If said rifle has a heavy barrel and pre '13 possession is registration necessary?
Email from the MD State Police
- Thread starter 98Volvo
- 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:
No
Thread lightly. Only frame the law. Not, ways to skirt it.
Last edited:
daggo66
Ultimate Member
This is why you don't voluntarily register firearms...
Except it is required for handguns brought into MD after 10-1-13 or now banned long guns brought into the state after 10-1-13 but legally possessed before 10-1-13
^^ This, it is not required. If it was me and I knew they were legitimately purchased before Oct 2013, I'd just move along.
Totally agree
Ranchero50
Ultimate Member
To the OP, visit the manufacturer's website and contact them in regards to build date based off of the serial number. About the only way the MSP can easily nail you for purchasing post 10/2013 is if the S/N wasn't made until after that. Also if needed, remove the upper from the lower. Since the receiver is the firearm it isn't banned if it doesn't have an upper. Just store your uppers in a box until you can escape MD or find some cheaper HBAR barrels. I ended up with a legal one from PSA for $75 on my first build. Since then I've chosen the pistol route.
5.56blaster
Ultimate Member
Move! It sucks here!
- Jul 29, 2014
- 49,989
Or is their caboose still back around the bend?
This is one of those things where if you try to follow the law and be truly law abiding, you get spanked for it. Punishment for being honest.
At some point in the semi-near future I hope to leave this state and never ever return to it.
Muleskinner
Ultimate Member
And the burden of proof is on the state, not on you. Let them find the dammed date of purchase...
Zorros
Ultimate Member
Here’s my $.02. You are seeking to register, the burden of establishing compliance is on you.
If, however, you were to be shooting your rifle at the range and a LEO charged you with possessing a post oct 13 rifle on the banned list, the burden of establishing the crime is the state’s. I doubt, “ he had a post oct 13 banned rifle” meets that burden. Still, you should have the bill of sale or a letter from your dealer to make your life easy as some fights are not worth picking unless you have a wicked sense of humor and a lot of money. I am a bit suprised MSP would go out of its way to tell you how this might be compliant if it is not.
Welcome to maryland. We still have good crabs and lots of recreational waterways.
If, however, you were to be shooting your rifle at the range and a LEO charged you with possessing a post oct 13 rifle on the banned list, the burden of establishing the crime is the state’s. I doubt, “ he had a post oct 13 banned rifle” meets that burden. Still, you should have the bill of sale or a letter from your dealer to make your life easy as some fights are not worth picking unless you have a wicked sense of humor and a lot of money. I am a bit suprised MSP would go out of its way to tell you how this might be compliant if it is not.
Welcome to maryland. We still have good crabs and lots of recreational waterways.
I have receipts and sent scanned copies today. The day of purchase on one of them is hard to make out. Month and year should be fine. This is the only one I am concerned about. I will contact the shop I bought it from if they give me grief. If the shop is unable to help, I will buy an upper with a heavy barrel and tape a copy of the email saying put a heavy barrel on it to the gun.
Main point of the thread is that I thought I did not have to provide proof of ownership prior to 10/1/13. I thought the burden was on the state. Especially since on their website they have no way for you to submit documents with the online application. Also there are several legal ways to come into possession of a firearm without having a paper trail.
The other things I found interesting was 1.) They said put a heavy barrel on something that is banned by name to make it legal and 2.) They are calling the Colt SOCOM banned even though it comes with a heavy barrel. They have it listed on their web site as banned but several people have been told by State Police it is legal and some FFLs are selling it as cash and carry.
I've been lurking here for a number of years. Only made a user name when I started the process of moving to the state.
One question I do have though after reading some of the responses. Am I not required to register my banned rifles no matter the date of ownership? I thought banned rifles were required to be registered no matter when you came in to possession of them. If not, shame on me.
Main point of the thread is that I thought I did not have to provide proof of ownership prior to 10/1/13. I thought the burden was on the state. Especially since on their website they have no way for you to submit documents with the online application. Also there are several legal ways to come into possession of a firearm without having a paper trail.
The other things I found interesting was 1.) They said put a heavy barrel on something that is banned by name to make it legal and 2.) They are calling the Colt SOCOM banned even though it comes with a heavy barrel. They have it listed on their web site as banned but several people have been told by State Police it is legal and some FFLs are selling it as cash and carry.
I've been lurking here for a number of years. Only made a user name when I started the process of moving to the state.
One question I do have though after reading some of the responses. Am I not required to register my banned rifles no matter the date of ownership? I thought banned rifles were required to be registered no matter when you came in to possession of them. If not, shame on me.
- Jul 29, 2014
- 49,989
No. The whole deal is, you DO have to prove you owned the "banned" weapon prior to its banning in order to be compliant. Otherwise, you will be required to make said weapons compliant to current regulations or risk penalties.
Now, if you want to spend a bunch of money, let them arrest you so that THEY will have to prove you are or are not in compliance. The choice should be an easy one.
The curious part of the letter is where they suggest you put a heavy barrel on your Bushmaster. I didn't think you could do that and be legal in Md, but I'm not a lawyer.
Nevermind. Misread your response.
- Jul 29, 2014
- 49,989
Zorros
Ultimate Member
Lawyer or no lawyer, this is like the mission of the starship enterprise. That is, to go where no man has gone before. You have an email telling you what to do. You should be able to rely on it. However, its an email, and i have apicture of the guy sweeping the floor stopping to use the computer and answer questions. Signatures are better, but i would probably rely on this, and withan HBAR installed, it becomes someting else ( but that’s the part where no man has gone before). Sounds like SP trying to be helpful.
smokey
2A TEACHER
- Jan 31, 2008
- 31,500
msp be like... banned
Attachments
Like they banned the ACR, which is not an ar15,on name. I thought piston driven ARs were legal, ie LWRC, SCAR and the like.
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
-
(Duplicate - mods please close) MoCo trans student arrested for threatening school- Started by Lafayette
- Replies: 2
-
-
-
-
-
OCMD Third Street Park; “It’s a beautiful park with an ugly name” (7 Viewers)- Started by RFBfromDE
- Replies: 8