If You have An Anderson Lower SBR - You need to pay attention to SB-39

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!

    • Register Log in
    A

    atblis

    Ultimate Member
    May 23, 2010
    2,031
    Let's suppose this passes. Let's suppose grandfathering is added. Let's suppose it applies to all Anderson Lowers (it appears their lowers are marked as AM-15).

    Does that mean that the now banned and grandfathered lowers could be be built into whatever configuration one wanted to build them?
     
    A

    Allen65

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 29, 2013
    7,146
    Anne Arundel County
    ironpony said:
    When did we let our Country’s second language become attorney?
    Click to expand...

    If it was legalese, at least someone would be able to understand what the wording truly meant. Instead, MD is stuck with laws written by people with a toxic combination of grammatical and cognitive disabilities.
     
    erwos

    erwos

    The Hebrew Hammer
    MDS Supporter
    Mar 25, 2009
    13,886
    Rockville, MD
    atblis said:
    Let's suppose this passes. Let's suppose grandfathering is added. Let's suppose it applies to all Anderson Lowers (it appears their lowers are marked as AM-15).

    Does that mean that the now banned and grandfathered lowers could be be built into whatever configuration one wanted to build them?
    Click to expand...
    Yes. IIRC, law is clear that a copy can't also be a copycat regardless of configuration. If they're going to play the game that your Anderson SBR is a copy, you should theoretically be able to reconfigure it into copycat config (eg, OAL < 29").
     
    Pinecone

    Pinecone

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 4, 2013
    28,175
    erwos said:
    Yes. IIRC, law is clear that a copy can't also be a copycat regardless of configuration. If they're going to play the game that your Anderson SBR is a copy, you should theoretically be able to reconfigure it into copycat config (eg, OAL < 29").
    Click to expand...

    Where do you get this? If so, the copycat provisions would not apply to ANY non-Colt AR-15. So sub 29" HBARs would be OK, as they are copies of the allowed Colt HBAR.

    The law states that if it is not BANNED, then the copycat provisions apply.
     
    erwos

    erwos

    The Hebrew Hammer
    MDS Supporter
    Mar 25, 2009
    13,886
    Rockville, MD
    "(2) “COPYCAT WEAPON” DOES NOT INCLUDE AN ASSAULT LONG GUN OR AN ASSAULT PISTOL."

    Right there in the text. The problem with your logic is that copycat weapon CAN include something that's not an assault long gun, which includes a Colt HBAR.
     
    calicojack

    calicojack

    American Sporting Rifle
    MDS Supporter
    May 29, 2018
    5,385
    Cuba on the Chesapeake
    erwos said:
    You're definitely the manufacturer. The question is whether it's considered a copy of a prohibited rifle. That is a problem right this second if you have a post-ban non-HBAR AR-15 SBR in 5.56, so I am not quite sure why people are suddenly freaking out about the Andersons in this context. Historically, the legislature never intended for SBRs to be included in the banned rifles list, hence why the SBR variants of certain rifles were omitted (example: Galil SAR).

    Personal thoughts:
    1. I doubt the bill is going anywhere. Frosh does not have a bunch of political leverage in his current position.
    2. If it does pass, it will be amended to have grandfathering.
    3. If it does pass, I still don't think SBRs or AR pistols are covered by the ban.
    Click to expand...

    Just to reinforce this; see this post about how MSP interprets the law WRT building an AR lower into an SBR. My read is the Anderson lower will not be a problem for an SBR build if SB39 passes.

    https://www.mdshooters.com/showpost.php?p=5761778&postcount=66
     
    ericoak

    ericoak

    don't drop Aboma on me
    Feb 20, 2010
    6,806
    Howard County
    erwos said:
    You're definitely the manufacturer. The question is whether it's considered a copy of a prohibited rifle. That is a problem right this second if you have a post-ban non-HBAR AR-15 SBR in 5.56, so I am not quite sure why people are suddenly freaking out about the Andersons in this context. Historically, the legislature never intended for SBRs to be included in the banned rifles list, hence why the SBR variants of certain rifles were omitted (example: Galil SAR).

    Personal thoughts:
    1. I doubt the bill is going anywhere. Frosh does not have a bunch of political leverage in his current position.
    2. If it does pass, it will be amended to have grandfathering.
    3. If it does pass, I still don't think SBRs or AR pistols are covered by the ban.
    Click to expand...

    Well if AK SBRs are legal, which I think they are, why would a non HBAR AR15 SBR be a problem?

    Or maybe I’m misunderstanding what you are saying.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
    Gun Commander Training Maryland

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,368
    Messages
    7,279,047
    Members
    33,442
    Latest member
    PotomacRiver

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom