anderson76
Active Member
- Feb 16, 2013
- 209
You make the argument that because something meets the definition of “Short Barreled Rifle” it cannot meet the definition of either Assault Long Gun or Copycat Weapon. The counter argument is that something such as an SBR AR-15 can be all three: Short Barreled Rifle, Assault Long Gun or Copycat Weapon.
Or what about handgun? That Public Safety Art. 5-101(n) defines the term “Handgun” to include firearms with barrels lest that 16 inches:
(n) Handgun. --
(1) "Handgun" means a firearm with a barrel less than 16 inches in length.
(2) "Handgun" includes signal, starter, and blank pistols.
If that’s the case, then that would be the nail in the coffin for future SBR purchase, unless these things make it on the handgun roster.
If you interpret the Code in a vacuum, completely ignorant of how the MSP has regulated these items in the past, then I think you would be more likely to conclude that a SBR AR15 can be all these things:
Assault Long Gun, Copycat Weapon, and Handgun.
I believe that this is what the Code says. However, the MSP has treated SBRs differently in the past. Maybe for the sake of consistency the will continue to do so. Maybe the question presents mixed issues of law and fact. If that’s the case, then the MSP, in its capacity as the State’s subject matter expert on all thing firearm related, may conclude that there is a factual basis for saying that a SBR AR15 is not a copy of a Colt AR15 and therefore not a banned Assault Weapon.
At this point, I am not trying to argue with anyone. Just thinking out loud.
A number of members have reported that the MSP has been informing FFLs that NFA items are not affected by the Ban.
Last edited:
