3/13 Judiciary voting session...

fidelity · Mar 14, 2019

mac1_131 said:
Any amendments?

fabsroman said:
Thanks Delegate Grammer. If you can swing it, I am sure almost all of us would like to see the marked up copy of the bill that was pushed through Judiciary. Granted, that would probably be a lot of pics to post since it is rather long, but it would be much appreciated. Hoping there is a lot of strike-through in it.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Delegate Robin Grammer · Mar 14, 2019

Judiciary moved HB 740.

PowPow · Mar 14, 2019

Really not good. :mad54:

ELEMENT94 · Mar 14, 2019

PowPow said:
Really not good.

meaning?

PowPow · Mar 14, 2019

ELEMENT94 said:
meaning?

It means that said bill is going out of committee to a second reading. Question is with or without amendments?

Bertfish · Mar 14, 2019

PowPow said:
Really not good.

It's their hot button issue for the year. Their talking point. Of course they were gonna push it.

I will not comply. Come get me.

chilipeppermaniac · Mar 14, 2019

POWPOW, keep me in the loop, bro. I really hate the suckage in that place we pay for.

fidelity · Mar 14, 2019

Delegate Robin Grammer said:
Judiciary moved HB 740.

Folks, this is the legislation to make illegal homemade firearms ~~that is in part directed at 80% builds~~ ...

Prohibiting a person from transporting into the State or manufacturing, possessing, selling, offering to sell, transferring, purchasing, or receiving a firearm manufactured after 1968 that is not imprinted with a serial number issued by a federally licensed firearms manufacturer or importer; and establishing penalties of up to 5 years imprisonment or a fine of up to $5,000, or both for violations of the Act.

https://www.marylandshallissue.org/jmain/legislation-tracker/164-msi-2019-gun-legislation-tracker

Eta: as Budman corrected below, it may not be limited to firearms with CNC milled or 3D printed receivers, and not more common hobbyist 80% builds.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

budman93 · Mar 14, 2019

fidelity said:
Folks, this is the legislation to make illegal homemade firearms that is in part directed at 80% builds ...

https://www.marylandshallissue.org/jmain/legislation-tracker/164-msi-2019-gun-legislation-tracker

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

According to amendments in the other thread it now only applies to guns completed with computer controlled devices.

fidelity · Mar 14, 2019

budman93 said:
According to amendments in the other thread it now only applies to guns completed with computer controlled devices.

Thanks for clarifying.

Found the thread too ...

https://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=233596

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Rab1515 · Mar 15, 2019

budman93 said:
According to amendments in the other thread it now only applies to guns completed with computer controlled devices.

Read the definition of computer. It includes the human brain.

fabsroman · Mar 15, 2019

Rab1515 said:
Read the definition of computer. It includes the human brain.

(C) (1) “COMPUTER–AIDED FABRICATION DEVICE” MEANS A
26 COMPUTER–CONTROLLED DEVICE OR MACHINE CAPABLE OF OPERATING:
27 (I) ON PHYSICAL MATERIAL OR MEDIA TO MANUFACTURE OR
28 FABRICATE AN OBJECT;
4 HOUSE BILL 740
1 (II) USING SPECIFICATIONS CONTAINED IN COMPUTER
2 CONTROL LANGUAGE, A COMPUTER PROGRAM, COMPUTER SOFTWARE, OR A
3 COMPUTER DATABASE; AND
4 (III) WITHOUT THE DIRECT AND CONTINUOUS CONTROL OF A
5 PERSON.

So, your brain is not being directly and continuously controlled by a person. Makes sense. Good grief.

Malleovic · Mar 15, 2019

fabsroman said:
(C) (1) “COMPUTER–AIDED FABRICATION DEVICE” MEANS A
26 COMPUTER–CONTROLLED DEVICE OR MACHINE CAPABLE OF OPERATING:
27 (I) ON PHYSICAL MATERIAL OR MEDIA TO MANUFACTURE OR
28 FABRICATE AN OBJECT;
4 HOUSE BILL 740
1 (II) USING SPECIFICATIONS CONTAINED IN COMPUTER
2 CONTROL LANGUAGE, A COMPUTER PROGRAM, COMPUTER SOFTWARE, OR A
3 COMPUTER DATABASE; AND
4 (III) WITHOUT THE DIRECT AND CONTINUOUS CONTROL OF A
5 PERSON.

So, your brain is not being directly and continuously controlled by a person. Makes sense. Good grief.

This distinction is rather thin. The section you quoted attempts to define the term "COMPUTER-AIDED FABRICATION DEVICE" but then the section immediately following (2) says it includes "A COMPUTER CONTROLLED: II CUTTING MACHINE...IV MILLING MACHINE", which seems to extend the blanket onto ANY cutting or milling machine controlled by something which fits their definition of a computer, defined later as "(i) an electronic, magnetic, optical, organic, or other data processing device or system that performs logical, arithmetic, memory, or storage functions.", which would indeed include the human brain.

Yes it's semantics, but this is potentially going to be a law, so I don't think the angst is unwarranted, especially considering the attitude of those pushing it.

fabsroman · Mar 15, 2019

Malleovic said:
This distinction is rather thin. The section you quoted attempts to define the term "COMPUTER-AIDED FABRICATION DEVICE" but then the section immediately following (2) says it includes "A COMPUTER CONTROLLED: II CUTTING MACHINE...IV MILLING MACHINE", which seems to extend the blanket onto ANY cutting or milling machine controlled by something which fits their definition of a computer, defined later as "(i) an electronic, magnetic, optical, organic, or other data processing device or system that performs logical, arithmetic, memory, or storage functions.", which would indeed include the human brain.

Yes it's semantics, but this is potentially going to be a law, so I don't think the angst is unwarranted, especially considering the attitude of those pushing it.

You obviously do not understand what the AND means between 3 AND 4.

It means that a Computer Fabrication Device must do everything WITHOUT THE DIRECT AND CONTINUOUS CONTROL OF A PERSON.

So, telling me that your brain is an organic computer, even if that meets the definition, still does not make it a Computer Fabrication Device because it is always operating WITH the direct and continuous control of a person.

So, a person using a drill press, a router, etc. without the aid of a computer running those items with no input from a person, would still be legal.

Continuous is a little tough, but I have no idea how I would finish out an 80 without continuous input on the machines I am using to finish it.

mrbob1000 · Mar 15, 2019

fabsroman said:
...

...Continuous is a little tough, but I have no idea how I would finish out an 80 without continuous input on the machines I am using to finish it.

Even with a 3D printer, it requires continuous monitoring and input to ensure:

A: The part doesn't pop off the build platform
B: You don't get an error like a layer shift
C: You don't burn your house down from a thermal runaway on a cheap printer.

The law is too vague and open to too much interpretation by an overly imaginative future prosecutor.

teratos · Mar 15, 2019

mrbob1000 said:
Even with a 3D printer, it requires continuous monitoring and input to ensure:

A: The part doesn't pop off the build platform
B: You don't get an error like a layer shift
C: You don't burn your house down from a thermal runaway on a cheap printer.

The law is too vague and open to too much interpretation by an overly imaginative future prosecutor.

The Ghost Gunner CNC does not need attending.

Malleovic · Mar 15, 2019

fabsroman said:
You obviously do not understand what the AND means between 3 AND 4.

It means that a Computer Fabrication Device must do everything WITHOUT THE DIRECT AND CONTINUOUS CONTROL OF A PERSON.

So, telling me that your brain is an organic computer, even if that meets the definition, still does not make it a Computer Fabrication Device because it is always operating WITH the direct and continuous control of a person.

So, a person using a drill press, a router, etc. without the aid of a computer running those items with no input from a person, would still be legal.

Continuous is a little tough, but I have no idea how I would finish out an 80 without continuous input on the machines I am using to finish it.

I assume you mean between (II) and (III) under item (1) (line 25)? Unless we're reading different versions.

I understand what you're saying, but the language of the bill does not sufficiently indicate to me that item (2) in that section could not be used to cast the net farther than you are choosing to entertain. Item (1) stands alongside it, rather than explicitly restricting it.

Bertfish · Mar 15, 2019

teratos said:
The Ghost Gunner CNC does not need attending.

Get them to add a shut off in the program at each machining step which requires a manual restart and then it does. We program stop points for recalibration in to the CNC machines at work. Despite it being CNC a guy sits with it all day.

rseymorejr · Mar 15, 2019

mrbob1000 said:
The law is too vague and open to too much interpretation by an overly imaginative future prosecutor.

Those are pre-requisites for every gun law those morons pass.

budman93 · Mar 15, 2019

Rab1515 said:
Read the definition of computer. It includes the human brain.

I don't think organic in the definition of computer is an issue currently since the bill prohibits manufacture with a "computer-aided fabrication device" which by their definition is a "device or machine capable of operating ... without the direct and continuous control of a person."

So a drill/dremel etc controlled by my brain is not a "computer-aided fabrication device"

Its still a steaming pile but nothing there makes a hand finished 80% illegal as of yet.

3/13 Judiciary voting session...

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

piled higher and deeper

State Lawmaker

Where's the beef?

Wild eyed pistol waver.

Where's the beef?

Throw bread on me

Ultimate Member

piled higher and deeper

Ultimate Member

piled higher and deeper

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Member

My hair is amazing

Active Member

Throw bread on me

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics