Maryland Shall Issue Files Suit Against the Maryland State Police

[j_h_smith]

I think we got screwed on the law suit.

I know we got screwed. If we had actually won, EVERY ffl would be releasing the firearms on the 8th day. I don't understand the AGC and MSI statement that we had won.

An official "MAY" is not a win. If anything it's a considerable loss. Look at the time and money utilized and what did we get? An ffl MAY release on the 8th day. That's after the state of Maryland got the FBI to make it illegal for any ffl to get their own NICS number.

So, the state will allow the ffl to release a firearm without an NCIS number. You can't even do that with an 870 shotgun, much less a MD restricted firearm.

Go ahead ffl, do what you want. But I bet when it comes time to renew their license, they're going to have a lot of explaining to do.

MD said they wouldn't hold the ffl responsible, but the Feds have never made that statement.

Releasing a firearm without an NICS number will more than likely send you to the front of the classroom.

If I owned a business, I wouldn't be releasing any firearm without an NICS number.

Venting mode off
Jim Smith

 

[fabsroman]

This is where the problem (with some MSI folks) is.

They always had the "green light", it's called,.....the LAW. Nothing changed.

Yeah, the law was written a certain way and the dealers could have been releasing on the 8th day before this lawsuit happened. However, this was new territory that none of the dealers had ever ventured into. Some actually started releasing before this lawsuit was settled. Mine was one of them. Kudos to those that did. Kudos to the rest that can read English, understand what happened in Court, and are now releasing.

Let's keep in mind that not all dealers can afford to hire attorneys at $200 an hour to review all this and advise them accordingly.

Also, there is the issue of civil liability and being sued for something that happens as a result of an 8th day release without a NICS, etc. I'm fine with dealers using their discretion on this matter AS LONG AS the customer knew their policy ahead of time OR the customer has the ability to walk away from the transaction without incurring any cost whatsoever.

End of the day, I think the result of the lawsuit has motivated a lot more dealers to release on the 8th day, or at least prior to MSP coming back with a ND. That is a decent end result.

The law really does not support forcing the MSP to complete ALL applications within 7 days. It really does say that the MSP only has to disapprove within 7 days. So, if I were a dealer I would take the position that if the disapproval is not received within 7 days, then the person passed the NICS check. Dealers might even want to send the MSP a letter stating that they will assume not receiving a disapproved within 7 days means that the purchaser passed a NICS.

 

[fabsroman]

I know we got screwed. If we had actually won, EVERY ffl would be releasing the firearms on the 8th day. I don't understand the AGC and MSI statement that we had won.

An official "MAY" is not a win. If anything it's a considerable loss. Look at the time and money utilized and what did we get? An ffl MAY release on the 8th day. That's after the state of Maryland got the FBI to make it illegal for any ffl to get their own NICS number.

So, the state will allow the ffl to release a firearm without an NCIS number. You can't even do that with an 870 shotgun, much less a MD restricted firearm.

Go ahead ffl, do what you want. But I bet when it comes time to renew their license, they're going to have a lot of explaining to do.

MD said they wouldn't hold the ffl responsible, but the Feds have never made that statement.

Releasing a firearm without an NICS number will more than likely send you to the front of the classroom.

If I owned a business, I wouldn't be releasing any firearm without an NICS number.

Venting mode off
Jim Smith

What happens on an 870 shotgun if the dealer applies for a NICS and does not hear back within 3 days? I believe the 870 shotgun may be released on the 4th day if there is no response from NICS (i.e., no hold or no denied) before that.

 

[L0gic]

My Frederick dealer is not releasing because his attorney has advised him that until he gets something in writing from the ATF that he does not need a NICS ... he should not to release.

MD said they wouldn't hold the ffl responsible, but the Feds have never made that statement.

A template letter was posted in the "Live Release" thread for people to copy and paste to barrage ATF to give an updated response on how to release firearms with no response from the NICS POC. Click and send one to help with the flood: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2vWDPHXUFiiakgySnY3WGFDUUE/edit?usp=sharing

The law really does not support forcing the MSP to complete ALL applications within 7 days. It really does say that the MSP only has to disapprove within 7 days. So, if I were a dealer I would take the position that if the disapproval is not received within 7 days, then the person passed the NICS check. Dealers might even want to send the MSP a letter stating that they will assume not receiving a disapproved within 7 days means that the purchaser passed a NICS.

