Belt-Feds banned in Maryland?

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!

    • Register Log in
    G

    GunBum

    Active Member
    Feb 21, 2018
    751
    SW Missouri
    This has devolved into “How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?” :sad20:
     
    Combloc

    Combloc

    Stop Negassing me!!!!!
    Nov 10, 2010
    7,249
    In a House
    I've been watching it and I must say, it is puzzling. I have belt fed firearms and I never agonized one bit about this stuff.
     
    D

    dblas

    Past President, MSI
    MDS Supporter
    Apr 6, 2011
    13,109
    JohnnyE said:
    I don't know if you notice it too, but I see a disturbing desire of folks to see something in writing from government clearly saying the thing they want to do or own is legal, and without that affirmation, they're afraid to move forward.

    Some people have difficulty with the idea that unless it's something that requires a permit or license, they will not find written governmental approval of their behavior. The state doesn't (and shouldn't!) provide citizens a list of things that are OK (a list of "do's), it provides a list of things that are not legal (a list of "don'ts").

    If you cannot find the thing you want to do or get on the list of don'ts, or discover that a permit or license is required, do it or get it. Yes, it's challenging or even disconcerting to have to prove a negative. You need to look skillfully or extensively to determine there isn't a restriction or prohibition on what you want. Some folks lack the confidence to do that, but that's the way it is.

    For a humorous take on this, here's Newton Minow's great quote from a speech he gave in the '90's to the Association of American Law Schools. I know that you know, counselor, that the US is like France in the example.

    "After 35 years, I have finished a comprehensive study of European comparative law. In Germany, under the law, everything is prohibited, except that which is permitted. In France, under the law, everything is permitted, except that which is prohibited. In the Soviet Union, under the law, everything is prohibited, including that which is permitted. And in Italy, under the law, everything is permitted, especially that which is prohibited."

    FYI, Newt did some legal work for the family back in the '60's, after he left DC and returned to the practice of law Chicago. I have some docs with his signature. I smile when I think of it.
    Click to expand...


    It's called BGOS

    Battered Gun Owner Syndrom
     
    D

    dblas

    Past President, MSI
    MDS Supporter
    Apr 6, 2011
    13,109
    GunBum said:
    It’s called a “belt fed” so the belt feeds. It’s in the name. No movement or feeding is capable with a magazine unless some outside force is applied.
    Click to expand...

    The belt doesn't feed on it's own, unlike a detachable magazine.

    In a belt the feed paws in the rifle pull the next link and round into the action to be loaded into the chamber. Without the feedpaws inside the firearm, the rounds in the belt cannot detach from the belt and then move to the next round. When you remove a round from the belt, you have to move the belt to the next round to remove it, the round is NOT moved to you by the magazine.

    In a detachable magazine, the spring and follower move the round to the action to be loaded into the chamber WITHOUT and action on the magazine by the firearm. When you remove a round from a detachable magazine, the spring in the magazine move the next round up so you can remove it, you do not have to move to the next round.

    Your argument fails because you think that a belt operates like a detachable magazine, which it clearly does not, and clearly does NOT meet the definition of one in State Statute.
     
    D

    dblas

    Past President, MSI
    MDS Supporter
    Apr 6, 2011
    13,109
    rseymorejr said:
    Only in F***ing Maryland would we be arguing over this stupid shit
    Click to expand...

    Only in Maryland would someone argue that something is illegal based on their opinion, as opposed to what the actual definition in the law states.

    BGOS is strong with this one.
     
    JohnnyE

    JohnnyE

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 18, 2013
    9,630
    MoCo
    dblas said:
    It's called BGOS

    Battered Gun Owner Syndrom
    Click to expand...

    Yup. I was attempting to illustrate in a stark manner that you need to look for laws that prevent you from taking an action, rather than seek out language that specifically authorizes the action.
     
    J

    jcutonilli

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 28, 2013
    2,474
    Doco Overboard said:
    I'm trying to visualize how a magazine fed firearm that the magazine feeds the action with only the volition of the mag and not the movement of the bolt. As well as how feed pawls push a round into the chamber.
    Click to expand...

    There certainly is some ambiguity about what constitutes an ammo feeding device and what steps of the loading process it addresses.

    If you define feeding as the entire process of moving ammo from the magazine to the chamber, then you can never get a detachable magazine. In the typical firearm, the bolt pushes the round into the chamber. The bolt of the typical firearm is not detachable (without some kind of disassembly) so you cannot have a detachable ammo feeding device. That definition would never be accepted because it essentially makes the law meaningless.

    If you define feeding as the process of moving ammo to the action, then there are many examples of this. The typical box magazine uses a spring and follower to push (feed) new rounds into the action. This can be easily demonstrated by manually stripping a round. The magazine will then feed another round into place.

    The problem with a belt is that it is not capable of feeding ammo. If you strip a round like the box mag, the rest of the ammo remains in the same place. No feeding takes place. This means that the belt itself does not meet the MD definition of a detachable magazine.

    A belt fed firearm certain does feed ammo. The question is which parts do that and are they detachable (without disassembly). For most belt fed firearms, the parts that actually do the feeding are not detachable.
     
    Vile Shadow

    Vile Shadow

    ...
    Feb 28, 2013
    28,953
    JohnnyE said:
    Yup. I was attempting to illustrate in a stark manner that you need to look for laws that prevent you from taking an action, rather than seek out language that specifically authorizes the action.
    Click to expand...

    I wanna go shootin on Saturdays... when the suns out and the winds blowin from the north

    ...BUT... But....

    I cant cuz nuthin in the law that says I can!! :eek:
     
    Last edited:
    K

    Kharn

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 9, 2008
    3,580
    Hazzard County
    To the original question, a 1919A4 is not a rifle, it is an "other" firearm and cannot be sold across state lines by an FFL.

    The 1919A6 configuration, with the buttstock, is a rifle.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
    MD Elite Firearms Sales

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,536
    Messages
    7,285,436
    Members
    33,473
    Latest member
    Sarca

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom