Attorney General Opinion on 7 day Wait?

[Gryphon]

As a supporter of MSI I think the recent lawsuit filed in Baltimore County is well founded, and it will hopefully get an official ruling from the judiciary. That said, I couldn't help but wondering whether one of our "friends" in the legislature has, or might, solicit a formal opinion from the Attorney General on his or her constituents rights under the law as written, i.e. Mr. Attorney General what obligations, rights and risks do the FFL's have, if any, after the mandated 7 day waiting period has expired? I know most will think Ganlser's opinion would be prejudiced, but it would be interesting to see how he interprets the statute, and/or if he tries to twist it into something it is truly not. Maybe we would be surprised and running for office he might be candid?

The solicitation of formal opinions from the AG happens all the time. They are not binding, but provide guidance at the request of legislators and those among the executive branch's hierarchy, as to what the AG would expect a court to do.

Does anyone know if such a request has been made, and if so what the response from Gansler has been, and where I might find it. They are typically published, but I am not aware of one on this issue. Thanks.

 

[madness3120]

Im going to try to email his office tonight

 

[frogman68]

here it is

http://delegatemike.com/?p=3575

 

[matt]

Im going to try to email his office tonight

Why open Pandora's box?

Some dealers are following the law as written. Lets NOT put them in a BOX....

 

[ianmcall]

So the AG is saying that the MSP process must be completed before a transfer of a firearm from dealer to buyer can be completed?

 

[JADCecil]

That is the way I interpret it. The transfer/purchase is not complete until the whole process is complete. If transfer is not completed by 10/1 then licensing requirements become an issue, and, if a first time regulated buyer, so does the training issue.

 

[jaycee2004]

That is the way I interpret it. The transfer/purchase is not complete until the whole process is complete. If transfer is not completed by 10/1 then licensing requirements become an issue, and, if a first time regulated buyer, so does the training issue.

That's bull, because if the buyer can prove they paid for it before Oct 1st, they should not have to go through the licensing because of O'Malley's henchmen slowing the process up. Sounds like another possible suit

 

[Gryphon]

here it is

http://delegatemike.com/?p=3575

Thanks - but I have seen that already and it doesn't address the more narrow issue. Frankly, its a non-answer. For the moment forget about the 30 days before another purchase waiting issue, the question I am proposing be submitted to the AG by a legislator assumes only one purchase, a proper application, and the seven days has expired - period. That's a much tougher question to avoid answering.

 

[Gryphon]

That is the way I interpret it. The transfer/purchase is not complete until the whole process is complete. If transfer is not completed by 10/1 then licensing requirements become an issue, and, if a first time regulated buyer, so does the training issue.

My point is that under Maryland law the application process is complete after 7 days - period. They are obligated to disapprove with a legitimate basis or issue a non-disapproved letter within 7 days and are clearly not doing that. Agreed, you must then complete the sale within 90 days - but who isn't going to do that so forget about that. Also, forget about the 30 days for another purchase, October 1st, or whatever, and focus on the narrow issue (7 days to disapprove or issue a non-disapproved letter) which is more difficult for the AG to avoid.

MSI has put that narrow issue before the courts, my question was if any legislators had put that very narrow, specific question to the AG for a formal opinion. Asking a broader question and involving multiple purchases, or the October 1 effective date of the new legislation opens the door to obfuscation - just like the response to the Smigiel inquiry.

We know the answer. But I'd like to see if Gansler has, or will, address the issue in an honest fashion or not. The courts are not bound by whatever he says, but as the top law enforcement official the MSP is.

 

[daggo66]

That is the way I interpret it. The transfer/purchase is not complete until the whole process is complete. If transfer is not completed by 10/1 then licensing requirements become an issue, and, if a first time regulated buyer, so does the training issue.

You are adding a whole lot of conjecture there. What he said is actually succinct and to the point with no interpretation needed. He simply stated what we already know, the 30 days begins when you take possession. That was all Smigel was asking. I see no mention of releasing after 7 days in his question.

 

[daggo66]

Thanks - but I have seen that already and it doesn't address the more narrow issue. Frankly, its a non-answer. For the moment forget about the 30 days before another purchase waiting issue, the question I am proposing be submitted to the AG by a legislator assumes only one purchase, a proper application, and the seven days has expired - period. That's a much tougher question to avoid answering.

However, it does answer the question that was asked of him. The issue is that the question was not the one we wanted asked.

 

[Gryphon]

However, it does answer the question that was asked of him. The issue was that they question was not the one we wanted asked.

Bingo!

 

[iH8DemLibz]

I am not a lawyer, but I don't see what this MSI lawsuit is going to accomplish.

It does not take the MSP 88 days to do paperwork. I think we have all come to that conclusion. But it will take them more than seven days to do it.

And that is the rub. Who is going to compell an FFL to realease after seven days if the FFL is not comfortable doing so?

 

[Mitch Connor]

I am not a lawyer, but I don't see what this MSI lawsuit is going to accomplish.

It does not take the MSP 88 days to do paperwork. I think we have all come to that conclusion. But it will take them more than seven days to do it.

And that is the rub. Who is going to compell an FFL to realease after seven days if the FFL is not comfortable doing so?

I believe the point is to make the FFLs comfortable with it. My guess, the lawsuit will be thrown out because the MSP ,while not complying with state law, are not the ones legally standing in the way of the individual from taking possession of the firearm. In doing so it will confirm the ability of the FFLs to release the firearms after 7 days. The FFLs will claim to the court they cant because of liability purposes and MSP either has to say there will be no repercussions or they are admitting to being the ones blocking the transfer.

 

[dfens42]

I doubt the case will be thrown out, because it does involve a Constitutionally guaranteed civil right AND the FFLs can prove financial damage. I wouldn't be surprised if we get a preliminary injunction in our favor and then the FFLs could look to file a class action suit against the state.

 

[iH8DemLibz]

I doubt the case will be thrown out, because it does involve a Constitutionally guaranteed civil right AND the FFLs can prove financial damage. I wouldn't be surprised if we get a preliminary injunction in our favor and then the FFLs could look to file a class action suit against the state.

You're asking the FFL's to Crap where they Eat and that's not going to happen.

We're waiting 88 days for our guns now and we'll be waiting 6 months for our guns after 10-1.

Just another one of my predictions. People think 6 months is crazy talk. We'll see.

 

[04RWon]

You all enjoy the super long wait. Im making it a point to buy a firearm, cash ans carry and post it everywhere with a big FU omalley.

Its bad enough im waiting for this g23. I dont have time. Not being impatient anymore, i am dead serious, i dont have time to wait.

 

[iH8DemLibz]

You all enjoy the super long wait. Im making it a point to buy a firearm, cash ans carry and post it everywhere with a big FU omalley.

Its bad enough im waiting for this g23. I dont have time. Not being impatient anymore, i am dead serious, i dont have time to wait.

Why? Did you see Zombies?

 

[04RWon]

Why? Did you see Zombies?

I wont be a MD resident lol. Once i move i cant really wait around to change my id and tags. Plus driving 14 hours just to pick up a gun and drive 14 more hours isnt really cost effective.


However, florida was one of the states that had the zombie incidents last year

 

[Fox123]

Might be faster, though decisively more expensive, to do the move, get new ID and everything and have it transferred to a Fla FFL for them to do the NICS and then pick it up in 72 hrs. Unless you have a Fla CCW then I believe you could take it with you same day.