I think this was in part the reason behind MSP asking to have notice sent to them for all 8th day releases, even though nothing in current law requires a dealer to do so.

 

[mcornish86@gmail.com]

What exactly did you expect from this? All the apps to magically be processed in 7 days when there is no physical way that can happen?

The dealers got their certification that 8th day release is ok. They have it from MSP and from the ATF.

The dealers have a green light to do 8th day release.

There's nothing more a court is going to give.

They already had the green light when the law was written. A lot if ffls r still not releasing tho. What I expected was MSP to say hey we sorry for the confusion and delays and to hire a extra 5-7 people on top of the extra help they (suppose to) have

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[ShallNotInfringe]

I just have two questions:

A. Why does it take a week to fax after the ND?
B. Has anyone that has "skin in the game" been over to tour the operation?

 

[MDFF2008]

They already had the green light when the law was written. A lot if ffls r still not releasing tho. What I expected was MSP to say hey we sorry for the confusion and delays and to hire a extra 5-7 people on top of the extra help they (suppose to) have

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

They are, they said in the lawsuit. Unfortunately the databases they use are restricted to law enforcement officers. Takes time to get LEOs up and going.

Some FFL's will not release no matter what.

 

[MDFF2008]

So, the state will allow the ffl to release a firearm without an NCIS number. You can't even do that with an 870 shotgun, much less a MD restricted firearm.

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/brady-law.html#waiting-period

It's all right there, from the ATF.

 

[CharlieFoxtrot]

My Frederick dealer is not releasing because his attorney has advised him that until he gets something in writing from the ATF that he does not need a NICS ... he should not to release. If he does he will be in violation of federal law. Just because MSP said go ahead doesn't mean Federal law does not apply. NICS will not give him a number because msp is still the poc.

How are the dealers who are releasing getting a NICS number?

I think we got screwed on the law suit.

He needs a better attorney.

 

[MDFF2008]

My Frederick dealer is not releasing because his attorney has advised him that until he gets something in writing from the ATF that he does not need a NICS ... he should not to release. If he does he will be in violation of federal law. Just because MSP said go ahead doesn't mean Federal law does not apply. NICS will not give him a number because msp is still the poc.

How are the dealers who are releasing getting a NICS number?

I think we got screwed on the law suit.

Print this out and show him. It's pretty clear.

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/brady-law.html#waiting-period

 

[MJD438]

Print this out and show him. It's pretty clear.

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/brady-law.html#waiting-period

But it's not an official letter, on official letterhead, therefore it is not an official communication acceptable for those purposes... [/sarcasm]

 

[Mark75H]

They are, they said in the lawsuit. Unfortunately the databases they use are restricted to law enforcement officers. Takes time to get LEOs up and going.

Some FFL's will not release no matter what.

I can accept that 7 day processing will not happen overnight, but ... explain why they are getting farther behind with less workload rather than catching up ... BOTH the increased manpower they claim AND the decreased workload should have them catching up NOT FALLING FARTHER BEHIND every week ...

 

[Faderhaus]

As I see it, Nothing has Changed.....Business as usual for the MSP and Governor/Dictator Jackass OweMalley. It was an attempt by MSI to "speed up the process", and it did not work. The MSP stood their ground and FFL's are continuing to Do Business in the manner in which they feel "comfortable".

I don't blame any of the FFL's that are holding until the NICS data is released by theMSP. (The FFL's) are on the "hook" for "Civil Penalties" if someone who got through the process shoots and kills someone. It's called "Wrongful Death" and it is burdened on the seller of the firearm (or in this case, the FFL). If I were an FFL owner, I would hold the paperwork until I got the NICS Number, REGARDLESS OF WHAT CRIMINAL PENALTIES I WAS PROTECTED FROM UNDER CURRENT LAW.

People are not thinking about the CIVIL PENALTIES. Everyone remembers the O.J.Simpson Trial. He was acquitted of Criminal Charges in the Murder of his wife and wife's friend, HOWEVER, he was sued by his wife's family for wrongful death and he LOST HIS ASS.

All of this hoopla over nothng more than "posturing". Can someone - anyone explain to me how this has changed ANYTHING?

I didn't think so.

 

[L0gic]

^^ Can You Explain Why Some Dealers Still Won't Release Everything On The First ND Coming Back For Designated Collectors? The Paperwork In Their Hands Says This Person Is Good To Go, Yet They Want Paperwork Per Firearm...

 

[Smokescreen]

Print this out and show him. It's pretty clear.

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/brady-law.html#waiting-period

Everyone seems to keep quoting that. Yes its from the ATF, but as I read it and my FFL replied to me all it says is that the licensee MAY release. What it fails to detail is the HOW the 4473 should be filled out.

I will not outwardly say we lost but it sure feels like we are missing something. I think if it was something obvious, more FFL's would be releasing and those that are releasing would not be so secretive of how they are filling out 4473.

My bet is that those that are releasing and not saying how they are filling out 4473 are just filling it out how they think is best and hoping that they are right. They don't want to show their hand and be caught wrong and have more to pay for.

 

[Smokescreen]

^^ Can You Explain Why Some Dealers Still Won't Release Everything On The First ND Coming Back For Designated Collectors? The Paperwork In Their Hands Says This Person Is Good To Go, Yet They Want Paperwork Per Firearm...

My guess would be that since each transfer has its own NICS number, they are waiting for each individual number to come back ND.

 

[fabsroman]

As I see it, Nothing has Changed.....Business as usual for the MSP and Governor/Dictator Jackass OweMalley. It was an attempt by MSI to "speed up the process", and it did not work. The MSP stood their ground and FFL's are continuing to Do Business in the manner in which they feel "comfortable".

I don't blame any of the FFL's that are holding until the NICS data is released by theMSP. (The FFL's) are on the "hook" for "Civil Penalties" if someone who got through the process shoots and kills someone. It's called "Wrongful Death" and it is burdened on the seller of the firearm (or in this case, the FFL). If I were an FFL owner, I would hold the paperwork until I got the NICS Number, REGARDLESS OF WHAT CRIMINAL PENALTIES I WAS PROTECTED FROM UNDER CURRENT LAW.

People are not thinking about the CIVIL PENALTIES. Everyone remembers the O.J.Simpson Trial. He was acquitted of Criminal Charges in the Murder of his wife and wife's friend, HOWEVER, he was sued by his wife's family for wrongful death and he LOST HIS ASS.

All of this hoopla over nothng more than "posturing". Can someone - anyone explain to me how this has changed ANYTHING?

I didn't think so.

Whether or not they would be on the "hook" for civil liability really would be one heck of a court fight. They would be on the hook for attorneys fees though if their liability insurer will not pick up the tab. Ultimately, it comes down to whether or not the dealer follows a reasonable standard of care in releasing a firearm. The argument can be made that the dealer sent in the Form 77r, waited the amount of time proscribed by law, and figured that the MSP was being diligent on its end and doing an initial NICS check on these purchasers as soon as the application came in. They can also argue that MSP, per the lawsuit, was to hire more people and get back to timely review of these applications.

I think there are a lot of arguments that can be made regarding why a dealer that follows the law should NOT be liable for the actions of a purchaser after the fact.

It would be one heck of a lawsuit though and the attorneys fees would probably be substantial.

 

[Topher]

He needs a better attorney.

I heard that!!!
Do you know anyone who could drop in and give him an initial consultation?

 

[GearDown]

Here's the deal on FFL liability.... The FFL has the duty imposed on them to be reasonably careful by following the letter of the law... Based on the ATF and MSP wait times once the 3 day for federal and 7 day for state wait times have expired... the firearm can be transferred. So 8th day transfers are legal by law regardless of any background checks not completed or NCIS numbers not received. Therefore, any FFL who waits 8 days and then completes the transfer could not be held liable for any civil liability cases.

For civil tort law or "liability law":
First, the plaintiff must establish that the defendant was under a legal duty to act in a particular fashion. Second, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant breached this duty by failing to conform his or her behavior accordingly. Third, the plaintiff must prove that he suffered injury or loss as a direct result of the defendant's breach.

If an FLL completes the proper paperwork and then releases on the 8th day then all is well because the FLL has done their legal duty.

However, I'd say that most FFL's have now clue how the law works and are in fact ignorant to it and are just burying their heads in the sand till they get the ok to come out and release from the MSP.

 

[Mark75H]

However, I'd say that most FFL's have now clue how the law works and are in fact ignorant to it and are just burying their heads in the sand till they get the ok to come out and release from the MSP.

I'd say they understand that there are lawyers that will sue for a hangnail ... or spilled coffee