20190314 - HB740 JUD Amendments

[chilipeppermaniac]

Or airborne Ebola.

Better not use anything CNC to fabricate that Ebola. Teratos

 

[rbird7282]

The injection mold was almost certainly made with CNC. Draft angles, shrinkage compensation, flow simulation for injection gate placement, etc. are best handled by building the design in CAD, and if the mold is designed in CAD, it makes no sense from a cost perspective to not use CNC (milling, EDM, etc.) to fabricate the mold parts. Again, it depends how far back in the manufacturing process MD wants to go to decide what's compliant.

What interpretation do you think Brian Frosh will promulgate?

Doesn’t matter, an 80% lower is not a firearm.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tebonski]

Will the barrel have manufacturer's markings on it, or is everybody filing those off? What about the upper receiver or in the case of a handgun, the slide? Once they have a name of some manufactured part on the gun, how hard is it to subpoena a witness from that company knowledgeable about the manufacturing process and then ask said witness on the stand how the specific part was manufactured?

The firearm is the receiver. If the owner made the receiver and remains silent on how the receiver was finished how does a prosecutor prove anything? The rifle has a hand finished receiver and might contain a conglomeration of parts from numerous different companies. Are you saying that the state can prove a receiver was CNC finished if a Ruger representative says their barrel is on the hand finished receiver? Will that obtain a conviction?

 

[Mark75H]

The firearm is the receiver. If the owner made the receiver and remains silent on how the receiver was finished how does a prosecutor prove anything? The rifle has a hand finished receiver and might contain a conglomeration of parts from numerous different companies. Are you saying that the state can prove a receiver was CNC finished if a Ruger representative says their barrel is on the hand finished receiver? Will that obtain a conviction?

That's the point of the "this law is unenforceable argument"

 

[MEGARMS]

The firearm is the receiver. If the owner made the receiver and remains silent on how the receiver was finished how does a prosecutor prove anything? The rifle has a hand finished receiver and might contain a conglomeration of parts from numerous different companies. Are you saying that the state can prove a receiver was CNC finished if a Ruger representative says their barrel is on the hand finished receiver? Will that obtain a conviction?

We all understand that the lower receiver by itself is considered a firearm. I think what Fabs is saying is that when the lower is mated with the upper, then the entire thing, including the upper is also part of the firearm. Any part on the firearm that was created using a CNC or similar computer controlled device would make the rest of the firearm banned.

 

[Mark75H]

We all understand that the lower receiver by itself is considered a firearm. I think what Fabs is saying is that when the lower is mated with the upper, then the entire thing, including the upper is also part of the firearm. Any part on the firearm that was created using a CNC or similar computer controlled device would make the rest of the firearm banned.

No, the defintion of manufacturing a firearm is completing the receiver.

The rest is simply dressing, no different under law than installing grips, mounting a scope, bluing, painting or Ceracoating

 

[budman93]

No, the defintion of manufacturing a firearm is completing the receiver.

The rest is simply dressing, no different under law than installing grips, mounting a scope, bluing, painting or Ceracoating

Exactly

 

[dblas]

The firearm is the receiver. If the owner made the receiver and remains silent on how the receiver was finished how does a prosecutor prove anything? The rifle has a hand finished receiver and might contain a conglomeration of parts from numerous different companies. Are you saying that the state can prove a receiver was CNC finished if a Ruger representative says their barrel is on the hand finished receiver? Will that obtain a conviction?

A firearm equals all of the parts assembled to create said firearm, not just the receiver. People need to stop concentrating on just the receiver and consider the entire parts collection needed.

 

[dblas]

No, the defintion of manufacturing a firearm is completing the receiver.

The rest is simply dressing, no different under law than installing grips, mounting a scope, bluing, painting or Ceracoating

Exactly

Legal cite in federal or state law please?

 

[MEGARMS]

A firearm equals all of the parts assembled to create said firearm, not just the receiver. People need to stop concentrating on just the receiver and consider the entire parts collection needed.

I believe you are correct and that the correct answer is in fact both. A receiver is considered a firearm as is a receiver attached to an upper. Seems that anything on any part of the firearm fabricated on a CNC machine would disqualify it. Don't believe me, read the bill itself.

4–204

(a) (1) In this section, “firearm” means:


(i) a weapon that expels, is designed to expel, or may readily be
converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; or


(ii) the frame or receiver of such a weapon.

 

[dblas]

I believe you are correct and that the correct answer is in fact both. A receiver is considered a firearm as is a receiver attached to an upper. Seems that anything on any part of the firearm fabricated on a CNC machine would disqualify it. Don't believe me, read the bill itself.

4–204

(a) (1) In this section, “firearm” means:


(i) a weapon that expels, is designed to expel, or may readily be
converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; or


(ii) the frame or receiver of such a weapon.

Thanks Mega, I am familiar with Maryland law.

I was replying to Tebonski, who keeps thinking that the only concern is the receiver and not ALL of the parts of a firearm used to assemble said firearm.

 

[MEGARMS]

Thanks Mega, I am familiar with Maryland law.

I was replying to Tebonski, who keeps thinking that the only concern is the receiver and not ALL of the parts of a firearm used to assemble said firearm.

I know you were. I appreciate you telling him that I am not stupid for me.

 

[whistlersmother]

So we'll have make all the parts by hand? Cool. Completely untraceable. Sorta defeats the reason for the bill in the first place.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[jefflac02]

A first for me. Twitter shamed a mommy into pulling her post of supporting HB 740 and Atterbeary. And I got another delegate to jump in on the Dem stupid train.

and deleted tweet by the mommy.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dave]

any word on the vote for this yet today?

 

[Dave]

any word on the vote for this yet today?

like we don't already know what the outcome is gonna be...

 

[MJD438]

any word on the vote for this yet today?

It is on one of the 3rd Reader Calendars for the session of the House that starts at 1700.

 

[Dave]

thanks

 

[sundaeman]

I just realized something. What happens to a home made AOW for example that's registered with the ATF with a self assigned serial number. No serial number from a FFL but a serial number registered with the ATF under a Form 1?

 

[ironpony]

No, the defintion of manufacturing a firearm is completing the receiver.

The rest is simply dressing, no different under law than installing grips, mounting a scope, bluing, painting or Ceracoating

Exactly

Attorneys?

I just realized something. What happens to a home made AOW for example that's registered with the ATF with a self assigned serial number. No serial number from a FFL but a serial number registered with the ATF under a Form 1?

Bill says FFL issued ser. # ......


IANAL !