Check out my blog post on this year's gun bills:https://mdfirearmblawg.blogspot.com/2019/02/2019-md-gun-legislation-summary-and.html
Here is the full text:
February 20, 2019
This post reflects my personal opinions and it does not constitute legal advice or opinions. It does not reflect the views of my employer or any organization I am affiliated with.
For the sake of efficiency, I focused on those laws that will have the most direct impact on my use and enjoyment of firearms.
2019 MD Firearm Legislation
Talking points for all gun laws: gun laws only punish innocent law abiding citizens. There are already numerous laws in the books meant to control gun violence. None of them are working because criminals don't follow the law! New restrictions only make things more burdensome for law abiding gun owners who want to enjoy shooting sports, hunt, and defend their families from the very criminals these laws are meant to stop. These laws won't stop crime and they make law abiding citizens less safe.
HB 612 (HBAR Ban)
Short Summary:
Summary: This law will RETROACTIVELY ban heavy barrel modern sporting rifles similar to the AR15.
Talking points:
This law will affect thousands of people who purchased such rifles since 10/2013. The law makes anyone who purchased an HBAR after 2013 a criminal unless they destroy or go through the hassle of selling, likely at a big loss, to someone out of state. People who purchase these rifles are already subject to a background check from a dealer.
This style of rifle was specifically excluded from the ban. Why is the legislature changing its mind? These guns are not known to be used in any sort of crime. They are designed with a heavy barrel to meet the precision required for hunting and competition. These rifles are purchased by thousands by law abiding citizens who enjoy the ease of use and precision that comes with these guns. What new data does the legislature have to support a new ban? We know for a fact that these types of rifles have NEVER been used in a violent crime in the state or anywhere in the country. We know for a fact that generally only firearms purchased illegally are used in violent crime. So, what benefit is there to banning these rifles for law abiding citizens?
The bill would also result in the loss of very valuable personal property, as Maryland residents who own these HBARs would be forced to give up possession. That forced dispossession of valuable property is a Taking under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution and under Article 40 of the Maryland Constitution.
Why doesn't the law include a grandfather clause like the original law did?
Analysis
To understand this law we have to go back to 2013, when the the MD legislature dramatically banned so called “assault rifles”. This is how the ban worked. It provided a laundry list of guns that they deemed assault rifles because they have certain features and/or where historically used by a military, albeit in a full auto version or in a specific configuration. One of the guns on the list was the ubiquitous Colt AR15 and any imitations. So, any modern sporting rifle that was branded or essentially a copy of an AR15 was banned. However, the law specifically excluded the Colt HBAR (heavy barrel) rifle. So, this meant that an AR15 could be “Maryland compliant” as long as it was configured with a heavy barrel.
Another important aspect of the assault weapons ban is that it included a grandfather clause. So, as long as you legally purchased the rifle before October 2013, you could keep it.
The new law seeks to amend the current law and remove only the one section that excluded AR15 HBAR rifles. This means that that original ban will apply to all AR15 rifles, regardless of how they are configured. The grandfather clause will not be updated to permit people who relied on the law to purchase HBARs until now. Rather, it will only grandfather rifles purchased prior to October 2013.
This law should not affect rifles made from a standard AR lower in a different caliber. It only affects 5.56 caliber. So, technically it won't even ban 223 caliber HBARs. It for sure won't affect other AR style rifles like the AR10 and AR9.
SB 737, HB 786 (Long Gun Qualification License)
This law will require anyone who wants to purchase ANY type of long gun, (except antiques), to jump through the following hoops:
Obtain a license to purchase a long gun, which will require:
1. A 4-hour class
2. Application
3. Fingerprints
4. Background check
5. $50 fee
6. 10 year expiration
A 7 day waiting period
You can only buy 1 long every 30 days unless you are a collector
A $10 transfer fee
Exceptions
Transfer between immediate family members
Curio and Relic firearms
Temporary transfers for self defense (reasonable immediate danger)
Lending a gun at the range, shooting competition, hunting, or in the actual presence of the owner
Exception to 7 day wait - exchanges within 30 days of purchase, replacement of stolen or lost gun (with a police report within 30 days)
This law also means that there will no more private sales of long guns. If you want to sell a rifle or shotgun to a trusted friend, you will either have to go to a State police barracks and pay $10, or go to a gun store and do an FFL transfer with a fee.
If you go out of state and find a rifle you like, you will have to get it shipped to a gun store in MD.
If you move in from out of state with a rifle or shotgun, you will have to register it with the state.
Talking Points
This law inappropriately criminalize private sales of long guns even though such long guns are very seldom used in crime. This is confirmed by the Maryland 2015 UNIFORM CRIME REPORT issued annually by the State Police. For example, in 2014, a rifle (of any type) was used in one (1) murder in Maryland and a shotgun was used in seven (7). In 2015, a rifle was used in five (5) murders and Page 6 of 16 a shotgun used in six (6). By way of comparison and perspective, a knife was used in 79 murders in 2014 and 65 murders in 2015. A “blunt object” was used in 12 murders in 2014 and 17 murders in 2015. “Personal weapons” (hands and feet) were used in 13 murders in 2014 and 19 murders in 2015. FBI statistics show similar results nationwide. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u....e_data_table_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2010- 2014.xls. According to the latest data from the FBI (attached), in Maryland, there were 475 murders in 2017. Of those 475 murders, 5 (1%) were committed with rifles and 3 (0.6%) were committed with shotguns. In contrast, knives were used in 44 murders and hands and feet were used in 11 murders. Fifty (50) murders were committed in Maryland in 2017 using “other weapons.” In short, murders using long guns are not only exceedingly rare, they are the least used weapon for such crimes. Yet, nothing in these bills would address murders using knives or murders by using hands and feet or by “other weapons.”
It is already illegal to give a gun to a prohibited person. Gun owners in MD are responsible law abiding individuals who are careful to follow this law. For the purpose of keeping the law, private sales are only conducted after the seller has done their due diligence. Sellers have been trusted until now to ensure they are complying with law. Why is the legislature changing this? Why don't you trust the law abiding gun owners any more? There is no data that shows weapons sold private sales by law abiding citizens have been used in crime. The black market for guns will still be in full force, all this law does is punish law abiding citizens.
In terms of obtaining the LGQL, the total cost of these requirements is roughly $300.00. That does not count the cost of taking time off of work to obtain fingerprinting services, attending the training and go through the complex permit process.
There is no evidence whatsoever that requiring a purchaser to obtain a LGQL will result in fewer sales to disqualified persons. In the HQL litigation, currently in the federal court, the State Police have been unable to identify a single sale subject to the HQL restrictions that would not have been also prevented by pre-existing state or federal law. Not a single straw purchase, for example, was prevented. The LGQL is utterly unnecessary to prevent illegal sales by dealers.
This law is without precedent, even in the most anti-gun states. New York State, the home of ex-Mayor Bloomberg, does not require any permit at all to purchase a long gun. We know of no special or unique reason for imposing all these requirements on Marylanders when no other state has done so. In short, these bills are extreme by any measure. New Jersey, a notoriously anti-gun state, also requires a FOID card, but it does not impose any training requirement whatsoever for long gun sales, much less a requirement that the purchaser personally attend a 4- hour class given by a certified instructor, as required by these bills.
This bill imposes an unconscionable burden to those who have an immediate need for a firearm for defense of themselves and their families. The MD legislature has already restricted one’s ability to provide for his self defense with a handgun by enacting the HQL requirements and 7 day waiting period for handguns. Alarming as that was, many people shrugged that off, because they could still purchase a shotgun or rifle if needed. Many people actually prefer shotguns for home defense. Now, the state is stripping that from us as well, leaving people defenseless for a significant period of time. Under these bills, the Secretary has 30 days to approve a license and there is no provision for expedited treatment of licenses. Given the staffing levels at the State Police, these bills would effectively impose a minimum 30-day waiting period just to obtain a license. In discovery conducted in the HQL litigation, the State Police stated, in sworn testimony, that the average time for a HQL permit to be issued is 26-27 days and has often taken much longer. The number of long gun purchasers are orders of magnitude greater than the number of individuals buying handguns. The State Police would be inundated. The bills would then impose an additional 7-day waiting period on top of that 30-day period to actually purchase a long gun.
HB 96, SB 346 (Lending Ban)
This law will change the definition of transfer. Currently, the courts have held that a transfer only occurs when there is a permanent exchange. The new law redefines transfer as any exchange other than lending a firearm while you remain in the same place. I.E., you will still be able to let someone use your gun at the range, shooting competition, gun show as long as you are right there with them.
Talking Points
As stated above, law abiding gun owners are responsible and careful not to lend or sell firearms to a prohibited person. Gun owners should be trusted to use their judgement when it comes to their personal property. There is no data to support finding that lending between responsible, law abiding people has any effect on crime. Criminals don't follow the law and they will flout this law the same way they ignore the law that prohibits them from possessing a firearm currently.
Law abiding citizens routinely lend firearms to other responsible individuals for a variety of legitimate purposes, such as shooting competitions, hunting, testing out new firearms etc. This law will only inhibit responsible citizens and it will have no effect on violent crime.
We support SB 115. Currently, you need a “good and substantial” reason to carry a concealed firearm. Self-defense is not a valid reason unless you can show evidence of direct threats of violence. This law would circumvent the “good and substantial” reason requirement by stating that self defense is a “good and substantial reason” without requiring any additional evidence. Ultimately, this law would mean that anyone who is not otherwise prohibited can get a CCW, because everyone has a right to defend themselves.
We Support SB 114, This law will change the CCW application process so that the applicants and State police can deal with them more efficiently. Currently, the applicant has to complete the 16-hour firearm safety course first and then submit the application. The State police review the application to determine whether the person has a “good and substantial” reason, and then approves or disapproves. The problem is that the applicant has to spend all the time and money required to take the safety course, without any guarantee that the permit will be approved. The bill will fix that problem by allowing applicants to submit the application first and receive preliminary approval from MSP. Once they have that approval, the applicant will take the safety course and complete the application.
Here is the full text:
February 20, 2019
This post reflects my personal opinions and it does not constitute legal advice or opinions. It does not reflect the views of my employer or any organization I am affiliated with.
For the sake of efficiency, I focused on those laws that will have the most direct impact on my use and enjoyment of firearms.
2019 MD Firearm Legislation
Talking points for all gun laws: gun laws only punish innocent law abiding citizens. There are already numerous laws in the books meant to control gun violence. None of them are working because criminals don't follow the law! New restrictions only make things more burdensome for law abiding gun owners who want to enjoy shooting sports, hunt, and defend their families from the very criminals these laws are meant to stop. These laws won't stop crime and they make law abiding citizens less safe.
HB 612 (HBAR Ban)
Short Summary:
Summary: This law will RETROACTIVELY ban heavy barrel modern sporting rifles similar to the AR15.
Talking points:
This law will affect thousands of people who purchased such rifles since 10/2013. The law makes anyone who purchased an HBAR after 2013 a criminal unless they destroy or go through the hassle of selling, likely at a big loss, to someone out of state. People who purchase these rifles are already subject to a background check from a dealer.
This style of rifle was specifically excluded from the ban. Why is the legislature changing its mind? These guns are not known to be used in any sort of crime. They are designed with a heavy barrel to meet the precision required for hunting and competition. These rifles are purchased by thousands by law abiding citizens who enjoy the ease of use and precision that comes with these guns. What new data does the legislature have to support a new ban? We know for a fact that these types of rifles have NEVER been used in a violent crime in the state or anywhere in the country. We know for a fact that generally only firearms purchased illegally are used in violent crime. So, what benefit is there to banning these rifles for law abiding citizens?
The bill would also result in the loss of very valuable personal property, as Maryland residents who own these HBARs would be forced to give up possession. That forced dispossession of valuable property is a Taking under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution and under Article 40 of the Maryland Constitution.
Why doesn't the law include a grandfather clause like the original law did?
Analysis
To understand this law we have to go back to 2013, when the the MD legislature dramatically banned so called “assault rifles”. This is how the ban worked. It provided a laundry list of guns that they deemed assault rifles because they have certain features and/or where historically used by a military, albeit in a full auto version or in a specific configuration. One of the guns on the list was the ubiquitous Colt AR15 and any imitations. So, any modern sporting rifle that was branded or essentially a copy of an AR15 was banned. However, the law specifically excluded the Colt HBAR (heavy barrel) rifle. So, this meant that an AR15 could be “Maryland compliant” as long as it was configured with a heavy barrel.
Another important aspect of the assault weapons ban is that it included a grandfather clause. So, as long as you legally purchased the rifle before October 2013, you could keep it.
The new law seeks to amend the current law and remove only the one section that excluded AR15 HBAR rifles. This means that that original ban will apply to all AR15 rifles, regardless of how they are configured. The grandfather clause will not be updated to permit people who relied on the law to purchase HBARs until now. Rather, it will only grandfather rifles purchased prior to October 2013.
This law should not affect rifles made from a standard AR lower in a different caliber. It only affects 5.56 caliber. So, technically it won't even ban 223 caliber HBARs. It for sure won't affect other AR style rifles like the AR10 and AR9.
SB 737, HB 786 (Long Gun Qualification License)
This law will require anyone who wants to purchase ANY type of long gun, (except antiques), to jump through the following hoops:
Obtain a license to purchase a long gun, which will require:
1. A 4-hour class
2. Application
3. Fingerprints
4. Background check
5. $50 fee
6. 10 year expiration
A 7 day waiting period
You can only buy 1 long every 30 days unless you are a collector
A $10 transfer fee
Exceptions
Transfer between immediate family members
Curio and Relic firearms
Temporary transfers for self defense (reasonable immediate danger)
Lending a gun at the range, shooting competition, hunting, or in the actual presence of the owner
Exception to 7 day wait - exchanges within 30 days of purchase, replacement of stolen or lost gun (with a police report within 30 days)
This law also means that there will no more private sales of long guns. If you want to sell a rifle or shotgun to a trusted friend, you will either have to go to a State police barracks and pay $10, or go to a gun store and do an FFL transfer with a fee.
If you go out of state and find a rifle you like, you will have to get it shipped to a gun store in MD.
If you move in from out of state with a rifle or shotgun, you will have to register it with the state.
Talking Points
This law inappropriately criminalize private sales of long guns even though such long guns are very seldom used in crime. This is confirmed by the Maryland 2015 UNIFORM CRIME REPORT issued annually by the State Police. For example, in 2014, a rifle (of any type) was used in one (1) murder in Maryland and a shotgun was used in seven (7). In 2015, a rifle was used in five (5) murders and Page 6 of 16 a shotgun used in six (6). By way of comparison and perspective, a knife was used in 79 murders in 2014 and 65 murders in 2015. A “blunt object” was used in 12 murders in 2014 and 17 murders in 2015. “Personal weapons” (hands and feet) were used in 13 murders in 2014 and 19 murders in 2015. FBI statistics show similar results nationwide. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u....e_data_table_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2010- 2014.xls. According to the latest data from the FBI (attached), in Maryland, there were 475 murders in 2017. Of those 475 murders, 5 (1%) were committed with rifles and 3 (0.6%) were committed with shotguns. In contrast, knives were used in 44 murders and hands and feet were used in 11 murders. Fifty (50) murders were committed in Maryland in 2017 using “other weapons.” In short, murders using long guns are not only exceedingly rare, they are the least used weapon for such crimes. Yet, nothing in these bills would address murders using knives or murders by using hands and feet or by “other weapons.”
It is already illegal to give a gun to a prohibited person. Gun owners in MD are responsible law abiding individuals who are careful to follow this law. For the purpose of keeping the law, private sales are only conducted after the seller has done their due diligence. Sellers have been trusted until now to ensure they are complying with law. Why is the legislature changing this? Why don't you trust the law abiding gun owners any more? There is no data that shows weapons sold private sales by law abiding citizens have been used in crime. The black market for guns will still be in full force, all this law does is punish law abiding citizens.
In terms of obtaining the LGQL, the total cost of these requirements is roughly $300.00. That does not count the cost of taking time off of work to obtain fingerprinting services, attending the training and go through the complex permit process.
There is no evidence whatsoever that requiring a purchaser to obtain a LGQL will result in fewer sales to disqualified persons. In the HQL litigation, currently in the federal court, the State Police have been unable to identify a single sale subject to the HQL restrictions that would not have been also prevented by pre-existing state or federal law. Not a single straw purchase, for example, was prevented. The LGQL is utterly unnecessary to prevent illegal sales by dealers.
This law is without precedent, even in the most anti-gun states. New York State, the home of ex-Mayor Bloomberg, does not require any permit at all to purchase a long gun. We know of no special or unique reason for imposing all these requirements on Marylanders when no other state has done so. In short, these bills are extreme by any measure. New Jersey, a notoriously anti-gun state, also requires a FOID card, but it does not impose any training requirement whatsoever for long gun sales, much less a requirement that the purchaser personally attend a 4- hour class given by a certified instructor, as required by these bills.
This bill imposes an unconscionable burden to those who have an immediate need for a firearm for defense of themselves and their families. The MD legislature has already restricted one’s ability to provide for his self defense with a handgun by enacting the HQL requirements and 7 day waiting period for handguns. Alarming as that was, many people shrugged that off, because they could still purchase a shotgun or rifle if needed. Many people actually prefer shotguns for home defense. Now, the state is stripping that from us as well, leaving people defenseless for a significant period of time. Under these bills, the Secretary has 30 days to approve a license and there is no provision for expedited treatment of licenses. Given the staffing levels at the State Police, these bills would effectively impose a minimum 30-day waiting period just to obtain a license. In discovery conducted in the HQL litigation, the State Police stated, in sworn testimony, that the average time for a HQL permit to be issued is 26-27 days and has often taken much longer. The number of long gun purchasers are orders of magnitude greater than the number of individuals buying handguns. The State Police would be inundated. The bills would then impose an additional 7-day waiting period on top of that 30-day period to actually purchase a long gun.
HB 96, SB 346 (Lending Ban)
This law will change the definition of transfer. Currently, the courts have held that a transfer only occurs when there is a permanent exchange. The new law redefines transfer as any exchange other than lending a firearm while you remain in the same place. I.E., you will still be able to let someone use your gun at the range, shooting competition, gun show as long as you are right there with them.
Talking Points
As stated above, law abiding gun owners are responsible and careful not to lend or sell firearms to a prohibited person. Gun owners should be trusted to use their judgement when it comes to their personal property. There is no data to support finding that lending between responsible, law abiding people has any effect on crime. Criminals don't follow the law and they will flout this law the same way they ignore the law that prohibits them from possessing a firearm currently.
Law abiding citizens routinely lend firearms to other responsible individuals for a variety of legitimate purposes, such as shooting competitions, hunting, testing out new firearms etc. This law will only inhibit responsible citizens and it will have no effect on violent crime.
We support SB 115. Currently, you need a “good and substantial” reason to carry a concealed firearm. Self-defense is not a valid reason unless you can show evidence of direct threats of violence. This law would circumvent the “good and substantial” reason requirement by stating that self defense is a “good and substantial reason” without requiring any additional evidence. Ultimately, this law would mean that anyone who is not otherwise prohibited can get a CCW, because everyone has a right to defend themselves.
We Support SB 114, This law will change the CCW application process so that the applicants and State police can deal with them more efficiently. Currently, the applicant has to complete the 16-hour firearm safety course first and then submit the application. The State police review the application to determine whether the person has a “good and substantial” reason, and then approves or disapproves. The problem is that the applicant has to spend all the time and money required to take the safety course, without any guarantee that the permit will be approved. The bill will fix that problem by allowing applicants to submit the application first and receive preliminary approval from MSP. Once they have that approval, the applicant will take the safety course and complete the application.
