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

[fabsroman]

I don't mean to be rude, but I don't know how else to put it. Your receiver had yet to be a specifically listed/defined "assault long gun" or "copycat weapon" and is therefore not grandfathered.

Follow along, I personally finished all of my pre Oct. 1st registered AR-15 receivers TEMPORARILY into a "assault long gun" or "copycat weapon" configuration before Oct. 1st. Therefore, since they were at one point an ALG or CCW, then they are not permanently grandfathered as such.

I know this is stupid, but remember this is a public forum.

§ 5-101. Definitions

(h) Firearm. --

(1) "Firearm" means:

(i) a weapon that expels, is designed to expel, or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; or

(ii) the frame or receiver of such a weapon.

(r) Regulated firearm. -- "Regulated firearm" means:

(1) a handgun; or

(2) a firearm that is any of the following specific assault weapons or their copies, regardless of which company produced and manufactured that assault weapon:

(i) American Arms Spectre da Semiautomatic carbine;

(ii) AK-47 in all forms;

(iii) Algimec AGM-1 type semi-auto;

(iv) AR 100 type semi-auto;

(v) AR 180 type semi-auto;

(vi) Argentine L.S.R. semi-auto;

(vii) Australian Automatic Arms SAR type semi-auto;

(viii) Auto-Ordnance Thompson M1 and 1927 semi-automatics;

(ix) Barrett light .50 cal. semi-auto;

(x) Beretta AR70 type semi-auto;

(xi) Bushmaster semi-auto rifle;

(xii) Calico models M-100 and M-900;

(xiii) CIS SR 88 type semi-auto;

(xiv) Claridge HI TEC C-9 carbines;

(xv) Colt AR-15, CAR-15, and all imitations except Colt AR-15 Sporter H-BAR rifle;

(xvi) Daewoo MAX 1 and MAX 2, aka AR 100, 110C, K-1, and K-2;

(xvii) Dragunov Chinese made semi-auto;

(xviii) Famas semi-auto (.223 caliber);

(xix) Feather AT-9 semi-auto;

(xx) FN LAR and FN FAL assault rifle;

(xxi) FNC semi-auto type carbine;

(xxii) F.I.E./Franchi LAW 12 and SPAS 12 assault shotgun;

(xxiii) Steyr-AUG-SA semi-auto;

(xxiv) Galil models AR and ARM semi-auto;

(xxv) Heckler and Koch HK-91 A3, HK-93 A2, HK-94 A2 and A3;

(xxvi) Holmes model 88 shotgun;

(xxvii) Avtomat Kalashnikov semiautomatic rifle in any format;

(xxviii) Manchester Arms "Commando" MK-45, MK-9;

(xxix) Mandell TAC-1 semi-auto carbine;

(xxx) Mossberg model 500 Bullpup assault shotgun;

(xxxi) Sterling Mark 6;

(xxxii) P.A.W.S. carbine;

(xxxiii) Ruger mini-14 folding stock model (.223 caliber);

(xxxiv) SIG 550/551 assault rifle (.223 caliber);

(xxxv) SKS with detachable magazine;

(xxxvi) AP-74 Commando type semi-auto;

(xxxvii) Springfield Armory BM-59, SAR-48, G3, SAR-3, M-21 sniper rifle, M1A, excluding the M1 Garand;

(xxxviii) Street sweeper assault type shotgun;

(xxxix) Striker 12 assault shotgun in all formats;

(xl) Unique F11 semi-auto type;

(xli) Daewoo USAS 12 semi-auto shotgun;

(xlii) UZI 9mm carbine or rifle;

(xliii) Valmet M-76 and M-78 semi-auto;

(xliv) Weaver Arms "Nighthawk" semi-auto carbine; or

(xlv) Wilkinson Arms 9mm semi-auto "Terry".

§ 4-301. Definitions.

(a) In general. -- In this subtitle the following words have the meanings indicated.

(b) Assault long gun. -- "Assault long gun" means any assault weapon listed under § 5-101(r)(2) of the Public Safety Article.

Making this argument though gets convoluted. The receiver to a firearm is considered a firearm. The firearms listed are considered assault weapons. Hence, the receiver of those guns would also be considered assault weapons because they are by definition assault weapons.

Where we have been going round and round on this one is that the receiver to an AR-15 can be used to build a pistol, an SBR, an assault weapon, an HBAR, or a piston driven AR. Think that covers everything. So, while the receiver can indeed be considered an assault weapon, it can also be considered a lot of other things too. If nothing else, the law is extremely vague, and pretty much confusing as heck, regarding this subject.

 

[bobthefisher]

Good point. Yeah this gets tricky, but the "copycat weapon" definition is under a different subsection that doesn't have that "firearm" definition.

Then perhaps Klunatic can make his pre Oct 1st lower receivers into an ALG, but not a CCW.

BTW I screwed up my post on your quote. I meant to say

"then they are now permanently grandfathered as such."

now, not... not

 

[Klunatic]

Good point. Yeah this gets tricky, but the "copycat weapon" definition is under a different subsection that doesn't have that "firearm" definition.

Then perhaps Klunatic can make his pre Oct 1st lower receivers into an ALG, but not a CCW.

A semiautomatic centerfire rifle will be a banned "copycat" if it meets any one of these three tests:
(1) Has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds; or
(2) has an overall length of less than 29 inches; or
(3) "can accept" a "detachable magazine" and actually has at least two of the following three attributes: (i) folding stock, (ii) grenade or flare launcher, or (iii) flash suppressor. ("Flash suppressor" is defined on page 11 of the bill


So you can meet the CCW test above by having a detachable mag and flash suppressor. Edit: At which point it seems that it would be up to the State to prove you didn't possess a ALG or CCW prior to 10/13 even though you had the receiver in hand. I don't believe modifying the CCW after 10/13 makes is illegal you just have to meet the test of owning one prior to 10/13 to be legal.

 

[bobthefisher]

A semiautomatic centerfire rifle will be a banned "copycat" if it meets any one of these three tests:
(1) Has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds; or
(2) has an overall length of less than 29 inches; or
(3) "can accept" a "detachable magazine" and actually has at least two of the following three attributes: (i) folding stock, (ii) grenade or flare launcher, or (iii) flash suppressor. ("Flash suppressor" is defined on page 11 of the bill


So you can meet the CCW test above by having a detachable mag and flash suppressor.

No, read subsection (3) more carefully. It must have two of those features and/or be under 29 inches in OAL.

 

[fabsroman]

No, read subsection (3) more carefully. It must have two of those features and/or be under 29 inches in OAL.

You have to read a little further than just what is listed under (1).

(2) "Copycat weapon" does not include an assault long gun or an assault pistol.

So, if the AR is listed as an assault weapon, can it be a copycat too? I don't think it can be. Are we saying that an SBR is no longer an AR?

Like I said, this law is so poorly written and convoluted it isn't even funny.

 

[bobthefisher]

Good stuff. I actually like being corrected on these things. However, I think the "copycat weapon" restrictions would still apply if Klunatic decided to finish those pre Oct. 1st receivers into SBR's.

 

[bobthefisher]

You have to read a little further than just what is listed under (1).

(2) "Copycat weapon" does not include an assault long gun or an assault pistol.

So, if the AR is listed as an assault weapon, can it be a copycat too? I don't think it can be. Are we saying that an SBR is no longer an AR?

Like I said, this law is so poorly written and convoluted it isn't even funny.

Yuck, agreed on the poorly written part.

 

[Klunatic]

A semiautomatic centerfire rifle will be a banned "copycat" if it meets any one of these three tests:
(1) Has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds; or
(2) has an overall length of less than 29 inches; or
3) "can accept" a "detachable magazine" and actually has at least two of the following three attributes: (i) folding stock, (ii) grenade or flare launcher, or (iii) flash suppressor. ("Flash suppressor" is defined on page 11 of the bill

No, read subsection (3) more carefully. It must have two of those features and/or be under 29 inches in OAL.

No, it says you must meet 1 of the three test. There is no requirement that it be <29" OAL and one of the other features.

 

[Klunatic]

It is a sh!tty law and needs to go. Lots of legal quagmires. My brain feels tired after all the mental gymnastics. I need nightcap now.

 

[bobthefisher]

No, it says you must meet 1 of the three test. There is no requirement that it be <29" OAL and one of the other features.

Sorry that's what I meant, OR being the operative clause.

 

[bobthefisher]

It is a sh!tty law and needs to go. Lots of legal quagmires. My brain feels tired after all the mental gymnastics. I need nightcap now.

I'm already there man! Which is probably why you shouldn't argue stupid law buzzed.

 

[Pinecone]

I don't follow your logic. I can take my pre 10/13 lower and finish it with post 10/13 banned features and still be legal. MD consider the lower the firearm regardless of its finished state. Why would this be different if its an SBR?

1) Because an SBR is a newly manufactured firearm.

2) Because according to MSP, the first part may not be legal. Only if you built is into a banned configuration BEFORE 10/1/13 may you return it to that condition. People asking MSP about CURRENTLY taking a pre-ban stripped lower and building a banned configuration have gotten conflicting answers. Your choice on whether you want to take the chance on becoming the test case.

 

[Pinecone]

Not trying to obstinate or rude either. How does MD know you finished your pre 10/13 lowers in to CCW or ALG prior to 10/13? Did you register them as ALG or CCW prior to 10/13? Are you saying that because you finished your lowers prior to 10/13 they are Grandfather and you can SBR them with OAL <29"?

1) Because you are talking about it on a public forum.

2) Because, while the state has to prove that you broke the law, in the meantime you will have been arrested, made bail, hired a lawyer, had ALL your firearms confiscated. And then go to trial. And even if you win, you then have to try to get all your confiscated firearms back.

Have fun.

And NO, if you built your lower into a non-banned configuration pre-10/1/13 you CANNOT build that into a <29" SBR NOW. BATFE and MSP state that a Form 1 SBR is a NEW firearm, and therefore made, AFTER 10/1/13.

 

[Pinecone]

Which takes me back to my original question. If you have a pre 10/13 CCW or ALG and SBR it now at 29". Can you not still comply with both Federal and MD law if you temporarily put a shorter upper on the lower making it less than 29 OAL?

If made into an SBR post 10/1/13, NO. You would be making a copy cat weapon and inviolation of MD law.

NOW, you could have a shorter upper and only assemble as such OUTSIDE MD, remember to file the paperwork to take your SBR into another state.

The >29" limitaion only applies IN MD.

 

[TyFromMD]

So now that they're approving new SBRs again, does this mean I should go with the 10.5" 458 socom... or does it not..

 

[swinokur]

Some members here took dated pictures to prove they had assembled their firearms before 10-1-13.

 

[tom b]

Form 1 APPROVED.

AR lower, 29.6" OAL, submitted 11/11, Signed by Ted Clutter.

Now I just need to get the DRAFT Watermark removed....ugh.

Whats the process for having the "DRAFT" removed? I have 3 with the draft and one without.

 

[Sticky]

Got a first "disapproved" tonight for my 3rd SBR

was for an AK SBR 14.5" barrel so definitely over 29" OAL. meh

Just read the comment at the very end of my PDF. Thought it was going to be the lame excuse of being an copycat etc.

Instead I got this:


So even though i wrote "FORM 1 Registration" like I have done for my last 2 home built AR SBRs, seems this time it's not good enough.

This happened to me on a paper submission a couple years ago. However, I was lucky enough that the examiner called me and requested "plans" for the home made firearm. I sent her all sided pictures of the unfinished AK receiver. It was approved shortly after that submission. Keep trying.

Okay, this brings up a question... as all of my AR pistols are built from 80% lowers, how do you define the lower's manufacturer (me) for the purpose of submitting a form 1 for an SBR?

 

[schnejerator]

Another formerly-denied-approval
Submitted 12/10 for 29.5" post SB281 Mega lower

This is to advise you that the status of your eForms submission with the subject Permit/Control number has changed to APPROVED

Permit/Control No:
Your Reference No: 201511878
Submission Date: 2014-12-10-05:00
Form ID: ATF FORM 1 (5320.1) - APPLICATION TO MAKE AND REGISTER A FIREARM

Time to buy a barrel!

P.S. Thanks for all the help everyone who helped sort this out.

 

[Boonie Hat]

Whats the process for having the "DRAFT" removed? I have 3 with the draft and one without.

Send a message on eforms via "ask the experts" stating that your approved forms are watermarked. Be sure to include the permit/control number for each. It is apparently a common issue that is a result of uploading the PDF. They'll fix it in 24-48 hours and you'll receive another email saying approved.