BUMP STOCK SUIT FILED!

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!
  • Falkus

    Dating Scarlett Johansson
    Feb 26, 2007
    2,035
    Undisclosed location
    Submit my letter today since Im only two blocks from the ATF Building. Let's see how long it takes
     

    platoonDaddy

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 30, 2011
    4,125
    SouthOfBalto
    Being an oldMan, how important is it to file the letter with BATF?

    Is MDSP waiting at the exit of all firearm ranges or knocking on our doors? !!!

    Just think the letter is a big deal about nothing.

    Incoming!
     

    Hawkeye

    The Leatherstocking
    Jan 29, 2009
    3,971
    Being an oldMan, how important is it to file the letter with BATF?

    Very, VERY important, because of the way that the law is written. It literally says "any device which increases the rate of fire" of a rifle. As the judge properly noted during the hearing, that could mean literally anything - gun oil or grease, ANY action or trigger work, etc.

    All it takes is some cop or prosecutor on a fishing expedition or out to make a name.

    You are ONLY allowed to possess such devices if you've applied to ATF for ownership before 10/1/18.


    Is MDSP waiting at the exit of all firearm ranges or knocking on our doors? !!!

    Realistically? No, probably not. However, this idiotic law is just one more step down the slippery slope to "no guns for you!" It was sold as the old common sense no one NEEDS that and it'll be safer type BS. The only way we are going to knock this law down is through this lawsuit, and 10,000 Marylanders sending these letters to ATF is a lot louder a signal than 10 Marylanders doing it.

    Just think the letter is a big deal about nothing.

    The danger of that statement is that if, every time our rights get chipped away a little bit we all just said "well, that's much ado about nothing," then soon we'd be left without any rights at all.
     

    Bisleyfan44

    Ultimate Member
    Jan 11, 2008
    1,758
    Wicomico
    You are ONLY allowed to possess such devices if you've applied to ATF for ownership before 10/1/18.

    The bad part is my FFL has a letter from MSP stating you can only possess these after 10/1/18 by applying to the ATF before then,BUT after 10/1/19 they are banned in the state completely, regardless of whether or not you sent the letter this year. What gives?
     

    j_h_smith

    Ultimate Member
    Jul 28, 2007
    28,516
    Being an oldMan, how important is it to file the letter with BATF?

    Is MDSP waiting at the exit of all firearm ranges or knocking on our doors? !!!

    Just think the letter is a big deal about nothing.

    Incoming!

    No, but lets say you get caught up in a Red Flag issue in the next year. Wanna bet they won't look at your firearms and if they find anything that makes any one of your firearms fire ever so slightly faster, you can kiss your 2A rights goodbye.

    This is lining up to be a perfect storm with the other laws on the book. Remember, in Maryland you are guilty until proven innocent.

    Send the letter, even if you just send it 1st class with a 50 cent stamp.
     

    j_h_smith

    Ultimate Member
    Jul 28, 2007
    28,516
    The bad part is my FFL has a letter from MSP stating you can only possess these after 10/1/18 by applying to the ATF before then,BUT after 10/1/19 they are banned in the state completely, regardless of whether or not you sent the letter this year. What gives?

    That is true. That's why the lawsuit by MSI is so important.
     

    Rab1515

    Ultimate Member
    Patriot Picket
    Apr 29, 2014
    2,081
    Calvert
    Realistically? No, probably not. However, this idiotic law is just one more step down the slippery slope to "no guns for you!" It was sold as the old common sense no one NEEDS that and it'll be safer type BS. The only way we are going to knock this law down is through this lawsuit, and 10,000 Marylanders sending these letters to ATF is a lot louder a signal than 10 Marylanders doing it.



    The danger of that statement is that if, every time our rights get chipped away a little bit we all just said "well, that's much ado about nothing," then soon we'd be left without any rights at all.

    Finally, some one else gets that there is strength in numbers.
     

    whistlersmother

    Peace through strength
    Jan 29, 2013
    8,948
    Fulton, MD
    The bad part is my FFL has a letter from MSP stating you can only possess these after 10/1/18 by applying to the ATF before then,BUT after 10/1/19 they are banned in the state completely, regardless of whether or not you sent the letter this year. What gives?
    You must have had ATF approval before 10/2019 to continue possessing after that date per the law.

    Since ATF isn't giving approval (not will it likely change that stance), devices will become illegal after 10/2019.

    Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
     

    Occam

    Not Even ONE Indictment
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 24, 2018
    20,239
    Montgomery County
    You must have had ATF approval before 10/2019 to continue possessing after that date per the law.

    No. The law says you have to APPLY for ATF authorization. Which is why sending the letter before 10/1 (as nicely explained by the federal judge, and helpfully assisted by MSI) is your 1-year remedy for this situation until October 2019. By which time, no doubt, we'll see either a proper injunction, or hopefully an outright defeat of the silly law.
     

    whistlersmother

    Peace through strength
    Jan 29, 2013
    8,948
    Fulton, MD
    No. The law says you have to APPLY for ATF authorization. Which is why sending the letter before 10/1 (as nicely explained by the federal judge, and helpfully assisted by MSI) is your 1-year remedy for this situation until October 2019. By which time, no doubt, we'll see either a proper injunction, or hopefully an outright defeat of the silly law.

    Yes. The question assumed application before 10/2018 and poster's words indicated under all cases possession was illegal after 10/2019. That's not what the law says. IF one gets approval, after applying, before 10/2019, then possession is legal.

    Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
     

    Hawkeye

    The Leatherstocking
    Jan 29, 2009
    3,971
    No. The law says you have to APPLY for ATF authorization. Which is why sending the letter before 10/1 (as nicely explained by the federal judge, and helpfully assisted by MSI) is your 1-year remedy for this situation until October 2019. By which time, no doubt, we'll see either a proper injunction, or hopefully an outright defeat of the silly law.

    No to you. :P

    Whistlersmother is correct. You must have applied to ATF for approval to own them before 10/1/18. However, you must have received approval to own them before 10/1/19 or they become illegal.
     

    CypherPunk

    Opinions Are My Own
    Apr 6, 2012
    3,907
    Frequently Asked Questions

    Q. Should I have my signature notarized?
    A. No. Proving your identity and having your signature witnessed by a notary is completely unnecessary.

    Q. Can I email the completed form?
    A. No. The form should be sent via independent, trackable carrier. Recommended options include United States Postal Service Certified Mail, United Parcel Service or FedEx. Email is not recommended.

    Q. Isn’t this the wrong zip code for the ATF?
    A. No. Please send your completed form to the mailing address indicated on the form.

    Q. Can I alter the form to include methods, etc.
    A. No. Multiple knowledgeable attorneys collaborated on the exact wording of each part of the form. It is not advised you alter any part of the text in any way.

    Q. Can you fill in and submit the form for me.
    A. No.

    Q. Why mail the form if the ATF already said that they will not receive or act on my application?
    A. Maryland law only requires that you apply to the ATF to be protected during the interim period, until October 1, 2019. Maryland law does not require the ATF to accept or even acknowledge your application.

    Q. Who would consider gun oil (or anything else) unlawful to possess under Maryland law?
    A. A Federal Judge has already concluded that gun oil could be construed as unlawful to possess under the current definition of the law.
     

    Bountied

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 6, 2012
    6,894
    Pasadena
    Frequently Asked Questions

    Q. Should I have my signature notarized?
    A. No. Proving your identity and having your signature witnessed by a notary is completely unnecessary.

    Q. Can I email the completed form?
    A. No. The form should be sent via independent, trackable carrier. Recommended options include United States Postal Service Certified Mail, United Parcel Service or FedEx. Email is not recommended.

    Q. Isn’t this the wrong zip code for the ATF?
    A. No. Please send your completed form to the mailing address indicated on the form.

    Q. Can I alter the form to include methods, etc.
    A. No. Multiple knowledgeable attorneys collaborated on the exact wording of each part of the form. It is not advised you alter any part of the text in any way.

    Q. Can you fill in and submit the form for me.
    A. No.

    Q. Why mail the form if the ATF already said that they will not receive or act on my application?
    A. Maryland law only requires that you apply to the ATF to be protected during the interim period, until October 1, 2019. Maryland law does not require the ATF to accept or even acknowledge your application.

    Q. Who would consider gun oil (or anything else) unlawful to possess under Maryland law?
    A. A Federal Judge has already concluded that gun oil could be construed as unlawful to possess under the current definition of the law.

    Where is this from? MSI?
     

    Abulg1972

    Ultimate Member
    You rewrite it, I’ll correct it.

    I'd rewrite it by deleting it. Judge Bredar did not conclude that gun oil could fall within the definition. I attended the hearing. In expressing his concern that the statute was unconstitutionally vague, he simply asked the State whether gun oil could fall within the definition. The State did not answer that question, and Judge Bredar did not issue any ruling with respect thereto. Keep in mind that to be within the scope of the definition, something must be a "device" that is "constructed" so that, when "installed" in or "attached" to a firearm, the rate of fire increases. No one is going to jail for possessing a bottle of Hoppe's No. 9 Lubricating Oil. We need to keep our heads on our bodies as we battle this out.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,931
    Messages
    7,259,491
    Members
    33,350
    Latest member
    Rotorboater

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom