fabsroman
Ultimate Member
To the OP, if your friend actually received a handout at this seminar, any chance he can scan it in pdf and you send me a copy?
NFA Untouched by Post Oct 1st Laws
- Thread starter Flipz
- 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:
SigDog
Active Member
The packet was from ATF and didn't have anything in it about SB281.
Most of the ATF presentation was about how to avoid violations when you get your ATF audit.
Most of the ATF presentation was about how to avoid violations when you get your ATF audit.
Biggfoot44
Ultimate Member
- Aug 2, 2009
- 33,199
Ok , the statements about NFA seem at least partiallt good news.
The rest about the HQL process sounds good as long as the mumble really fast. SAYing they'll do it in 30days is Not the sames as actually doing in 30 days , or being able to.
The ciriculum of the Training course not yet anounced ( if even exists yet). No word oncertification of instructors to teach same. Not counting the training issues , there will be min of 20k applicants first month. The HQL will require checking the same databases that already take 110days to check , and have 50k backlog.
The rest about the HQL process sounds good as long as the mumble really fast. SAYing they'll do it in 30days is Not the sames as actually doing in 30 days , or being able to.
The ciriculum of the Training course not yet anounced ( if even exists yet). No word oncertification of instructors to teach same. Not counting the training issues , there will be min of 20k applicants first month. The HQL will require checking the same databases that already take 110days to check , and have 50k backlog.
bobthefisher
Durka ninja
I see many 15.5" barreled AK's in my future 
Why do legal owners of handguns prior to Oct 1 need to provide proof of training? Isn't the mere fact of legally possessing proof of the previous training you need to purcjhase?
I don't see this requirement in 281.
I don't see this requirement in 281.
I'm guessing it needs to be a real SBR or SBS for this exception to work. Form 1 alone won't cut it, you do need the OAL and/or barrel length to make it an SBR or SBS under MD law. But that said, this is AMAZING news that reopens the door to a lot of great builds. For instance, the Beretta ARX-100 can now wait; worst case scenario is that I form 1 it and run it with a short barrel when I want to suppress it, and just run it with a comp on long barrels. Sweet. I'd like to see official confirmation of this, too!
Other big question is "will they let FFLs deban banned guns in state?" If yes, our problems are very close to mitigated (if you have the cash...).
IMBLITZVT
Ultimate Member
Hate to say it but while you guys were jumping off the deep end, I pretty much nailed how this was going to come out...
I was wrong that the FFLs are not going to be allowed to sell their remaining inventory in state but otherwise I think I pretty much understood it all. Now all you guys worried that these FFLs are going to refuse to sell these guns that are clearly not banned now... relax they pretty much all will or they will go out of business.
To me the real question was and still is WHAT is a purchase order? I don't care what you think it is, what is it legally.
For example, I would very much like to get a purchase order for Barrett light 50 to be delivered about 5 years from now. So I would like the Purchase order to reflect a sale price of "current MSRP" and no detailed delivery date and no deposit (or $1 deposit). Can I do this? I don't want opinions on the matter as everyone thinks they know what a purchase order is and all opinions are different. What is the legal definition? Lawyers, if you had to argue over the term, how would you expect to define it?
I was wrong that the FFLs are not going to be allowed to sell their remaining inventory in state but otherwise I think I pretty much understood it all. Now all you guys worried that these FFLs are going to refuse to sell these guns that are clearly not banned now... relax they pretty much all will or they will go out of business.
To me the real question was and still is WHAT is a purchase order? I don't care what you think it is, what is it legally.
For example, I would very much like to get a purchase order for Barrett light 50 to be delivered about 5 years from now. So I would like the Purchase order to reflect a sale price of "current MSRP" and no detailed delivery date and no deposit (or $1 deposit). Can I do this? I don't want opinions on the matter as everyone thinks they know what a purchase order is and all opinions are different. What is the legal definition? Lawyers, if you had to argue over the term, how would you expect to define it?
IMBLITZVT
Ultimate Member
I agree with the first part. The ATF has ruled that a SBR reverts back to a rifle if the barrel is not less than 16"s. So there will be no getting the receiver to say SBR and then sticking a full length barrel on it! It sucks for the full size rifle caliber guns caliber guns. After all who wants a SBR of a 308 or 7.63x54r or 50 caliber... For pistol caliber and 223, 7.62x39...etc it will be ok.
This is a gross mischaracterization of the actual discussion. It was more like "wait, this isn't as simple as you think", which it isn't. Hell, I was the one who came up with the very logic you're using. I'm still waiting for some formal guidance on this issue in writing, because doing a victory dance on what is essentially hearsay is a bit premature. But, I do agree this is encouraging.
Yeah, there are definitely some limitations to this approach. Even .223 is marginal for an SBR. There are also potential issues in getting guns in the state to be cut down to SBRs - I guess it's going to be mostly pistols->SBRs. *shrugs*
On the plus side, my dreams of some more ultra-short funky pistol caliber SBRs have been reignited. Yay!
aquaman
Ultimate Member
I bet the Colt 6921 is going to become very popular. Its basically an M4 minus burst. The 14.5 inch barrel is a good compromise.
IMBLITZVT
Ultimate Member
Haha... thats one of those comments that interesting to see the replies... as I did not direct it at anyone except those that are guilty. I used my own logic, thanks and while you understood it, you did not buy into it and still were posting that we did not know. Negatives are rarely ever put in writing. The law does not refer to SBRs and so there is no need for written guidance. The law does not talk about semi auto bow and arrows or nail guns either and so there is nothing written about them...
I put my money where my mouth was and did not go out and get a HK33 or HK94 SBR as I will eventually.
Yeah but the military uses a 14.5" 233 barrel. So even if you want that 15.5" barrel, it will be ok unless doing target style shooting in which case you will got with a HBAR anyway. Frankly aren't most people using HBARs today anyway? Almost no one still gets that pencil style barrel.
Brooklyn
I stand with John Locke.
I'm guessing it needs to be a real SBR or SBS for this exception to work. Form 1 alone won't cut it, you do need the OAL and/or barrel length to make it an SBR or SBS under MD law. But that said, this is AMAZING news that reopens the door to a lot of great builds. For instance, the Beretta ARX-100 can now wait; worst case scenario is that I form 1 it and run it with a short barrel when I want to suppress it, and just run it with a comp on long barrels. Sweet. I'd like to see official confirmation of this, too!
Other big question is "will they let FFLs deban banned guns in state?" If yes, our problems are very close to mitigated (if you have the cash...).
A tax stamp is a permission slip not an obligation.
It is not clear that possesion of a SBR with a standard barel would we prohibited under the new law. Its legal status has changed.
I think rusty will be busy next year lol.
Half-cocked
Senior Meatbag
- Mar 14, 2006
- 23,937
So suppressors will be legal after 10/1, but what about pistols with threaded barrels? I always wanted a suppressed .22, am I out of luck if I don't purchase a pistol with a threaded barrel before 10/1?
Brooklyn
I stand with John Locke.
Really I can transfer an sbr lower with a standard barell with out a tax stamp..
What if the barrel is 15.9 inches and the muzzle device is not welded in place? I am new at this so maybe I am wrong but once and SBR always an SBR.
squirrels
Who cooks for you?
- Jan 25, 2008
- 4,021
Um...what??
NFA requries that the item you wish to build/purchase be legal to possess in your state of residence.
You can probably get away with cutting down your bolt-action hunting rifle and getting a tax stamp for it, yes. But why would you do that??
When people think of SBRs, they are thinking of modern military-pattern rifles. You will not be able to buy or build a new SBR AR-15. The most you might be able to do is buy an HBAR rifle and trim it down to 14.5". I doubt MSP would approve much else.
Cops are not lawyers. They know the law well enough to know when someone should be arrested, but they don't always know the finer points of specific laws. Unless you get it on a FOIA from MSP, I would not go trying to build SBRs.
Handguns with threaded barrels are legal to purchase after Oct 1st. As noted, you'll just need the HQL.
Why couldn't you buy an SBR from a local dealer on a Form 4???
I think you're only thinking of building and not buying...
Kingjamez
Gun Builder
So my question is: Was the question asked of MSP refering to SBR's / NFA items in general, or named "Assault Weapons"?
I can very much understand a MSP person saying that SBR's are legal as there certainly will be legal SBR's under SB281 (SBR 22's, SBR bolt action). The question is whether making a gun that is otherwise a banned assault weapon into a SBR will magically make it no longer a banned assault weapon.
Everybody: I wouldn't start gloating yet... this is a good start but until we know the context and have it in writing. I'm still not convinced.
-Jim
No. You can take a receiver off the NFA roles by writing a letter to ATF. Then it will revert to being a normal regulated firearm (in MD). A barrel under 16" is a SBR. If it is not registered it is illegal. If it is registered as a SBR, it can ONLY be transferred with a stamp.
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
-
-
3rd Circuit Case - Range v Atty General Non-Violent Misdemeanor as a Prohibitor (7 Viewers)
- Latest: KingClown
-
-
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
-
Sign up on our online store and earn 1000 points- Started by J_Gunslinger
- Replies: 2
-
-
-
-
-