HBARs - are you taking a chance?

[Alutacon]

OK, prior to Oct 1, the MSP said that HBARs were OK and that seems to be carrying over to post Oct 1. Some shops in MD are even selling HBARs and the MSP seems to be not disapproving them.

However, remember that the MSP legally cannot interpret law, only enforce it. Only the AG can interpret laws, but not at Mr. Public's request, only at the request of another MD govt entity - I know, I tried, and that's what the AG told me in writing.

Now, remember the situation about whether the HQL was required for paperwork filed prior to Oct 1 but where the transfer was to take place after Oct 1? The MSP said no HQL was required. A short time after, the AG told the MSP to go pound sand, they were wrong, and that a HQL was required, as the law specifically stated that transfers of handguns after Oct 1 required a HQL and there was no exemption for paperwork filed prior to Oct 1 like there was for the sale/transfer of AR-15's.

If you read the law correctly, the net is cast over all AR-15's as illegal. Then comes the one exception - the Colt Sporter HBAR. This is a reference to a specific manufacturer and specific model of AR with a heavy barrel. If they wanted to exempt all HBARs, then they would have said that, but they didn't.

While I hate the laws as much as everyone else, I think buying any HBAR other than the one specified is a bit iffy in that the AG could again smack the MSP down and say that the exemption does not apply to all HBARs, only the Colt Sporter HBAR. Would the MSP have to go retrieve all of the ones they approved since Oct 1? Possibly, but I doubt it. The use of Commonwealth law where the rules are vague and interpretation is done in the courts is a bad system.

I think you mean "common law" not "commonwealth law", but whatever you want to call it that's not what's happening here. this is statutory law and the questions you pose concern the interpretations of the relevant statutes both by the MSP, as the enforcing entity, and the AG's office. One thing that is worth pointing out though and I don't think we discuss this here. The AG does not prosecute these weapons cases. These cases are prosecuted by the State's Attorney office for the County in which the offense occurred. Those State's Attorneys are not beholden to the AG. They are politicians in their own right. They are independently elected and don't answer to him. So your real concern should be the stance of the SA in your county.

in any event, I am happy to purchase any HBAR if MSP says that they are okay and approves them. I distrust anti-gunners like the next man, but I am not so paranoid as to think they will sign off on my purchase today and then be stupid enough to try to prosecute me for it tomorrow.

 

[BUFF7MM]

NOT that I would want to be the person who was a test case, but basically for the legislature to allow one company to produce a product but not allow another to produce the same product under their own name should be a no-no in court as it favors one company over another, IANAL

Just curious but what makes you think bushmaster does not care about sales in maryland? Not much they can do if the state bans everything they make. And if the law bans bushmaster why would a FFL take a chance and sell a banned weapon? No FFL would risk everything just to be a test case.

I think you mean "common law" not "commonwealth law", but whatever you want to call it that's not what's happening here. this is statutory law and the questions you pose concern the interpretations of the relevant statutes both by the MSP, as the enforcing entity, and the AG's office. One thing that is worth pointing out though and I don't think we discuss this here. The AG does not prosecute these weapons cases. These cases are prosecuted by the State's Attorney office for the County in which the offense occurred. Those State's Attorneys are not beholden to the AG. They are politicians in their own right. They are independently elected and don't answer to him. So your real concern should be the stance of the SA in your county.

in any event, I am happy to purchase any HBAR if MSP says that they are okay and approves them. I distrust anti-gunners like the next man, but I am not so paranoid as to think they will sign off on my purchase today and then be stupid enough to try to prosecute me for it tomorrow.

Hey you guys quit trying to put this thread back on track.
J/K.......carry on.

 

[Alutacon]

Which do you like best:

McDonalds

or

Burger King

Five Guys!!!!!!!!!

 

[Threeband]

Wheresawhatsaburger?

TEXAS!

 

[Inigoes]

NOT that I would want to be the person who was a test case, but basically for the legislature to allow one company to produce a product but not allow another to produce the same product under their own name should be a no-no in court as it favors one company over another, IANAL

I would agree; that is the Equal Protection issue with MSP's new Bushmaster interpretations. However, the HBAR issue can legitimately be argued as different (as in it would not trigger Ep issues).

I think you mean "common law" not "commonwealth law", but whatever you want to call it that's not what's happening here. this is statutory law and the questions you pose concern the interpretations of the relevant statutes both by the MSP, as the enforcing entity, and the AG's office. One thing that is worth pointing out though and I don't think we discuss this here. The AG does not prosecute these weapons cases. These cases are prosecuted by the State's Attorney office for the County in which the offense occurred. Those State's Attorneys are not beholden to the AG. They are politicians in their own right. They are independently elected and don't answer to him. So your real concern should be the stance of the SA in your county.

in any event, I am happy to purchase any HBAR if MSP says that they are okay and approves them. I distrust anti-gunners like the next man, but I am not so paranoid as to think they will sign off on my purchase today and then be stupid enough to try to prosecute me for it tomorrow.

Hey you guys quit trying to put this thread back on track.

I think they were trying to introduce legislation about Waffle Houses

 

[Alutacon]

And my fast food vote is Royal Farm chicken!

 

[Jimmmy1111]

5 guys for burgers

 

[Mdeng]

Cumberland may not have much but we still have a Roy Rogers.

Frederick, LaPlata and Waldorf each have a Roy Rogers

 

[rbird7282]

I could really go for some Roy Rogers. The only one I know still exist is in Westminister.

There's one in Burtonsville!



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[iH8DemLibz]

Happiness is Bambi on a Bun.

 

[vinjet700]

View attachment 110188

Happiness is Bambi on a Bun.

Where have I seen this before???? Hhmmmm ?? .

 

[Vile Shadow]

Anyhow.....

I agree with the OP, you're taking a risk in buying an HBAR that is not a Colt Sporter model. MSP has already said that Bushmaster HBARs are illegal.

All that said, I did buy a Colt 6721 after 10/1. Sadly, it was lost in a boating accident so it's sort of a moot point for me.

So did I. Fortunately mine has "HBAR" stamped on the barrel.

Maybe homemade is the better burger.....................

Mmmmmmm.......Bacon.....

There are two Roy Rogers in Germantown- one off Wisteria and 118 across from the NTB and the other off Frederick Road and Middlebrook. There is also one in Fredneck off 40 on the left in the large strip shopping centers heading out towards Middletown from rt 15.

I feel there is some sort of Bermuda Triangle in these parts. Seems to be many unexplained boating anomalies.

I thought there was one in Mt. Airy as well at the I-70 exit and MD 144?

There's also one in Solomons.

You all shouldn't be so quick to dismiss the OP.

MSP has attempted to define what makes something an HBAR, and that has been barrel profile. There is a legitimate way they could change that (and honestly, one that I see no defense to) and make future HBARs verbotten. A way that is completely within the law.

And.....?

Just curious but what makes you think bushmaster does not care about sales in maryland? Not much they can do if the state bans everything they make. And if the law bans bushmaster why would a FFL take a chance and sell a banned weapon? No FFL would risk everything just to be a test case.

Erwos sent Bushmaster an email informing them of what's going on here. According to him their response was less than encouraging to say the least.

It almost made me sorry I bought one of their rifles.

 

[AssMan]

I just finished a Roy's large roast beef sandwich and a holster of fries.

I'm a Roy's man myself. Can't beat the fixin's bar. And anyplace that sells "holsters" with their sandwiches is OK with me!

 

[Stoveman]

Jack in the Box has a Mango smoothie that must have heroin in it, it's that good...

 

[cww]

what the hell is wrong with you all, nobody has even mentioned this one

Checkers burgers kick the other burgers butts

now if you had the choice which would you buy a colt 6721 or windam weaponry HBC and why?

 

[SB281 Blaster]

what the hell is wrong with you all, nobody has even mentioned this one

Checkers burgers kick the other burgers butts

now if you had the choice which would you buy a colt 6721 or windam weaponry HBC and why?

My kids dragged me into a Five Guy on Kent Island a while back. Their fries with vinegar are just like OC boardwalk fries. Now I'm hooked. Checkers comes in second. And it is sad to say I can't say no to Popeyes extra spicy. Subway makes a great hot meatball sub. Then there is the godsend of the HBAR your 18 old can buy on a 4473 from your local FFL.

Far as I am concerned the Windham has a better fit and finish hands down, but does not come with a mil spec buffer tube and butt stock. Both barrels are 1/9 twist and the same profile. Huge under the forward hand guard. There are no markings on the barrel of the Windham that indicates it is an HBAR, but it is what it is. I have been meaning to ask those wonderful guys up in Maine to start doing that. MSP has set a precedence concerning HBARs, it is the state legislature we need to worry about changing the law.

 

[SB281 Blaster]

You all shouldn't be so quick to dismiss the OP.

MSP has attempted to define what makes something an HBAR, and that has been barrel profile. There is a legitimate way they could change that (and honestly, one that I see no defense to) and make future HBARs verbotten. A way that is completely within the law.

Even the Colt HBAR Sporter or the copies there of? Okey, you have me thinking again. I don't expect any hints here. It's not the MSP I worry about on this one, it's the legislature.

 

[JettaRed]

The AG doesn't interpret laws; the courts do.

 

[SB281 Blaster]

I bought a new boat on 10/2/2013, but it got lost in a tragic HBAR accident.

There you go making me laugh. I'm trying to envision that accident. I see a boat full of bullet holes. Now you have me thinking about finding some worthless boat, bringing it home, and blasting it. Hey, maybe a new business, "Boat Blasting Disposal Services Inc." Naa, heck with that. Buy an HBAR from me and please step out back and try it out on this bullseye I just drew on the side of this old boat with a Sharpie. We'll try out some 55 grain, some 62 grain green tips, a few hollow points, but we better stay away from the tracers, don't need any fires just now.

 

[Ab_Normal]

You all shouldn't be so quick to dismiss the OP.

MSP has attempted to define what makes something an HBAR, and that has been barrel profile. There is a legitimate way they could change that (and honestly, one that I see no defense to) and make future HBARs verbotten. A way that is completely within the law.

I don't see how they could change that without changing the law itself.

PM me with details. I wouldn't want this to be public knowledge if you are onto something.