What's the Latest Interpretation? Do I need HBAR on SBR

That tracks with what I remember from previous threads.

Basically, because MSP says so.

Just spoke to Cpl Edwards at MSP Headquarters, Firearms Licensing. In our phone conversation he indicated that an SBR falls under pistol and rifle (if that makes sense), the only requirement is greater than 29 inches. Barrel profile does not matter for AR15. Only length.

Pinecone said:

That tracks with what I remember from previous threads.

Basically, because MSP says so.

Click to expand...

That really is the key...

EMS Burnout said:

Just spoke to Cpl Edwards at MSP Headquarters, Firearms Licensing. In our phone conversation he indicated that an SBR falls under pistol and rifle (if that makes sence), the only requirement is greater than 29 inches. Barrel profile does not matter for AR15. Only length.

Click to expand...

No offense but what an officer tells you over the phone is close to useless. You call back tomorrow you might get a totally different answer.

ericoak said:

No offense but what an officer tells you over the phone is close to useless. You call back tomorrow you might get a totally different answer.

Click to expand...

MSP had a pretty lengthy review period over this issue, and had the MD Attorney General office council them, probably assistant AG's for MSP, Mark Bowen and staff. I've met Cpl Edwards a couple times and is a standup gentlemen. He has worked with us (firearms community) the best he can and has been pretty squared away on these issues recently.

Anyway, as stated here many times via MSP's LD-FRS-14-002 advisory (originally released March 20th 2014), SBR's are considered a "handgun" under the Public Safety Article §5–101(n)(1), as they have a barrel less than 16 inches in length. Therefore, since they're handguns they are not rifles under that subtitle and are not subject to the HBAR requirement from the listed assualt rifles.

However... under the Criminal Law Article §4–301(e)(1)(iii) they are considered to be a "semiautomatic centerfire rifle" and thus are subject to the 29 inch overall length "Copycat Weapon" restriction.

Different law articles, titles, subtitles, sections, and subsections have different definitions, plus there's always a little thing called legislative intent, which is always their trump card.

All that being said, I agree that SBR's should not be subject to the 29 inch OAL restriction, as "semiautomatic centerfire rifle" and "short-barrel rifle" are mutually exclusive terms throughout most of the law articles, and in some cases the law makers clearly defined the difference between the two entities. In my opinion the legislature never intended to wrap Title II firearms in any of the newer laws, but that's just me.

Until someone SUCCESSFULLY sues MSP over this issue, it's currently the law of the land.

View attachment MSP Licensing Div - Advisory LD-FRS-14-002 (REVISED) - SBS & SBR - 2014.05.02.pdf
View attachment MD Article - Public Safety 5-101 (Regulated Firearms Definitions).pdf
View attachment MD Article - Criminal Law 4-301 (Assault Weapon Definitions).pdf

EMS Burnout said:

Just spoke to Cpl Edwards at MSP Headquarters, Firearms Licensing. In our phone conversation he indicated that an SBR falls under pistol and rifle (if that makes sense), the only requirement is greater than 29 inches. Barrel profile does not matter for AR15. Only length.

Click to expand...

always one........

Pinecone said:

That tracks with what I remember from previous threads.

Basically, because MSP says so.

Click to expand...

What happens when the AG says, "I don't think so?" I think it has happened before on the subject of firearms. Maybe on what the definition of a "copy" of an AR-15 actually is.

I'm getting ready to buy a 5.56 barrel right now and I think I am going to stick with HBAR on this.

fabsroman said:

What happens when the AG says, "I don't think so?" I think it has happened before on the subject of firearms. Maybe on what the definition of a "copy" of an AR-15 actually is.

I'm getting ready to buy a 5.56 barrel right now and I think I am going to stick with HBAR on this.

Click to expand...

Then there's the Form 1 that does not enumerate a heavy barrel, while holding to all other Md. standards.

fabsroman said:

.
I'm getting ready to buy a 5.56 barrel right now and I think I am going to stick with HBAR on this.

Click to expand...

fabsroman said:

What happens when the AG says, "I don't think so?" I think it has happened before on the subject of firearms. Maybe on what the definition of a "copy" of an AR-15 actually is.

I'm getting ready to buy a 5.56 barrel right now and I think I am going to stick with HBAR on this.

Click to expand...

Then you go by the guidance at the time you built it.

So built it NOW with a pencil barrel.

Pinecone said:

Then you go by the guidance at the time you built it.

So built it NOW with a pencil barrel.

Click to expand...

I think the guidance at the time I build it would be a mitigating factor when it comes to sentencing. Don't think it would absolve me of being found guilty if the law is being misinterpreted by MSP in my favor, and then MSP or the AG changes that interpretation and begins enforcement as it sees fit.

fabsroman said:

I think the guidance at the time I build it would be a mitigating factor when it comes to sentencing. Don't think it would absolve me of being found guilty if the law is being misinterpreted by MSP in my favor, and then MSP or the AG changes that interpretation and begins enforcement as it sees fit.

Click to expand...

There was an official advisory from MSP about the matter. When it comes to the PS Article they're treating SBR's as handguns, therefore they cannot be cross referenced with the list of assault long guns. Put an HBAR on there if you like, but it's not necessary.

fabsroman said:

I think the guidance at the time I build it would be a mitigating factor when it comes to sentencing. Don't think it would absolve me of being found guilty if the law is being misinterpreted by MSP in my favor, and then MSP or the AG changes that interpretation and begins enforcement as it sees fit.

Click to expand...

I think that the threat of actually being prosecuted under this scenario is remote. If this was to occur, then the State would be running head first into a number of due process issues. There seems to be a considerable amount of institutional inertia behind MSP’s position that if you SBR one of the long guns listed under PS 5-101(r)(2) it is not an Assault Long Gun because it is a handgun within the meaning of the Code. I have read their guidance but I fail to understand what is animating their reasoning. Like you, I believe that this could all change with an AG opinion letter. Just happened in Massachusetts:
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/07/daniel-zimmerman/breaking-massachusetts-assault-weapons-ban-enforcement-guidelines-revealed/

My understanding is that the MSP asked the legislature to purge the list of SBR models when they first instituted the assault weapons regulations. This is why MA and federal code called out the Galil, but MD calls out the Galil AR and ARM - but not the SAR. It was never meant to apply to them, from a legislative intent perspective.

Didn't realise this at the time, Might have to get a lightweight 10.5" for my SBR, my 11.5" is a total chunker full HBAR profile.