Go Back   Maryland Shooters > Gun Rights and Legislation > Maryland 2A Issues
Don't Have An Account? Register Here

Join MD Shooters

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old September 14th, 2018, 07:32 PM #431
fred55 fred55 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Spotsylvania Co. VA
Posts: 288
fred55 fred55 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Spotsylvania Co. VA
Posts: 288
Quote:
Originally Posted by pcfixer View Post
Sounds like a "Paul Harvey Good Day" Standby for NEWS
Boy do I miss Paul Harvey’s news segments fred55
__________________
"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so." -- Ronald Reagan
fred55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 14th, 2018, 09:35 PM #432
esqappellate's Avatar
esqappellate esqappellate is offline
President, MSI
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 6,353
esqappellate esqappellate is offline
President, MSI
esqappellate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 6,353
GUN OWNERS BEWARE

Gun Owners of Maryland: BEWARE!

Today, United States District Court Judge James K. Bredar denied Maryland Shall Issue's motion for temporary relief against the State’s ban on possession of “Rapid Fire Trigger Activators” by SB 707, signed into law by the Governor on April 24, 2018. This means the law will go into effect as passed on October 1st, 2018. That's just two weeks from now. HOWEVER, while the case is pending, the judge made it clear that he believes all that’s needed to comply with the law is for the existing owner to send a letter applying for authorization to possess the "devices" covered by SB 707 to the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) by 10/01/2018. That is the "grandfather" clause contained in SB 707 and that was the clause that the judge seized upon in holding that MSI had failed to show the "irreparable injury" necessary for preliminary relief. As he said at the hearing, all you have to do is "apply" to the ATF by October 1 for "authorization to possess" the "device" in order to avoid prosecution for a year. And to the judge, it simply did not matter that the ATF has refused to receive or process any such request for "authorization" because the statute merely required the owner to "apply," not for the ATF to actually accept the application.

But, here is the rub: The law is so vague that no one knows what it covers. Every gun owner in the state may possess "Rapid Fire Trigger Activator(s), and not even know it. Such "device[s]" includes binary trigger systems, bump stocks, burst trigger systems, a Hellfire Trigger, a trigger crank, or a burst trigger system and copies thereof. But the banned items ALSO include any "device, including a removable manual or power-driven activating device, constructed so that, when installed in or attached to a firearm: (I) the rate at which the trigger is activated increases; or (II) the rate of fire increases.” Yet, virtually anything you do to your firearm may "increase" the "rate of fire" by some minute amount, including cleaning it. There is no definition for a "device" and the statute includes ALL firearms, not merely semi-automatics. At the hearing, Judge Bredar remarked on the extreme vagueness of the State’s law as he demonstrated how GUN OIL being used to lubricate A BOLT-ACTION RIFLE to "increase" the "rate of fire" of the rifle because the action could be worked more efficiently, meaning the trigger could be manually activated faster than it could before using the GUN OIL. The judge thus warned the State that he had real problems with how vague the statute was. In short, we don't know what is covered by this language covering a "device" that increases the "rate of fire" and neither does the State, the judge or anyone else. The potential for arbitrary enforcement is quite real.

And that is a BIG problem. A conviction for the mere possession of a SB 707 "device" (whatever it means) will result in the loss of your Second Amendment rights for life. It doesn't have to be a bump stock or the other listed devices to be covered. And even you aren't convicted, you could still be arrested and jailed for such possession by an overzealous law enforcement officer. It doesn't matter when or where you bought it or whether it is installed or whether it has ever been used. It doesn't have to be a device for a semi-automatic firearm. Mere possession in Maryland is enough. Under the judge's ruling today, the only way any gun owner in this State can protect themselves from potential arbitrary arrest and/or prosecution under this law (SB 707) is to send in the attached letter to the ATF.

All you have to do is print off this form, fill in the blanks and send it in to the ATF at the address indicated. To be safe, the ideal way to send it is via US Mail, return receipt requested. But by all means, send it any way you can (and keep a copy). Regardless how you send it, it must be sent before OCTOBER 1, 2018. Sending this letter does NOT mean that you are identifying yourself as owning a bump stock or any specific device. It just means that you (like we) don't know what is covered by the SB 707 ban on a "device" that "increases" the "rate of fire." The letter merely repeats the language set out in grandfather clause of SB 707. And note, even if you apply for "authorization" with the ATF, the prohibition imposed on possession by SB 707 kicks back in on October 1, 2019, if "authorization" is not actually received by that time. We already know that the ATF will not actually entertain such "applications" because it has publicly announced that it would not consider them. But that does not and will not matter until October 1, 2019. In the meantime, all you have to do is "apply" under the judge's ruling.

The case is not over by any means. All the judge did was deny preliminary relief. He did not address the merits in his ruling (other than to warn the State that they had a problem on how vague the statute was). We are encouraged by some the judge's remarks made at the hearing. Maryland Shall Issue will continue the fight but in the meantime, it is absolutely essential that you send this letter to the ATF as soon as possible. Legally, it is the only way you can protect yourself from this vague statute under the judge's ruling today. Hopefully, the case will be over by October 1, 2019 (at least in district court), so we will know more before then.
Attached Images
File Type: pdf APPLICATION FOR AUTHORIZATION.pdf (111.1 KB, 238 views)
__________________
This may sound like legal advice, but it isn't. Don't rely on it. Hire your own counsel.

Last edited by esqappellate; September 14th, 2018 at 11:05 PM.
esqappellate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 14th, 2018, 09:44 PM #433
squaregrouper's Avatar
squaregrouper squaregrouper is online now
Vote SG For King
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Pikesville, Peoples Republik Of Marylandistan
Posts: 7,615
Images: 1
squaregrouper squaregrouper is online now
Vote SG For King
squaregrouper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Pikesville, Peoples Republik Of Marylandistan
Posts: 7,615
Images: 1
I will be mailing my application tomorrow.
God forbid I over lubricate a rifle from the 1800's.
__________________
Nothing posted on this forum should be considered legal advice. If you are in need of legal advice, I advise you to seek your own counsel. Hell, I'm not even a lawyer, but this got your attention.
squaregrouper is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 14th, 2018, 09:44 PM #434
Qbeam's Avatar
Qbeam Qbeam is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Maryland
Posts: 3,619
Qbeam Qbeam is offline
Senior Member
Qbeam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Maryland
Posts: 3,619
So if I send sent letter, certified or receipt confirmation. I have complied with the law regardless of ATF's response or non response?


Q
Qbeam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 14th, 2018, 09:47 PM #435
Maswasnos's Avatar
Maswasnos Maswasnos is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: PG County
Posts: 13
Maswasnos Maswasnos is offline
Junior Member
Maswasnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: PG County
Posts: 13
Well I think that's pretty much good news. Sending in a letter for an additional year might as well be getting a preliminary injunction as far as us owners are concerned.

I can't thank MSI enough for the job they're doing. I think I'll have to buy a license plate frame from y'all.
Maswasnos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 14th, 2018, 09:49 PM #436
squaregrouper's Avatar
squaregrouper squaregrouper is online now
Vote SG For King
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Pikesville, Peoples Republik Of Marylandistan
Posts: 7,615
Images: 1
squaregrouper squaregrouper is online now
Vote SG For King
squaregrouper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Pikesville, Peoples Republik Of Marylandistan
Posts: 7,615
Images: 1
.
__________________
Nothing posted on this forum should be considered legal advice. If you are in need of legal advice, I advise you to seek your own counsel. Hell, I'm not even a lawyer, but this got your attention.
squaregrouper is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 14th, 2018, 09:50 PM #437
CypherPunk's Avatar
CypherPunk CypherPunk is offline
Opinions Are My Own
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 3,578
Images: 8
CypherPunk CypherPunk is offline
Opinions Are My Own
CypherPunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 3,578
Images: 8
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qbeam View Post
So if I send sent letter, certified or receipt confirmation. I have complied with the law regardless of ATF's response or non response?
Q
That would be a good question for your local attorney, who I am sure is competent and experienced with firearms laws.

Some things are too important to solely rely on advice from an internet forum.
CypherPunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 14th, 2018, 09:50 PM #438
danb's Avatar
danb danb is offline
W T F
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Howard County
Posts: 15,813
danb danb is offline
W T F
danb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Howard County
Posts: 15,813
Thank you very much for the update and pdf!

I wonder how we lucked into the one judge in Annapolis who knows about firearms and that GUN OIL increases the rate of fire. Now I wonder if FP10 makes the rate of fire faster than Ballistol or Rem oil. We got extremely lucky.
danb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 14th, 2018, 09:53 PM #439
Stoveman's Avatar
Stoveman Stoveman is offline
TV Personality
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Cuba on the Chesapeake
Posts: 12,023
Stoveman Stoveman is offline
TV Personality
Stoveman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Cuba on the Chesapeake
Posts: 12,023
Just posted this to the PP page on the Book of Faces. Share far and wide.
__________________
_______________
Proud CCW Cultist
Stoveman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 14th, 2018, 09:58 PM #440
Qbeam's Avatar
Qbeam Qbeam is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Maryland
Posts: 3,619
Qbeam Qbeam is offline
Senior Member
Qbeam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Maryland
Posts: 3,619
Quote:
Originally Posted by CypherPunk View Post
That would be a good question for your local attorney, who I am sure is competent and experienced with firearms laws.

Some things are too important to solely rely on advice from an internet forum.
That is what I am getting fron Esqappellatte's post. He was there with the judge, and has attached the form in PDF format. I understand the judge's logic (don't quire agree, but the law states "apply", not approval). This was a vague law that should never have been passed, but here we are. I am looking at what to do to stay legal.


Q
Qbeam is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  Home Page > Forum List > Gun Rights and Legislation > Maryland 2A Issues

Tags
sb707, trigger activator


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
© 2018, Congregate Media, LP Privacy Policy Terms of Service