non regulated firearms tracking in MD

I am asking because I don't know the correct answer..

If the HBAR confiscation bill is passed and signed, how would the state know who has purchased one since 10/13 without physically looking at the gun and contacting either the ATF or manufacturer to determine when it was made or sold? Unless someone voluntarily tells law enforcement where or when they bought it that is the only way I can figure how they would find that information. If you are approached by a LEO who asks to see the firearm you have the right to say no...so unless you have done something else illegal, how will they get the serial number to find out the sales date?

WC

They will be able to see all the people who bought lowers with 77R at least

Like most of their ******** laws, they will depend on voluntary compliance for the most part

I can think of several ways "Red Flag" Law, tipped off. Personally, I believe if they pass such a law they will have to grandfather everyone from the date enacted backwards. And think for a moment if the overall affect of data mining if you have access or create access for certain information. I dare not say more.

squaregrouper said:

WC

Click to expand...

not everyone who might have an interest in this can see the WC.

When have lawmakers ever cared about the enforcement of the infringements they create? It's not them having to confront people exercising their 2a to enforce the infringements. They can pass whatever tyrannical burden they want and let other people figure that piece out. At worst, I guess they figure the laws can act as add-ons for anyone to be found exercising their 2a rights while breaking other laws. In general, I feel like the politicians that are full anti-2a are comfortable allowing time and attrition to fight their battles for them...without a need for forced confiscation to get the same results. They're pretty good at the long-game, relative to us. For those that are just interested in scoring democratic political points, they can pass something and claim they've done something to "fight the scourge of gun violence plaguing our children and minorities", without actually doing anything that would actually address the roots of violence in society(because those steps are complicated, expensive, and take a long time)

smokey0118 said:

When have lawmakers ever cared about the enforcement of the infringements they create? It's not them having to confront people exercising their 2a to enforce the infringements. They can pass whatever tyrannical burden they want and let other people figure that piece out. At worst, I guess they figure the laws can act as add-ons for anyone to be found exercising their 2a rights while breaking other laws. In general, I feel like the politicians that are full anti-2a are comfortable allowing time and attrition to fight their battles for them...without a need for forced confiscation to get the same results. They're pretty good at the long-game, relative to us. For those that are just interested in scoring democratic political points, they can pass something and claim they've done something to "fight the scourge of gun violence plaguing our children and minorities", without actually doing anything that would actually address the roots of violence in society(because those steps are complicated, expensive, and take a long time)

Click to expand...

That's sort of what I was thinking, I was just wondering if there was some back door method for the state to compile a list of who has purchased what. Several years ago my Father (who was a retired LEO and took a 2nd career as a 911 operator/dispatcher) brought me a printed list of every firearm I had ever purchased from an FFL including guns I had purchased in Mississippi and South Carolina while in the military. Every single one..And I know that NICS only asks "long gun or hand gun" so short of getting their hands on the FFL logs of every gun store I ever bought from, I don't understand how it was done.

Could you put a hbar bought in 2010 onto a lower that was bought in 2016? and be legal.

Could you put an hbar bought in 2016 onto a lower that was bought in 2010? and be legal?

If you have an hbar upper sitting in your basement not attached to a lower it's just a part. So, If you put a blackout upper on your AR lower to be legit would you get in trouble for the possession of the hbar upper that sits in your basement?

I mean, you can have a 10 inch barrel with a pistol brace and a rifle stock not attached, but in your basement and you don't have an sbr, will the possession of a 223/556 upper be illegal or only when mated with a lower to actually make a gun. Only asking because it gets into the parts can become illegal very easily realm.


to answer:
***
***
***
I was just wondering if there was some back door method for the state to compile a list of who has purchased what.
***
***
***




I guess the state could write a program and have it used by visa, mastercard etc.... that would flag certain purchases. Doubtful as the cost would be high and then you have the enforcement part of it that you have to deal with but someone (might have even been Muleskinner) mentioned in another thread that they would not confiscate, but give an ultimatum like turn it in by x,y,z date or we freeze accounts, suspend drivers license etc....

Running credit card script and getting cooperation from Credit card companies would be the most thorough way I'd imagine when it comes to buying an upper.

For anyone who thinks im giving them ideas, don't think this would not be able to be come up with by someone 10x dumber than I am.

So many go with so much electronic. Look how much electronic media has been brought to light for things in the past and the search features for supercomputing become better and better as time progresses.

amazon, google, etc....are right now are literally fighting/racing to get a lock on getting rid of your keys to get into your house in favor of having an app that unlocks your door upon bluetooth proximity knowing you walk up. People don't know a days look at it as an invasion of privacy on the while (i do, but many dont) they look at it as a convenience.

Everyone has seen stuff about people being chipped, some companies have programs for it where they pay for the chip so it clocks you in and out etc. Tbh, that is 110% unnecessary. People are already chipped with gps. They all carry phones everywhere they go.

Just sayin, from a tech standpoint, it would not be to hard to find out where and when purchases are made.

Post 2013 all long gun sales are cash and carry so the state would have to have access to 4473 forms or sales invoices from FFL holders (if store bought). The state has no basis in law to do that without a legitimate law enforcement purpose...and a fishing expedition ain't one). There would be no way the state would know about face-to-face sales between individuals.

For any member of law enforcement to come to your door and start asking to see what you own, they can certainly be within the law to ask...you would not be required to give any information beyond being polite and declining to provide answers. Beyond that, they would need probable cause and a search warrant.

TexDefender said:

I can think of several ways "Red Flag" Law, tipped off. Personally, I believe if they pass such a law they will have to grandfather everyone from the date enacted backwards. And think for a moment if the overall affect of data mining if you have access or create access for certain information. I dare not say more.

Click to expand...

That doesn't necessarily stop states, knowing that challenges will takes years and $$$ while they enforce the illegal/unconstitutional laws.

Muleskinner said:

not everyone who might have an interest in this can see the WC.

Click to expand...

I think that's probably his reason for suggesting it.

The "pay to play" idea goes over like a lead balloon too. I've regrettably suggested (at least) a premium membership as a way to raise funds and also keep a portion of the content semi-private'ish. I got backlash from bottom all the way to the literal top (at the time).

TheOriginalMexicanBob said:

Post 2013 all long gun sales are cash and carry so the state would have to have access to 4473 forms or sales invoices from FFL holders (if store bought). The state has no basis in law to do that without a legitimate law enforcement purpose...and a fishing expedition ain't one). There would be no way the state would know about face-to-face sales between individuals.

For any member of law enforcement to come to your door and start asking to see what you own, they can certainly be within the law to ask...you would not be required to give any information beyond being polite and declining to provide answers. Beyond that, they would need probable cause and a search warrant.

Click to expand...

Correct. And I highly doubt that you at one point purchased an AR lower on a 77r would be probable cause. Even under the new law as proposed, there are many legal configurations that could be built. Even if there weren’t, the lower itself isn’t illegal. So I wanted a fireplace decoration.

There we bolt action uppers, pistol builds, non-5.56 caliber builds, piston builds, etc. all perfectly legal. If police were able to get a warrant it would possibly, probably be on such thin legal grounds you could get it quashed unless they had some other actual evidence that you had in fact assembled a banned configuration.

TheOriginalMexicanBob said:

Post 2013 all long gun sales are cash and carry so the state would have to have access to 4473 forms or sales invoices from FFL holders (if store bought). The state has no basis in law to do that without a legitimate law enforcement purpose...and a fishing expedition ain't one). There would be no way the state would know about face-to-face sales between individuals.

For any member of law enforcement to come to your door and start asking to see what you own, they can certainly be within the law to ask...you would not be required to give any information beyond being polite and declining to provide answers. Beyond that, they would need probable cause and a search warrant.

Click to expand...

There are other ways to obtain LGS sales data, as was mentioned above. And it's not hard to get to. Specific sale data is sold each and every day.

BeoBill said:

There are other ways to obtain LGS sales data, as was mentioned above. And it's not hard to get to. Specific sale data is sold each and every day.

Click to expand...

An FFL conducting business in MD in regulated firearms needs an MD Dealer's License, too. MDSP can audit the books of any MD licensed dealer at any time as part of an investigation, but is actually required by law to do a complete inspection at least once every two years. Even w/o 4473s, the FFL's bound book and other MD-mandated transaction records will contain a record of every transaction, including of non-regulated firearms. Make, model, caliber, buyer's info, serial number, date of purchase, are all part of that record set.

No point being cagey about it, MDSP knows what their authorities are already. Anything you bought from any regulated firearms dealer in-state either is known to, or can be easily discovered by, the State of MD.

Allen65 said:

An FFL conducting business in MD in regulated firearms needs an MD Dealer's License, too. MDSP can audit the books of any MD licensed dealer at any time as part of an investigation, but is actually required by law to do a complete inspection at least once every two years. Even w/o 4473s, the FFL's bound book and other MD-mandated transaction records will contain a record of every transaction, including of non-regulated firearms. Make, model, caliber, buyer's info, serial number, date of purchase, are all part of that record set.

No point being cagey about it, MDSP knows what their authorities are already. Anything you bought from any regulated firearms dealer in-state either is known to, or can be easily discovered by, the State of MD.

Click to expand...

^^ You said it for me. If MSP really wanted to, they could audit who'd bought what legally based on dealer bound books.

Let's be realistic though: Annapolis doesn't intend to send—nor would MSP likely comply with—a door to door confiscation campaign. That would be really bad PR. The Democrats are more than happy to keep making things illegal knowing that the majority of legal gun owners won't willingly hand over their firearms, and will let the courts fight it out at the taxpayer's expense. The fact that they make law-abiding gun owners criminals overnight is just a bonus. What they are focused on is shutting down any possibility of a future sale and a slow erosion of gun culture by increasing restriction.

squaregrouper said:

WC

Click to expand...

Muleskinner said:

not everyone who might have an interest in this can see the WC.

Click to expand...

PJDiesel said:

I think that's probably his reason for suggesting it.

The "pay to play" idea goes over like a lead balloon too. I've regrettably suggested (at least) a premium membership as a way to raise funds and also keep a portion of the content semi-private'ish. I got backlash from bottom all the way to the literal top (at the time).

Click to expand...

BINGO!!!
Anyone on MDS that thinks the antis don't get intel from this site are either fooling themselves or are fools. For some reason, we keep handing them all the info they need to further their agenda. On Thursday, there were 400+ guests reading the HBAR thread at the same time. That was not 400 random readers.

ETA- As I type this, there are 8 members and 3 guests watching this thread. During "bankers hours" that number may realistically be 8 members and 400 guests.

PJDiesel said:

The "pay to play" idea goes over like a lead balloon too. I've regrettably suggested (at least) a premium membership as a way to raise funds and also keep a portion of the content semi-private'ish. I got backlash from bottom all the way to the literal top (at the time).

Click to expand...

It might not get you into a private forum, but there's already a mechanism to donate funds to MDS for the irreplaceable service it provides to the MD pro-2A Community:
https://www.mdshooters.com/payments.php

Allen65 said:

It might not get you into a private forum, but there's already a mechanism to donate funds to MDS for the irreplaceable service it provides to the MD pro-2A Community:

https://www.mdshooters.com/payments.php

Click to expand...

I don't have an issue with donating, I've suggested ways (years back) of how to really push people to buck up. Got schit from all walks of life for even suggesting it.

Now, why having a tighter sub forum for the MGA stuff at least while it's all fluid is seen as a bad thing, that I'm not sure of.

500 times people have spouted off about HBARS, etc..... no surprise we're heading where we are. "The lessor of two evils" premise is really working out well for us in the ballot box.

PJDiesel said:

I don't have an issue with donating, I've suggested ways (years back) of how to really push people to buck up. Got schit from all walks of life for even suggesting it.

Now, why having a tighter sub forum for the MGA stuff at least while it's all fluid is seen as a bad thing, that I'm not sure of.

500 times people have spouted off about HBARS, etc..... no surprise we're heading where we are. "The lessor of two evils" premise is really working out well for us in the ballot box.

Click to expand...

There's an interest balancing act with dissemination of information. If we become a small, cliquish group that only communicates with each other, we'll never gain new members and lose the external support we need to survive and thrive. Serving as an open source of firearms knowledge, including how to comply with laws, is key to gaining and maintaining new interest.

OTOH, there are antis lurking around who will use what we say to come up with new ways to make our lives anxiety-filled and miserable in order to get us comply with their idea of an "ideal citizen".

The tough thing to figure out is where is the middle ground.