ups in the ATF, who may share his gun philosophy, this may explain the re-review that has/is being undertaken, especially if he has indicated an intention to declare previously approved SBRs as illegal in MD.
I have no facts to support this theory, but the timing is interesting and I cannot believe that Frosh does not have some plan to further SB281. Hopefully MSP will defend their jurisdiction in this area, especially under a new Superintendent.
Finally, why did the review section not contact the MSP directly when this issue was raised unless they had some statement from an "authority" that the MSP was not the appropriate State office to address these issues?
I have no facts to support this theory, but the timing is interesting and I cannot believe that Frosh does not have some plan to further SB281. Hopefully MSP will defend their jurisdiction in this area, especially under a new Superintendent.
Finally, why did the review section not contact the MSP directly when this issue was raised unless they had some statement from an "authority" that the MSP was not the appropriate State office to address these issues?
I forget where the >29" thing came into effect is that something that can be looked into as well, or is that in SB281, if not who is the authority saying >29"? Sorry if I am way off base here.
Claybreaker has me wondering but this started up again by something, simply the change in personnel at the ATF is what I am thinking. If this is due to frosh can he push for a change in who does have the authority in MD once he finds out he does not? Is this an area to tread lightly. Just curious don't mind me.
Thanks for everyone's work.
Claybreaker has me wondering but this started up again by something, simply the change in personnel at the ATF is what I am thinking. If this is due to frosh can he push for a change in who does have the authority in MD once he finds out he does not? Is this an area to tread lightly. Just curious don't mind me.
Thanks for everyone's work.
The > 29" OAL provision is part of the 281 bill, along with the 2 features test for copycats.
From the MD Court commissioners charging language document
Rev. 10/1/2014
447.
Short-barreled
PS 5-203(a)
MISDEMEANOR
$5,000.00 - 5 YEARS
*2_5212*
**RIFLE/SHOTGUN: UNREGISTERED**
...did possess a short-barrelled [rifle/shotgun].
NOTE: A short-barrelle
d rifle is one having
one or more barrels
less than 16 inches in length or
any rifle with an overall length
of less than 26 inches. A shor
t-barrelled shotgun has one or
more barrels less than 18 inches
in length or any shotgun with
an overall length of less than 26
inches. If either the barrel
length, or the overall length, or
both are less than the minimums
stated, the weapon falls under CR 4-201.
NOTE: Rifle means a weapon desi
gned or redesigned made or
remade and intended to be fire
d from the shoulder and to use
the energy of the explosive in a fi
xed metallic cartridge to fire
only a single projecti
le through a rifle bore for each single pull
of the trigger.
Shotgun means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or
remade and intended to be fire
d from the shoulder and to use
the energy of the explosive in a fixed shotgun shell to fire
through a smooth bore either a numbe
r of ball shot or a single
projectile for each single pull of the trigger.
NOTE: Possession allowed if registered with U.S. Government
in accordance with U.S. Statutes.
EXCEPTIONS - WHILE ON O
FFICIAL BUSINESS: Law
enforcement personnel of the U.S., this State or any political
subdivision; means of armed for
ces of U.S. or National Guard
while on duty or travelling to or
from duty; law enforcement
personnel of another state or political subdivision, while
temporarily in this State; jailer
, prison guard, warden, or guard
or keeper of any penal, correcti
onal, or detenti
on institution in
this State; sheriff and temporar
y or full time deputy sheriff.
Rev. 10/1/2014
447.
Short-barreled
PS 5-203(a)
MISDEMEANOR
$5,000.00 - 5 YEARS
*2_5212*
**RIFLE/SHOTGUN: UNREGISTERED**
...did possess a short-barrelled [rifle/shotgun].
NOTE: A short-barrelle
d rifle is one having
one or more barrels
less than 16 inches in length or
any rifle with an overall length
of less than 26 inches. A shor
t-barrelled shotgun has one or
more barrels less than 18 inches
in length or any shotgun with
an overall length of less than 26
inches. If either the barrel
length, or the overall length, or
both are less than the minimums
stated, the weapon falls under CR 4-201.
NOTE: Rifle means a weapon desi
gned or redesigned made or
remade and intended to be fire
d from the shoulder and to use
the energy of the explosive in a fi
xed metallic cartridge to fire
only a single projecti
le through a rifle bore for each single pull
of the trigger.
Shotgun means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or
remade and intended to be fire
d from the shoulder and to use
the energy of the explosive in a fixed shotgun shell to fire
through a smooth bore either a numbe
r of ball shot or a single
projectile for each single pull of the trigger.
NOTE: Possession allowed if registered with U.S. Government
in accordance with U.S. Statutes.
EXCEPTIONS - WHILE ON O
FFICIAL BUSINESS: Law
enforcement personnel of the U.S., this State or any political
subdivision; means of armed for
ces of U.S. or National Guard
while on duty or travelling to or
from duty; law enforcement
personnel of another state or political subdivision, while
temporarily in this State; jailer
, prison guard, warden, or guard
or keeper of any penal, correcti
onal, or detenti
on institution in
this State; sheriff and temporar
y or full time deputy sheriff.
See attachment in Engage Armament's post in the Maryland 2A forum. Note that the MD AG's motion to dismiss essentially says that letter is worthless in my layman eyes.
IMBLITZVT
Ultimate Member
Almost sounds like ATF tried to justify the current MSP ban on SBRs<29" as copy cats and could not do it! Why because its not a correct legal ban given the way the law is written. We have MSP making this up and we are getting a legal opinion from someone who is not a lawyer, but a state trooper. Since they can't seem to make sense of those whole mess, they are just scared to allow anything past as they don't understand what they are missing. As much as they want "A semiautomatic centerfire rifle" to include a SBR, it doesn't. I bet ATF sees this and does not want any part of a lawsuit seeking to force MSP to actually follow the law.
Agree. Of course, the danger is that the AG office steps into this mess and we get an even more ridiculous interpretation.
IMBLITZVT
Ultimate Member
In some ways the worse and more ridiculous it gets, the better as it makes it more clear in court that they are just making things up. That said, you need a lawsuit to reverse it and who knows if that will ever happen and could be years. I just don't see how this less than 29" thing is going to stand. Its just going to cause to many issues. MSP was correct the first time when they said FSA did not touch NFA. They should have stuck with it. I would still not be shocked to see MSP reverse themselves on this. The trouble they are having with this just can not be worth it and with no end in sight....
I dunno. The MSP had the perfect opportunity to back off on the issue when EA filed the lawsuit about copycats and SBRs, and they decided it was worth their time (and our money) to fight it. Maybe they'll turn around on it, but it's gonna be a while.
I really think the "Frosh did it" conspiracy theory is completely unsupported. He's not AG, the BATFE isn't going to care what he thinks until he is.
MSP's troubles are of little consequence to the AG however.
If having MSP look like fools by changing opinions all the time (or sticking with ridiculous ones) serves to keep "guns out of peoples hands" for a longer period, I'm sure thats a price the AG is willing to pay.
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
-
-
Montgomery County Gun Buyback: Interfaith GVP Network Aims to Hit $30,000 Goal by April 20 (12 Viewers)- Latest: Atlasarmory
-
3rd Circuit Case - Range v Atty General Non-Violent Misdemeanor as a Prohibitor (8 Viewers)- Latest: Inigoes
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
-
Sign up on our online store and earn 1000 points- Started by J_Gunslinger
- Replies: 2
-
-
-
-
-