Assault weapon
- Thread starter bigmanindc
- Start date
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!
Member Benefits:
BlueHeeler
Ultimate Member
Thanks for the update.
There are more than four of us DC residents here. Probably.
There are more than four of us DC residents here. Probably.
Kanly
Active Member
so 3/8/2019 I decided to see if I could get at least one answer from the firearms unit through email.
I asked one very specific question and so far no response. I did get an out of office reply from Lt. Hall and no response from Officer Mills yet.
I asked one very specific question and so far no response. I did get an out of office reply from Lt. Hall and no response from Officer Mills yet.
Why don't you just get a Mini-14? Are they GTG?
This is all great info Kanly. I'd be interested if the officer you spoke to has an email exchange between him and Lt. Hall regarding the fin grips.
When I asked about a Monsterman Grip, I was initially told it was good to go, then I was told it was a pistol grip.
sgt23preston
USMC LLA. NRA Life Member
Simple: Any Semi-Automatic Black Rifle of any Caliper that Holds Multiple Rounds of Ammo & that can be Reloaded Quickly...
False.
Kanly
Active Member
I fail to see your point here. Some guy made the same kind of comment in the HBAR ban thread and got roasted over the coals for it.
Hundreds of people went to Annapolis to protest the possibility that HBARs might be taken away. I guess they should all be happy with Mini-14s and whatever else is allowed?
DC obviously allows some kind or ARs.
I am trying to get some clarification or consistency on what they will accept.
It seems to me that the process right now is vague and capricious.
Kanly
Active Member
See this is what I don't understand. Without actually having held either, my impression is that the finned grips like Monsterman give you a worse grip than the Thordsen and thus should be more acceptable.
And if someone had a Monsterman grip when it was legal and now it's not legal what does DC do? Confiscate it? Arrest whoever has one? What happens if they change their mind about something else?
I think the Firearms Unit is in a difficult position as another person has mentioned to me but this is what DC has created and there needs to be at least some clarification and standardization of what is legal/acceptable.
I know they have a catchall phrase in the regulations of something like "or whatever else the Chief determines" so there's that to consider, but DC seems to have no problems accepting CA/MD/MA pistols maybe they need to think about that for ARs and AR options.
WTF? why spread completely false claims?
1) YOU are responsible for keeping up on laws. And like lots of US jurisdictions there is case law on "constructive possession" so a part that in and if itself that may not be illegal to possess can in other circumstances be "constructive possession" and a crime. For example in places that ban guns with a forward grip you can own a forward grip if you don't own the gun or keep a gun on the same premises, but the same part could be illegal if in the same premises as the gun
2) as far as CA/MD/MA pistol rosters that is a convenience for everyone, including us. It is seen as allowed for in the law a part of the chiefs discretion. do we want to push it so it ends up only California roster?
3) As far as "AR" and AR options, in whose interest is it to force DC council into a position where they are much more likely to simply ban any detachable mag fed semi auto?
BlueHeeler
Ultimate Member
Yes the AW definition includes 22lr.
(IV) A semiautomatic, rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following:
(aa) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
(bb) A thumbhole stock;
(cc) A folding or telescoping stock;
(dd) A grenade launcher or flare launcher;
(ee) A flash suppressor; or
(ff) A forward pistol grip;
(bb) A thumbhole stock;
(cc) A folding or telescoping stock;
(dd) A grenade launcher or flare launcher;
(ee) A flash suppressor; or
(ff) A forward pistol grip;
However the 10 round magazine restriction, "does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition."
Many thanks for the clarification, BlueHeeler.
I still have problems with this para in the AW definition:
(ii) Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder; provided, that this sub-subparagraph shall not apply to a weapon with an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition;
What's confusing is having shotguns and 22lr in the same sentence but "weapon" here probably means any AW.
I still have problems with this para in the AW definition:
(ii) Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder; provided, that this sub-subparagraph shall not apply to a weapon with an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition;
What's confusing is having shotguns and 22lr in the same sentence but "weapon" here probably means any AW.
BlueHeeler
Ultimate Member
I am not a lawyer, but I agree. Shotgun restrictions and .22lr exemptions should not be in the same subparagraph.
I think this is the info that you want:
"2501.01 (13a))
No person in the District shall possess, sell, or transfer any large capacity ammunition feeding device regardless of whether the device is attached to a firearm. A “large capacity ammunition feeding device” means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition. This does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition."
https://mpdc.dc.gov/page/firearm-registration-general-requirements-study-guide
Because Liberals.
BlueHeeler
Ultimate Member
Do you mean magblocks? The legal hurdle to pass is can the magazine be readily restored to +10 rounds?
Seems like some JB plasticweld from the spring to block would prevent a "readily restored" condition. Probably.
However DC has been known to have some interesting interpretations of their laws.
Or just by 10 round magazines.
Was actually thinking of the modified bolt catch , turning the AR from semi-auto to manual, and the AR Maglock which fixes the magazine. In both cases you get rid off one of the defining features of an AR. But as you noted, these modifications can be easily reversed.
Users who are viewing this thread
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
-
-
-
-
MD DNR Outdoor Recreation Survey -- Outdoorsman Responses Needed
- Started by Derwood
- Replies: 5
-
-