MSP Firearms Bulletin LD-FRS-Bulletin-14-001

fabsroman · Jul 10, 2014

OrbitalEllipses said:
Re: the list

HK 556 is listed as banned (piston AR).

I just scanned the list that the MSP has up and I did not see anything for the HK 556. Are you actually seeing it on the list of firearms at the bottom of this page, and if so, where?

https://www.mdsp.org/Organization/S...ngandRegistration/Firearms/FirearmSearch.aspx

anderson76 · Jul 10, 2014

fabsroman said:
hmmmm - might be splitting hairs here, but there might still be regulated long guns, all of which are now classified as assault weapons and banned. You are right though, ALL long guns that are legal to transfer, sell, etc. in Maryland are now cash and carry.

+1

Fab makes a good point. My pre 10/01/13 ar15 is still very much a "regulated firearm" and subject to all restrictions placed upon regulated firearms.

With respect to the MSP bulletin -- while this is a 2A friendly position -- lets not conclude that a piston AR or and AR with unusually small take down pins is legal.

Recall, that with respect to ARs & AKs, the enumerated lists casts a broad net. It bans AR 15s and "all imitations" and AKs in "all forms".

Consequently, before applying, MSP "complete parts interchangeability" we must first determine whether that enumerated boom stick is, for example, and "imitation" of an AR 15. Now the "imitation" standard may cast, and in IMO does cast, a much wider net that the MSP interchangeability standard.

So, is a Colt 6940P banned? Is at an imitation of an AR15? If yes then it is banned. If we answer the threshold question in the negative, then we apply the MSP interchangeability test.

Same thing with a vepr in 7.67X54R? Is it one of the "all forms" of an AK?
If so, then its banned.

Im not predicting that his the framework that will be applied -- all Im saying is to proceed with caution.

OrbitalEllipses · Jul 10, 2014

H & K MR556A1

Alea Jacta Est · Jul 10, 2014

On another note...just how much weight do you suppose this MSP bulletin will carry in the North Carolina mountains? Just curious. :innocent0

erwos · Jul 10, 2014

Gents, the issue is not just that the MR556 is a piston AR; it's that the MR556 is also advertised as having a heavy contour barrel.

MichaelTech · Jul 10, 2014

One thing that I take away from this is that how much of a can of worms have the MSP opened up with their Firearm Review Form to get a gun on the reviewed list.
the jist is if a dealer says no and an attorney says no that the layman still can get a review directly from the MSP.

This form is supposed to be used in a specific way by a "civilian",

as outlined by this paragraph and the specifics at the end.

>>>>>>
If you are unable to locate your firearm and you have already contacted a firearms dealer and/or the firearm's manufacturer and/or your attorney and have been unable to receive a satisfactory response, you may submit the below form. By submitting this form, you are acknowledging that you have contacted a firearms dealer and/or the firearm's manufacturer and/or your attorney and have not obtained the guidance necessary to make an informed decision.
>>>>>>>

But I see that this review form is going to put allot of forms in front of the MSP and many of them will be poorly done and will be multiple submission on the same gun. Most people will automatically interpret the "have not obtained the guidance necessary" as receiving a NO as reason enough.

Not that I am "worried" or sympathetic for the position the MSP have now put themselves in but I am concerned that it will further muddle the waters and delay the right ruling or forever get one on the list as enumerated because someone did a piss poor job of representing it on the form or 200 people think that if they submit an AK from some very minor Combloc that forged instead of stamped some very minor part of the gun and because it isn't a Russian AK that they are going to get it positively reviewed on the list and slip it by the MSP.

Mark75H · Jul 10, 2014

I don't think the FFL & lawyer have to say "no" - I think they have to say "I don't know" or "I can't tell"

I think if they tell you no, MSP doesn't want you to ask

tman · Jul 10, 2014

"
The piston driven AR-15 would need to have completely interchangeable internal components with the Colt piston driven AR-15 and likewise the gas block AR-15 would need to have completely interchangeable internal components with a Colt gas block AR-15.

Thank you,

Cpl. Jason Edwards
"

So MR556 must have fully interchangeable internal parts as Colt piston AR (LE6940P)?
Is there any piston ar that has non-interchangeable internals?

Not_an_outlaw · Jul 10, 2014

I asked this on another thread. Would a firearm without a forward assist and dust cover not be a copy of the AR-15? It does not have interchangeable components.

Jaybeez · Jul 10, 2014

MichaelTech said:
One thing that I take away from this is that how much of a can of worms have the MSP opened up with their Firearm Review Form to get a gun on the reviewed list.
the jist is if a dealer says no and an attorney says no that the layman still can get a review directly from the MSP.

This form is supposed to be used in a specific way by a "civilian",

as outlined by this paragraph and the specifics at the end.

>>>>>>
If you are unable to locate your firearm and you have already contacted a firearms dealer and/or the firearm's manufacturer and/or your attorney and have been unable to receive a satisfactory response, you may submit the below form. By submitting this form, you are acknowledging that you have contacted a firearms dealer and/or the firearm's manufacturer and/or your attorney and have not obtained the guidance necessary to make an informed decision.
>>>>>>>

But I see that this review form is going to put allot of forms in front of the MSP and many of them will be poorly done and will be multiple submission on the same gun. Most people will automatically interpret the "have not obtained the guidance necessary" as receiving a NO as reason enough.

Not that I am "worried" or sympathetic for the position the MSP have now put themselves in but I am concerned that it will further muddle the waters and delay the right ruling or forever get one on the list as enumerated because someone did a piss poor job of representing it on the form or 200 people think that if they submit an AK from some very minor Combloc that forged instead of stamped some very minor part of the gun and because it isn't a Russian AK that they are going to get it positively reviewed on the list and slip it by the MSP.

my problem with the above is that there is no published regulation allowing this form. no regulation or law allowing long gun review. no description of the process, or who will conduct the review. no public comment period. no hearing. no appeals process.

who makes the review? msp? vinnie demarco? Ceasefire md? could be anyone.

I think there is grounds for an injuction, depending on how that would be percieved by the judge in kolbe.

the state's defense in kolbe is that their law is well thought out and researched. their list of banned rifles is "specific" not arbitrary.

but now the state is copying the process for handguns, something that had to be codified into law for handguns, but long gun review was never codified. they are stretching, really stretching to make this law tenable.

these arent new issues with interpretation... they predate the current fsa2013, and date back to the passage of the first regulated firearms law. they were warned. there have been questions for years. testimony in annapolis revolved around these problems. there was ample time to clarify the law, and we just had a session of the general assembly where the law could have been repaired. instead the state has waited till a week before the kolbe hearing to administratively legislate through regulation, to fix parts of their position in the lawsuit. and to do so they have sidestepped the legal process. they should at the very least have to copy their handgun process, that set the bar for the states standard of review.

MichaelTech · Jul 10, 2014

Nice point Jaybeez.

I didn't make the connection and I like how you did.

It is rather convenient for this to popup right before the Kolbe hearing.

Is this just the State putting some ducks in a row?

Even if is or isn't it does show that the law was not well thought out and slapped together.

Mark75H:

I think if they tell you no, MSP doesn't want you to ask

That is what I think too. My point is if there is one more inkling of a chance like the review which is from an authority :lol2:

. who is going to take no for an answer from the dealers/lawyers.

ShallNotInfringe · Jul 10, 2014

Mark75H said:
I don't think the FFL & lawyer have to say "no" - I think they have to say "I don't know" or "I can't tell"

I think if they tell you no, MSP doesn't want you to ask

I thought the government set up support centers for citizen inquiries. Isn't that one of the reasons we pay taxes?

RDavidP · Jul 10, 2014

Nnztg8r said:
On another note...just how much weight do you suppose this MSP bulletin will carry in the North Carolina mountains? Just curious.

Depends, how strong is the paper that you printed the bulletin out on?

fabsroman · Jul 10, 2014

OrbitalEllipses said:
H & K MR556A1

Thanks. I went back and see how I overlooked it. I was only concentrating on the line below it and completely missed it above.

moojersey · Jul 13, 2014

Let me reword my first statement. I forgot how crazy you folks are.
"All long guns that are for sale in the state of MD through a legal FFL are cash and carry."
Ok pick it apart.

jrumann59 · Jul 14, 2014

tman said:
"
The piston driven AR-15 would need to have completely interchangeable internal components with the Colt piston driven AR-15 and likewise the gas block AR-15 would need to have completely interchangeable internal components with a Colt gas block AR-15.

Thank you,

Cpl. Jason Edwards
"

So MR556 must have fully interchangeable internal parts as Colt piston AR (LE6940P)?
Is there any piston ar that has non-interchangeable internals?

That is the issue with piston ARs, a LWRC's components are not 100% compatible with a H&K AR, or LaRue. That is why Chad dis not huge fan because there is no "Spec" that makes them all universal which now looks like may be a saving grace.

mac1_131 · Jul 14, 2014

At least it's something in writing, somewhere everyone can see.

dfens42 · Jul 14, 2014

This is so dumb. I fail to see why we need to play ring around the rosey with these clowns.

jkeys · Jul 14, 2014

dfens42 said:
This is so dumb. I fail to see why we need to play ring around the rosey with these clowns.

My biggest complaint is that the MSP only have authority to enforce the law, but this basically says that they are the ones with final say on what is or isn't legal. That should have been our politician's jobs.

fabsroman · Jul 14, 2014

jkeys said:
My biggest complaint is that the MSP only have authority to enforce the law, but this basically says that they are the ones with final say on what is or isn't legal. That should have been our politician's jobs.

Our politicians (i.e., the legislature/General Assembly) decided what the law is. It is right there in black and white. The executive branch (i.e., our Governor) then enforces the law as it interprets it (i.e., the MSP interpretation). Then, when it is unclear, the judicial branch (i.e., the Maryland Court of Appeals) figures out exactly what the legislative branch meant when it passed the law and whether the executive branch is interpreting it correctly. Capisce?

MSP Firearms Bulletin LD-FRS-Bulletin-14-001

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Attachments

Extinguished member

The Hebrew Hammer

Member

MD Wear&Carry Instructor

Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Member

Lil Firecracker

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Sic Semper Tyrannis

DILLIGAF

MSI Executive Member

Publius

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics