A visit from the Maryland State Police

Brooklyn · Sep 12, 2013

fabsroman said:
lol - you aren't in a position to concede anything until you are in Court. Yeah, we can all talk the talk, but until you get charged and are in Court, you can take the position that SB281 is unconsitutional, taxes are unconstitutional, etc. Things change when the MSP, ATF, IRS, etc. are knocking at the door.

Me, I am not pushing the envelope on anything. I'll abide by what the MSP says until this all gets figured out in Court. Wonder what happens if people get charged and jailed on some of this stuff and then it is determined to be unconstitutional down the road when somebody else decides to take it through the appeal process.

Look no one needs to be charged with anything to get to court. Every thingi am talking about is civil. No jail no police..

MD can NOT tell a company that only they can sell a product. That's what happens when you say colt only. Any non colt manufacture has standing.. Now... Please stop implying that I intend to break the law. I find that offensive. There are ways to get a day in court without breaking the law or even getting close.
This is what we are going to do. Very carefully.

Do not continue to imply that I am advocating illegal activity.
Just because you do not see a way to make a court challenge does not mean it does not exist.

fabsroman · Sep 12, 2013

Brooklyn said:
Look no one needs to be charged with anything to get to court. Every thingi am talking about is civil. No jail no police..

MD can NOT tell a company that only they can sell a product. That's what happens when you say colt only. Any non colt manufacture has standing.. Now... Please stop implying that I intend to break the law. I find that offensive. There are ways to get a day in court without breaking the law or even getting close.
This is what we are going to do. Very carefully.

Do not continue to imply that I am advocating illegal activity.
Just because you do not see a way to make a court challenge does not mean it does not exist.

Ah, so you are going to take care of it before anybody gets arrested. I see. You have this all under control. Who is setting up the court case as we speak for the PBJ issue? How about the firearms that MSP is now considering regulated, and therefore, banned after October 1, 2013.

Please. Try not to come across as though you have this all covered without anybody getting charged criminally. There are so many people out there that do not know the law that will be charged criminally before you or anybody else can even think of what to file.

Wait until the MSP or the AG decides to stop being nice about all the "HBAR" rifles purchased prior to October 1, 2013 cash & carry that were not Colt HBAR Sporters and they start arresting people for not applying to purchase them.

We shall see on October 1, 2013 how many manufacturers are willing to fight this versus just writing Maryland off. There are plenty of retailers already putting disclaimers up regarding Maryland. I've seen it all over Gunbroker.

If you think people will not be getting arrested over this stuff and ALL the issues will be taken care of by the manufacturers, NRA, MSI, etc., you are kidding yourself and others. We shall see what the lawsuit looks like on or about October 1, 2013 that is in the works.

mac1_131 · Sep 12, 2013

fabsroman said:
Ah, so you are going to take care of it before anybody gets arrested. I see. You have this all under control. Who is setting up the court case as we speak for the PBJ issue? How about the firearms that MSP is now considering regulated, and therefore, banned after October 1, 2013.

Please. Try not to come across as though you have this all covered without anybody getting charged criminally. There are so many people out there that do not know the law that will be charged criminally before you or anybody else can even think of what to file.

Wait until the MSP or the AG decides to stop being nice about all the "HBAR" rifles purchased prior to October 1, 2013 cash & carry that were not Colt HBAR Sporters and they start arresting people for not applying to purchase them.

We shall see on October 1, 2013 how many manufacturers are willing to fight this versus just writing Maryland off. There are plenty of retailers already putting disclaimers up regarding Maryland. I've seen it all over Gunbroker.

If you think people will not be getting arrested over this stuff and ALL the issues will be taken care of by the manufacturers, NRA, MSI, etc., you are kidding yourself and others. We shall see what the lawsuit looks like on or about October 1, 2013 that is in the works.

You've got it backwards. If anyone gets in legal trouble over the HBAR mess, it will be the selling dealer, not the purchaser. The law is written to regulate the sale end not the purchase end of the transaction.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

fabsroman · Sep 12, 2013

mac1_131 said:
You've got it backwards. If anyone gets in legal trouble over the HBAR mess, it will be the selling dealer, not the purchaser. The law is written to regulate the sale end not the purchase end of the transaction.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

I do? The law seems to impose a duty on the firearm applicant as far as regulated firearms are concerned. The question is whether the firearm is regulated? If it is, you have to adhere to Pub Safety 5-1XX. If not, then Pub Safety 5-2XX.

MD Code Pub. Safety. 5-118 Firearm application (Maryland Code (2013 Edition))

(a) In general. -- A firearm applicant shall:

(1) submit to a licensee or designated law enforcement agency a firearm application on the form that the Secretary provides; and

(2) pay to the licensee or designated law enforcement agency an application fee of $ 10.

(b) Required information. -- A firearm application shall contain:

(1) the firearm applicant's name, address, Social Security number, place and date of birth, height, weight, race, eye and hair color, signature, driver's or photographic identification soundex number, occupation, and regulated firearm information for each regulated firearm to be purchased, rented, or transferred;

(2) the date and time that the firearm applicant delivered the completed firearm application to the prospective seller or transferor; and

(3) a statement by the firearm applicant under the penalty of perjury that the firearm applicant:

(i) is at least 21 years old;

(ii) has never been convicted of a disqualifying crime;

(iii) has never been convicted of a violation classified as a common law crime and received a term of imprisonment of more than 2 years;

(iv) is not a fugitive from justice;

(v) is not a habitual drunkard;

(vi) is not addicted to a controlled dangerous substance or is not a habitual user;

(vii) has never spent more than 30 consecutive days in a medical institution for treatment of a mental disorder, unless a physician's certificate issued within 30 days before the date of application is attached to the application, certifying that the firearm applicant is capable of possessing a regulated firearm without undue danger to the firearm applicant or to another;

(viii) is not a respondent against whom a current non ex parte civil protective order has been entered under § 4-506 of the Family Law Article ;

(ix) if under the age of 30 years at the time of application, has not been adjudicated delinquent by a juvenile court for an act that would be a disqualifying crime if committed by an adult; and

(x) subject to § 5-119 of this subtitle, has completed a certified firearms safety training course that the Police Training Commission conducts without charge or that meets the standards that the Police Training Commission establishes under § 3-207 of this article.

MD Code Pub. Safety. 5-143 Knowing participation in violation of subtitle (Maryland Code (2013 Edition))

(a) Prohibited. -- Except as otherwise provided in this subtitle, a dealer or other person may not:

(1) knowingly participate in the illegal sale, rental, transfer, purchase, possession, or receipt of a regulated firearm in violation of this subtitle; or

(2) knowingly violate § 5-142 of this subtitle.

(b) Penalty. -- A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction is subject to imprisonment not exceeding 5 years or a fine not exceeding $ 10,000 or both.

(c) Separate crime. -- Each violation of this section is a separate crime.

Wonder how it would fly if I said I did not understand the law and was relying on the dealer to tell me what is and is not regulated.

Wish I had the legislative history behind the "Bushmaster semi-auto rifle" reference in the Assault Long Gun list, an opinion from the AG regarding LR-308 rifles, the MSP position on LR-308 rifles, etc.

ShallNotInfringe · Sep 12, 2013

mac1_131 said:
You've got it backwards. If anyone gets in legal trouble over the HBAR mess, it will be the selling dealer, not the purchaser. The law is written to regulate the sale end not the purchase end of the transaction.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

Isn't it the purchasers that are getting the visits?

ObsceneJesster · Sep 12, 2013

I said it earlier in this thread and I'll say it again. If you purchased an HBAR cash and carry and it does not say "Colt HBAR Sporter" on it then you have two choices.

1. Go to your local MSP Barack prior to October 1st and do a voluntary registration.

2. Don't register it and risk being a criminal after October 1st. The MSP may pay you a visit and confiscate the rifle you illegally acquired in their eyes.

It's not like registering it now is going to matter. The government already knows you have it. There is no reason to risk not registering it with Maryland.

DON'T SAY I DIDN'T WARN YOU!

mac1_131 · Sep 12, 2013

Don't see how october 1st has anything to do with it.

If what you say is true, it was clearly purchased before the ban date.

Only time will tell here. Right now there is conflicting info if MSP has flip-flopped or not on HBARs.

CLEARLY they said they were OK before. If they have flip-flopped, there was no intent as the dealer and the purchaser followed MSP guidance that was in place and may or not still be in place.

Seems the worst they would do is have you 77R it, which is bad enough...

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

ObsceneJesster · Sep 12, 2013

mac1_131 said:
Don't see how october 1st has anything to do with it.

If what you say is true, it was clearly purchased before the ban date.

Only time will tell here. Right now there is conflicting info if MSP has flip-flopped or not on HBARs.

CLEARLY they said they were OK before. If they have flip-flopped, there was no intent as the dealer and the purchaser followed MSP guidance that was in place and may or not still be in place.

Seems the worst they would do is have you 77R it, which is bad enough...

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

Seems like you have to much trust for this state. When they come knocking on your door after October 1st, who's to say they even allow you to register it. They may tell you that it should have been registered prior to purchasing it. They may tell you that they can't register it now and the only outlawed rifles they will register are ones brought into the state by people who moved here.

Either way, I wouldn't take the chance. This state is to damn slimey.

Brooklyn · Sep 12, 2013

fabsroman said:
Ah, so you are going to take care of it before anybody gets arrested. I see. You have this all under control. Who is setting up the court case as we speak for the PBJ issue? How about the firearms that MSP is now considering regulated, and therefore, banned after October 1, 2013.

Please. Try not to come across as though you have this all covered without anybody getting charged criminally. There are so many people out there that do not know the law that will be charged criminally before you or anybody else can even think of what to file.

Wait until the MSP or the AG decides to stop being nice about all the "HBAR" rifles purchased prior to October 1, 2013 cash & carry that were not Colt HBAR Sporters and they start arresting people for not applying to purchase them.

We shall see on October 1, 2013 how many manufacturers are willing to fight this versus just writing Maryland off. There are plenty of retailers already putting disclaimers up regarding Maryland. I've seen it all over Gunbroker.

If you think people will not be getting arrested over this stuff and ALL the issues will be taken care of by the manufacturers, NRA, MSI, etc., you are kidding yourself and others. We shall see what the lawsuit looks like on or about October 1, 2013 that is in the works.

Look All I am saying is that I will not tolerate any more insinuation that I am condoning, advocating or inciting illegal activity.

IS THAT CLEAR.

Now you can bay at the moon and declare the end of civilization if you like.

As far as all the folks that do not know about the law. Well what the hell Have we been trying to do for the last year?

We can comply with the law and fight it at the same time. And we can educate or we can bellyache.

I have decided.

Brooklyn · Sep 12, 2013

fabsroman said:
I do? The law seems to impose a duty on the firearm applicant as far as regulated firearms are concerned. The question is whether the firearm is regulated? If it is, you have to adhere to Pub Safety 5-1XX. If not, then Pub Safety 5-2XX.

MD Code Pub. Safety. 5-118 Firearm application (Maryland Code (2013 Edition))

(a) In general. -- A firearm applicant shall:

(1) submit to a licensee or designated law enforcement agency a firearm application on the form that the Secretary provides; and

(2) pay to the licensee or designated law enforcement agency an application fee of $ 10.

(b) Required information. -- A firearm application shall contain:

(1) the firearm applicant's name, address, Social Security number, place and date of birth, height, weight, race, eye and hair color, signature, driver's or photographic identification soundex number, occupation, and regulated firearm information for each regulated firearm to be purchased, rented, or transferred;

(2) the date and time that the firearm applicant delivered the completed firearm application to the prospective seller or transferor; and

(3) a statement by the firearm applicant under the penalty of perjury that the firearm applicant:

(i) is at least 21 years old;

(ii) has never been convicted of a disqualifying crime;

(iii) has never been convicted of a violation classified as a common law crime and received a term of imprisonment of more than 2 years;

(iv) is not a fugitive from justice;

(v) is not a habitual drunkard;

(vi) is not addicted to a controlled dangerous substance or is not a habitual user;

(vii) has never spent more than 30 consecutive days in a medical institution for treatment of a mental disorder, unless a physician's certificate issued within 30 days before the date of application is attached to the application, certifying that the firearm applicant is capable of possessing a regulated firearm without undue danger to the firearm applicant or to another;

(viii) is not a respondent against whom a current non ex parte civil protective order has been entered under § 4-506 of the Family Law Article ;

(ix) if under the age of 30 years at the time of application, has not been adjudicated delinquent by a juvenile court for an act that would be a disqualifying crime if committed by an adult; and

(x) subject to § 5-119 of this subtitle, has completed a certified firearms safety training course that the Police Training Commission conducts without charge or that meets the standards that the Police Training Commission establishes under § 3-207 of this article.

MD Code Pub. Safety. 5-143 Knowing participation in violation of subtitle (Maryland Code (2013 Edition))

(a) Prohibited. -- Except as otherwise provided in this subtitle, a dealer or other person may not:

(1) knowingly participate in the illegal sale, rental, transfer, purchase, possession, or receipt of a regulated firearm in violation of this subtitle; or

(2) knowingly violate § 5-142 of this subtitle.

(b) Penalty. -- A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction is subject to imprisonment not exceeding 5 years or a fine not exceeding $ 10,000 or both.

(c) Separate crime. -- Each violation of this section is a separate crime.

Wonder how it would fly if I said I did not understand the law and was relying on the dealer to tell me what is and is not regulated.

Wish I had the legislative history behind the "Bushmaster semi-auto rifle" reference in the Assault Long Gun list, an opinion from the AG regarding LR-308 rifles, the MSP position on LR-308 rifles, etc.

Do you think the word 'Knowingly' may have any bearing on this? As a lawyer do you think relying on the expert written opinion of the MSP, the agency charged ' in the first instance' with determining the factual basis for declaring a firearm regulated or not, might create an affirmative defense to the claim that they knowingly violated the law.

Now if they rescind the opinion and you continue to behave as you have in the past that's a different matter.

altima98 · Sep 12, 2013

This sucks and I just picked up a Saiga 308 C&C (4473)from MD FFL, I guess I will having coffee brewing and bagels every morning for the next month just in case... :innocent0

Ab_Normal · Sep 13, 2013

altima98 said:
This sucks and I just picked up a Saiga 308 C&C (4473)from MD FFL, I guess I will having coffee brewing and donuts every morning for the next month just in case...

FIFY.

altima98 · Sep 13, 2013

Ab_Normal said:
FIFY.

I was trying to be more progressive and not stereotype them...

, besides I would have eaten all the doughnuts...

Pinecone · Sep 13, 2013

ELEMENT94 said:
I have always thought this would eventually happen. The law says Colt Sporter HBAR . Without the rollmark you are screwed. Barrel profile doesn't matter, its on the unregulated part anyway. Been in several arguments here about it.

Nowhere does the law say it has to be marked.

Also, the LAW states above the list, applying to the entire list, the imitations are included. They cannot say an imitation of an M1A is regulated using that wording, and then say the a imitation of an HBAR is regulated because an imitation is not allowed.

swinokur · Sep 13, 2013

This to policy seems to comport with MSP's new aggressive stance on AR's. They are also telling FFL's at the meetings that previously non regulated SBR's are now considered copies and will be banned after Oct.1

Inigoes · Sep 13, 2013

eruby said:
Not sure if it's been answered in this thread, but why did ATF contact the MSP? Unless the ATF is going to start contacting the MSP everytime they come across an out of state FFL's sale to a MD resident, I don't see buying an HBAR out of state being a problem.

The in-state HBAR purchaes could definitely cause trouble for citizens, but if you bought, say, a Windham HBAR in Wyoming (not getting into the 'adjacent state' thing) of the same model being sold by an IP here, absent crimninal activity by the Wyoming FFL (found on audit) I don't see MSP ever knowing about the Wyoming bought HBAR.

Which is contrary to the BATFE rules about residency.

psucobra96 · Sep 13, 2013

MSP is making it up as they go now and changing the rules. Time for a real fight in court.

swinokur · Sep 13, 2013

An FFL in Fredericksburg was being audited and a sale to MD residents was turned over to MSP to investigate.

Please note an audit is not an investigation in the criminal sense.

Inigoes · Sep 13, 2013

swinokur said:
An FFL in Fredericksburg was being audited and a sale to MD residents was turned over to MSP to investigate.

Please note an audit is not an investigation in the criminal sense.

At least the MSP has set a precedent.

If a "deemed" regulated rifle is purchased out of state, they have to afford you an avenue to right the perceived wrong.

hvymax · Sep 13, 2013

mac1_131 said:
Don't see how october 1st has anything to do with it.

If what you say is true, it was clearly purchased before the ban date.

Only time will tell here. Right now there is conflicting info if MSP has flip-flopped or not on HBARs.

CLEARLY they said they were OK before. If they have flip-flopped, there was no intent as the dealer and the purchaser followed MSP guidance that was in place and may or not still be in place.

Seems the worst they would do is have you 77R it, which is bad enough...

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

No the worst is they find you in violation of the law and charge you with an exclusionary offense and take all of your guns.

A visit from the Maryland State Police

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

I stand with John Locke.

Ultimate Member

MSI Executive Member

Ultimate Member

Lil Firecracker

Ultimate Member

MSI Executive Member

Ultimate Member

I stand with John Locke.

I stand with John Locke.

Active Member

Ab_member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

In a State of Bliss

Head'n for the hills

Ultimate Member

In a State of Bliss

Head'n for the hills

Banned

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics