Heard there may be additional amendments or this was just time to "vet" the current amendment and get it printed for everyone in the house.
Is it their intent to go after machine guns or simply a consequence of ignorance
At least they defined a bump stock correctly.
Seems to me (many?) transferable machine guns will be BANNED after Oct 1 2018 because they included "burst trigger systems" (or maybe Oct 1 2019 if one applied for the NFA stamp after Oct 1 2018 and got authorization before Oct 1 2019).
Looks to me as though someone with actual firearms knowledge helped them with this.
Good luck primarying Republicans on this. Machine guns and bump stocks are not a voting issue, and Trump and a lot of prominent Republicans already gave air support for this. NRA already paved the way too. I won't be surprised to see a lot of Republicans vote for this to give Hogan cover. Look at it this way, a lot of Republicans in FL just voted for a complete shotgun/rifle ban for 18-20 year olds.
The bill is pretty specific, and atypically crystal clear for a MD gun grab. Pretty clear that the sponsors had help from someone who knows their stuff. Unfortunately it looks like we got nothing for this.
So they intend to make people destroy or give up property that has significant value come October 1, 2018 without providing compensation?
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
You don't do our community any good advising the ANTIs who read this forum that the language of their bills is accurate, or a mess, or not defined well, or well crafted by someone with actual firearms knowledge.
There are items mentioned in this bill that have not been mentioned in public forums. Cant recall them being mentioned in testimony either. They are definitely not getting it from MDS.
Originally Posted by danb View Post
At least they defined a bump stock correctly.
Seems to me (many?) transferable machine guns will be BANNED after Oct 1 2018 because they included "burst trigger systems" (or maybe Oct 1 2019 if yone applied for the NFA stamp after Oct 1 2018 and got authorization before Oct 1 2019).
Looks to me as though someone with actual firearms knowledge helped them with this.
Would not surprise me in the least that it might have been a troll(s) from here. Some times we are our own worst enemy by answering to many questions that most us already know the answers.I'm sure someone did. There are plenty of 2A Turncoats just here on MDS that have just enough knowledge to create problems.
There are even more outside this circle.
Would not surprise me in the least that it might have been a troll(s) from here. Some times we are our own worst enemy by answering to many questions that most us already know the answers.
I wonder if they are getting it from the office of Anti 2A AG or even from the anti Frosh himself? What are the chances of this ending up in court over just taking thing with out giving those just compensation?
Yes, this is to avoid forcing people to sell legally-owned machineguns. If you want a lightning link, you need to start buying it real soon now.The bill exempts rapid fire trigger activators possessed before Oct 1, 2018, if you have "applied to the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives before October 1, 2018, for authorization to possess a rapid fire trigger activator;" and receive the authorization before Oct 1 2019. So if you possess it lawfully before Oct 1 2018, they are not taking it. There is some outside chance if you buy something in Sept and don't get your NFA stamp until after Oct 2019, you could theoretically be screwed.
There are some people here who have become increasingly delusional about "infiltrators" on the forum somehow guiding and feeding the gun control crowd. There's definitely evidence they know about this place; there's no concrete evidence that they're somehow are taking their cues from what we write here, at least on any significant level. Unfortunately, the people with these delusions are doing their damndest to run off every new person who joins and has a question about firearms law, and that's not doing MDS or the cause any favors.Frosh and his staff and Bloomberg cronies don't have two brain cells to rub together in the winter, they usually copy it from somewhere like CT. I have to check, I am pretty sure this is very different from what passed in CT, NJ, and FL. There are also some details here that have not appeared on MDS. I do not think that this is a cut and paste Bloomberg-esque job.
Yes, this is to avoid forcing people to sell legally-owned machineguns. If you want a lightning link, you need to start buying it real soon now.
There are some people here who have become increasingly delusional about "infiltrators" on the forum somehow guiding and feeding the gun control crowd. There's definitely evidence they know about this place; there's no concrete evidence that they're somehow are taking their cues from what we write here, at least on any significant level. Unfortunately, the people with these delusions are doing their damndest to run off every new person who joins and has a question about firearms law, and that's not doing MDS or the cause any favors.
Actual legislative strategy dealing with specific delegates and lawmakers should probably not be discussed on here, and esq has done a pretty good job of keeping that under wraps anyways. But the self-appointed mods trying to squelch any discussion of anything that comes close to flaws in the laws - proposed or existing - are actively harming this forum and I'm tired of it. I ignore them, and I encourage others to do so as well. If the real mods want to step in, I'll pay attention to what they say. But no on else.
Sorry, but getting real frustrated with the culture around here.
But the self-appointed mods trying to squelch any discussion of anything that comes close to flaws in the laws - proposed or existing - are actively harming this forum and I'm tired of it. I ignore them, and I encourage others to do so as well. If the real mods want to step in, I'll pay attention to what they say. But no on else.
Sorry, but getting real frustrated with the culture around here.
That new language is very, very tight. They know it, I suspect. I think someone from our side would do well to consider how to write an amednment exempting bona fide machineguns from this verbiage - easiest thing to do would be to exempt firearms and devices manufactured before 1987, since this includes the entire corpus of transferable machineguns, and to my knowledge, there were few-to-none of the bumpstocks/Hellfires/cranks in usage in that timeframe.
I can tell you that the Democrats are not currently considering compensation--as the "takings" clause of the Maryland Constitution stipulates-- for property that is taken because Judiciary Vice Chair Kathleen Dumais announced that it is her belief that the "compensation for property" alludes to real estate only.
John Locke (1632-1704) argued that the law of nature obliged all human beings not to harm “the life, the liberty, health, limb, or goods of another”:
The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges every one: and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions… (and) when his own preservation comes not in competition, ought he, as much as he can, to preserve the rest of mankind, and may not, unless it be to do justice on an offender, take away, or impair the life, or what tends to the preservation of the life, the liberty, health, limb, or goods of another.
The bill as written does not confiscate property owned lawfully prior to Oct 1 2018. It continues to be lawful so long as you comply with all federal rules.
They clearly thought of this, took the problem seriously, and wrote it to survive a lawsuit.