20190314 - HB740 JUD Amendments

PowPow · Mar 16, 2019

As amended on 3/15, went to floor on 3/16. Two floor amendments offered, one by Del Kipke and one by Del Mautz, both failed. Bill ordered printed for third reading. Keep the pressure on. I really liked Kipke's amendment and presentation today. He was great!

budman93 · Mar 16, 2019

PowPow said:
As amended on 3/15, went to floor on 3/16. Two floor amendments offered, one by Del Kipke and one by Del Mautz, both failed. Bill ordered printed for third reading. Keep the pressure on. I really liked Kipke's amendment and presentation today. He was great!

Are the amendments the same as the first post in this thread from 3/14 or are they different?

fabsroman · Mar 16, 2019

Kicken Wing said:
I did serialized ar-lowers pre-2013 when nobody knew what the hell was going to happen. Fingers crossed, the 80 percent thing simmers down. I am hitting Annapolis next legislative session. I did all that I could from my corner of the universe this year. I am curious to see what next year brings.

Curiosity killed the cat.

I hope next year brings nothing. When the little one finally gets into kindergarten in 5 years, visits to Annapolis on weekdays will become a lot easier. Granted, I hope the only reason I will need to visit Annapolis the first quarter of the year is to have lunch with MDS guys and gals, meet with clients, or be in court. This General Assembly stuff is getting ridiculous. You would think they would learn from other areas that they try to emulate (e.g., New York has had so much money leave the state that it has to cut its budget by 25% at the minimum), look at the IRS map of money leaving the areas that Maryland tries to emulate, etc. However, that just does not happen for some reason.

It is like people from MoCo relocating to western Howard County because MoCo is a craphole now, and they bring their failed policies here. How is it that they cannot see that their political policies are what destroyed MoCo? It really boggles my mind. Affluent counties and affluent cities (e.g., Detroit) in the US go the way of Rome, and nobody is getting any wiser. Might as well accomplish it on a national level.

Time to go clean some guns and then get some work done while my head isn't pounding.

PowPow · Mar 16, 2019

budman93 said:
Are the amendments the same as the first post in this thread from 3/14 or are they different?

I think so. However, they have the third read copy ready for your reading.

http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2019RS/bills/hb/hb0740t.pdf

lazarus · Mar 16, 2019

My question is what is manufacturered? At any step? Or just the final steps? Because most 80% probably had a computer involved at some point in the mold process for polymer ones or in the casting/forging process for metal ones. Especially ones that have limited milling or drilling done.

At the very least how could you know? All you’d know is the final completion steps from 80% to firearm. Unless you were the guy building a sten gun from hardware store parts on your drill press.

And heck, can you even rely on the ATF submitted documentation on an 80%? I’ve seen some where the manufacturer describes it as something like a plastic mold and ATF firearm branch responds back “approved, not a firearm because these key features are missing. BTW we think you used a CNC machine even though you said it was only produced with a mold”.

Mark75H · Mar 16, 2019

fabsroman said:
Curiosity killed the cat.

I hope next year brings nothing. When the little one finally gets into kindergarten in 5 years, visits to Annapolis on weekdays will become a lot easier. Granted, I hope the only reason I will need to visit Annapolis the first quarter of the year is to have lunch with MDS guys and gals, meet with clients, or be in court. This General Assembly stuff is getting ridiculous. You would think they would learn from other areas that they try to emulate (e.g., New York has had so much money leave the state that it has to cut its budget by 25% at the minimum), look at the IRS map of money leaving the areas that Maryland tries to emulate, etc. However, that just does not happen for some reason.

It is like people from MoCo relocating to western Howard County because MoCo is a craphole now, and they bring their failed policies here. How is it that they cannot see that their political policies are what destroyed MoCo? It really boggles my mind. Affluent counties and affluent cities (e.g., Detroit) in the US go the way of Rome, and nobody is getting any wiser. Might as well accomplish it on a national level.

Time to go clean some guns and then get some work done while my head isn't pounding.

In the hinderlands we have always seen it as a population density problem. Population density begets problems that cannot be resolved. Athens, Rome, Paris, Chicago, Baltimore ... no one has ever come up with a working solution.

Kicken Wing · Mar 16, 2019

fabsroman said:
Curiosity killed the cat.

I hope next year brings nothing. When the little one finally gets into kindergarten in 5 years, visits to Annapolis on weekdays will become a lot easier. Granted, I hope the only reason I will need to visit Annapolis the first quarter of the year is to have lunch with MDS guys and gals, meet with clients, or be in court. This General Assembly stuff is getting ridiculous. You would think they would learn from other areas that they try to emulate (e.g., New York has had so much money leave the state that it has to cut its budget by 25% at the minimum), look at the IRS map of money leaving the areas that Maryland tries to emulate, etc. However, that just does not happen for some reason.

It is like people from MoCo relocating to western Howard County because MoCo is a craphole now, and they bring their failed policies here. How is it that they cannot see that their political policies are what destroyed MoCo? It really boggles my mind. Affluent counties and affluent cities (e.g., Detroit) in the US go the way of Rome, and nobody is getting any wiser. Might as well accomplish it on a national level.

Time to go clean some guns and then get some work done while my head isn't pounding.

10-4 to all of that. It IS mind boggling. Their policies are largely based on pure ignorance and a refusal to see why they have failed. Doubling down on losing hand gets people nowhere unless you are running for re-election in Maryland.

fabsroman · Mar 16, 2019

lazarus said:
My question is what is manufacturered? At any step? Or just the final steps? Because most 80% probably had a computer involved at some point in the mold process for polymer ones or in the casting/forging process for metal ones. Especially ones that have limited milling or drilling done.

At the very least how could you know? All you’d know is the final completion steps from 80% to firearm. Unless you were the guy building a sten gun from hardware store parts on your drill press.

And heck, can you even rely on the ATF submitted documentation on an 80%? I’ve seen some where the manufacturer describes it as something like a plastic mold and ATF firearm branch responds back “approved, not a firearm because these key features are missing. BTW we think you used a CNC machine even though you said it was only produced with a mold”.

Well, up until the receiver is over 80% complete, you have not manufactured a firearm yet. Once the receiver is 80.0000000000001% complete, then you have yourself a firearm. The question is going to be whether the first 80% is considered part of the manufacturing process.

I was going to say that one could get some 80% receivers and finish them up before this law goes into effect, but that would do no good since manufacturing the firearm with a computer-aided fabrication device isn't the crime, possession, etc. is.

So, forged 80% looks like it might be the way to go. Have to wonder though if there is a computer used during the fabrication of a forged 80% receiver.

https://www.80-lower.com/collections/forged-lower-receiver/

So, two questions:

1) Is the initial 80% of the manufacturing process on a "paperweight" taken into account in the manufacturing of a firearm, and

2) Do forged 80% "paperweights" use a computer-aided fabrication device anywhere in the process?

Once again, a law with a bunch of grey in it.

fabsroman · Mar 16, 2019

Mark75H said:
In the hinderlands we have always seen it as a population density problem. Population density begets problems that cannot be resolved. Athens, Rome, Paris, Chicago, Baltimore ... no one has ever come up with a working solution.

Sure they have come up with a solution that works. I can actually think of two solutions.

1) Leave the area

2) War

Both seem to fix the problem eventually. Not a great solution, but it does have a result.

mac1_131 · Mar 16, 2019

lazarus said:
My question is what is manufacturered? At any step? Or just the final steps? Because most 80% probably had a computer involved at some point in the mold process for polymer ones or in the casting/forging process for metal ones. Especially ones that have limited milling or drilling done.

At the very least how could you know? All you’d know is the final completion steps from 80% to firearm. Unless you were the guy building a sten gun from hardware store parts on your drill press.

And heck, can you even rely on the ATF submitted documentation on an 80%? I’ve seen some where the manufacturer describes it as something like a plastic mold and ATF firearm branch responds back “approved, not a firearm because these key features are missing. BTW we think you used a CNC machine even though you said it was only produced with a mold”.

That's why even if you wanted to comply, one could not.

chilipeppermaniac · Mar 16, 2019

Mark75H said:
In the hinderlands we have always seen it as a population density problem. Population density begets problems that cannot be resolved. Athens, Rome, Paris, Chicago, Baltimore ... no one has ever come up with a working solution.

Bubonic plague anyone?

Allen65 · Mar 16, 2019

fabsroman said:
So, two questions:

1) Is the initial 80% of the manufacturing process on a "paperweight" taken into account in the manufacturing of a firearm, and

2) Do forged 80% "paperweights" use a computer-aided fabrication device anywhere in the process?

Once again, a law with a bunch of grey in it.

1) The way the law is written, if CNC was used during any portion of fabrication, you need an FFL-issued S/N on it. I could easily see MDAG as interpreting that to mean anything done to an aluminum billet, even if it only brings it to 79% completion before manual machining, and even if the person who completes the 80% into an actual firearm is unwitting of those prior CNC steps by the receiver blank vendor.

2) Even though the basic shape is forged, CNC is usually used to make minor features like mag release button cutouts, pivot pin lugs, and bolt release channels, and to shape mag wells. It's also possible, actually likely, that the forging die used to shape the raw block was created with CNC, if the AG wanted to really stretch the law.

You'd need to start with something like this:
https://www.80percentarms.com/20-lower-blank-ar-15-lower-receiver-forging/
or maybe this, just to be safe:
https://www.80percentarms.com/0-billet-ar-15-lower-receiver/

Good luck completing either of those without a real milling machine and some serious machinist skill.

budman93 · Mar 16, 2019

Allen65 said:
1) The way the law is written, if CNC was used during any portion of fabrication, you need an FFL-issued S/N on it. I could easily see MDAG as interpreting that to mean anything done to an aluminum billet, even if it only brings it to 79% completion before manual machining, and even if the person who completes the 80% into an actual firearm is unwitting of those prior CNC steps by the receiver blank vendor.

2) Even though the basic shape is forged, CNC is usually used to make minor features like mag release button cutouts and bolt release channels, and to shape mag wells.

You'd need to start with something like this:
https://www.80percentarms.com/20-lower-blank-ar-15-lower-receiver-forging/
or maybe this, just to be safe:
https://www.80percentarms.com/0-billet-ar-15-lower-receiver/

Good luck completing either of those without a real milling machine and some serious machinist skill.

I disagree, the law refers to manufacturing a firearm. As sold an 80% is not a firearm so how it was made is irrelevant. An 80% is not a firearm so creating one up to 80% with cnc is not manufacturing a firearm with a computer controlled device.

Allen65 · Mar 16, 2019

budman93 said:
I disagree, the law refers to manufacturing a firearm. As sold an 80% is not a firearm so how it was made is irrelevant. An 80% is not a firearm so creating one up to 80% with cnc is not manufacturing a firearm with a computer controlled device.

The question isn't how you or I define manufacturing a firearm. The question is how will MDAG and the MD court system define it. I hope your interpretation gets upheld, but I wouldn't want to bet my current non-felon status on it.

fabsroman · Mar 16, 2019

budman93 said:
I disagree, the law refers to manufacturing a firearm. As sold an 80% is not a firearm so how it was made is irrelevant. An 80% is not a firearm so creating one up to 80% with cnc is not manufacturing a firearm with a computer controlled device.

No, the proposed law says:

A person may not possess, sell, offer to sell, transfer, purchase, or receive a firearm manufactured using a computer aided fabrication device unless the firearm is imprinted with a serial number issued by a federally licensed firearms manufacturer or importer.

So, the question ends up being, what is considered the manufacturing process for a firearm? The ATF does not consider an 80% to be a firearm, but that initial 80% is part of the manufacturing process to get to 100%. Therein lies the problem. The manufacturing process is from beginning to end of the finished product. Obtaining raw materials is part of the manufacturing process.

Once again, one heck of a mess.

Is a block of aluminum, the 0% lower, created with any computer-aided fabrication devices?

How are polymer frames made?

The more I think about this, the more I am going to steer clear of 80's. Thought I was going to be alright with this thing, but if this passes, no 80's for me.

I'd prefer that they scrap this bill. If they will not scrap this bill, it would be nice if they would limit the use of a computer-aided fabrication device to the last 20% of a firearm.

DRAWER THE BILL, LET MSP STUDY THE FEASIBILITY OF THE REGISTRATION OF HOME MADE FIREARMS, AND THEN REVISIT THIS WITH MORE DATA NEXT SESSION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Allen65 · Mar 16, 2019

fabsroman said:
DRAWER THE BILL, LET MSP STUDY THE FEASIBILITY OF THE REGISTRATION OF HOME MADE FIREARMS, AND THEN REVISIT THIS WITH MORE DATA NEXT SESSION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Too late for that on the House side, but there's still a chance in the SJPC. This is Rep. Dumais' baby, no chance it wasn't going to pass the House in some form.

whistlersmother · Mar 17, 2019

Polymer is typically injection molded - highly doubt there is any CNC involved. Maybe ask Polymer80?

And aluminum can be cast in green sand moulds...

fabsroman · Mar 17, 2019

Allen65 said:
Too late for that on the House side, but there's still a chance in the SJPC. This is Rep. Dumais' baby, no chance it wasn't going to pass the House in some form.

Yep, haste makes waste is a good saying here.

It really would take a good amount of research to come up with arguments as to whether an 80% frame is considered part of the manufacturing process of a firearm. While it isn't yet a firearm, it sure is part of the manufacturing process. The bill, as is, is quite scary.

In my searches, I saw some CA compliant 80% lowers that came with serial numbers already on them. I am wondering what the CA law looks like. Not wondering enough right now to go and look it up, but curious.

fabsroman · Mar 17, 2019

whistlersmother said:
Polymer is typically injection molded - highly doubt there is any CNC involved. Maybe ask Polymer80?

And aluminum can be cast in green sand moulds...

I think it would have to come down to contacting 80% manufacturers and determining what their manufacturing process entails. What a complete headache, and how many manufacturers are going to want to deal with us Marylanders?

Allen65 · Mar 17, 2019

whistlersmother said:
Polymer is typically injection molded - highly doubt there is any CNC involved. Maybe ask Polymer80?

And aluminum can be cast in green sand moulds...

The injection mold was almost certainly made with CNC. Draft angles, shrinkage compensation, flow simulation for injection gate placement, etc. are best handled by building the design in CAD, and if the mold is designed in CAD, it makes no sense from a cost perspective to not use CNC (milling, EDM, etc.) to fabricate the mold parts. Again, it depends how far back in the manufacturing process MD wants to go to decide what's compliant.

What interpretation do you think Brian Frosh will promulgate?

20190314 - HB740 JUD Amendments

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Where's the beef?

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Where's the beef?

Ultimate Member

MD Wear&Carry Instructor

Snakes and Sparklers

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

MSI Executive Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Peace through strength

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics