Colt SP1 C&R exempt from HBAR law?

[Biggfoot44]

A quick search was $1800 .

More looking could show higher or lower .

But definitely, an SP-1 is worth significantly more to a Colt Collector, than as a generic shooter .

 

[Bob A]

Pre-October 2013 lowers, along with the extra-killy skinny barrels, can be transferred by inheritance on the death of the grandfathered owner.

 

[MattFinals718]

One other hypothetical question...I've always considered doing an M16A1 build (which has the same extra-dangerous pencil barrel as any AR-15 SP1). Obviously, since I didn't own one prior to 2013, I can't have one in MD. Unless...what if my build was set up as a CA legal-style, with a Maglocked upper/lower and only a 10-round magazine inserted (or something like a 20-rounder pinned to 10-round capacity). Would that be MD-compliant?

 

[Cool_Moo5e]

Has anyone ever been prosecuted for having a non-HBAR rifle? Does anyone in law enforcement care, or even know what they're looking at?

Not to my knowledge but with my luck I would get the cops called for shooting on my property by Karen down the road and that would be the thing they notice so for my sake I am following MD laws to a T with my guns till I find a place in the free state.

 

[Muleskinner]

Does the law even define HBAR?

 

[teratos]

Does the law even define HBAR?

Nooooo.

 

[MattFinals718]

Has anyone ever been prosecuted for having a non-HBAR rifle? Does anyone in law enforcement care, or even know what they're looking at?

Probably not. With that being said, my experience since I moved to MD is that most FFLs will not even sell "pencil" barrels at all, even custom-order barrels that their OEM marks with "HBAR" to comply with the law. The reason is that unlike other barrel types, a pencil barrel does look visually different from either medium or heavy barrels past the gas block (the part that's visible).

I think it would be a lot harder for LEOs to make a visual distinction between something like a Gov barrel and an HBAR barrel, because the only difference between those barrels is what's hidden under the handguard; past the gas block, most HBAR and GOV barrels look identical. My Daniel Defense M4A1 doesn't look any different than it did before I swapped its M4 GOV barrel for an M4 SOCOM barrel before moving to MD.

Does the law even define HBAR?

As we've discussed ad nauseum in other topics: No. MSP has given us their "guidance," but it's arbitrary and non-sensical and impossible to enforce. And it isn't legally binding anyway.

 

[Muleskinner]

Probably not. With that being said, my experience since I moved to MD is that most FFLs will not even sell "pencil" barrels at all, even custom-order barrels that their OEM marks with "HBAR" to comply with the law. The reason is that unlike other barrel types, a pencil barrel does look visually different from either medium or heavy barrels past the gas block (the part that's visible).

I think it would be a lot harder for LEOs to make a visual distinction between something like a Gov barrel and an HBAR barrel, because the only difference between those barrels is what's hidden under the handguard; past the gas block, most HBAR and GOV barrels look identical. My Daniel Defense M4A1 doesn't look any different than it did before I swapped its M4 GOV barrel for an M4 SOCOM barrel before moving to MD.



As we've discussed ad nauseum in other topics: No. MSP has given us their "guidance," but it's arbitrary and non-sensical and impossible to enforce. And it isn't legally binding anyway.

I've been to the range at DELMARVA several times with law enforcement there shooting. The only interactions I've had with any of them have all been positive. I have 1 pre 2013 AR and several that were built or purchased afterward. I have both HBAR and standard profile uppers and have invited officers to shoot my firearms while there. Never have they inspected my guns or even commented on the HBAR law...and I can tell you that they have shot post 2013 ARs that I own with standard profile barrels and they never even asked.

 

[teratos]

I've been to the range at DELMARVA several times with law enforcement there shooting. The only interactions I've had with any of them have all been positive. I have 1 pre 2013 AR and several that were built or purchased afterward. I have both HBAR and standard profile uppers and have invited officers to shoot my firearms while there. Never have they inspected my guns or even commented on the HBAR law...and I can tell you that they have shot post 2013 ARs that I own with standard profile barrels and they never even asked.

Nobody cares but the c*nts in Annapolis

 

[Muleskinner]

Nobody cares but the c*nts in Annapolis

You got that right. I have ARs with both HBAR and standard profile barrels in 5.56 and I use them interchangeably based on my mood while packing for the range.

 

[MattFinals718]

I've been to the range at DELMARVA several times with law enforcement there shooting. The only interactions I've had with any of them have all been positive. I have 1 pre 2013 AR and several that were built or purchased afterward. I have both HBAR and standard profile uppers and have invited officers to shoot my firearms while there. Never have they inspected my guns or even commented on the HBAR law...and I can tell you that they have shot post 2013 ARs that I own with standard profile barrels and they never even asked.

Well, you're a braver person than me, then. If any of my uppers were not converted to HBARs, I would at least keep them off my lowers while at home, and never use them except at ranges in Virginia. (In other topics, I've seen people say that they do that.)

Tbh, the reason that I follow the law is not that I'm worried about MSP ever checking my rifles at the range; my bigger concern is maintaining my security clearance. I've literally been asked in clearance interviews whether I've ever violated federal or state gun laws (I received that question from the interviewer for my most recent investigation, which was just last year). I'd rather have a clear conscience that I'm not doing anything that would jeopardize my employment prospects, especially in the event that I ever have to get polygraphed.

 

[teratos]

Well, you're a braver person than me, then. If any of my uppers were not converted to HBARs, I would at least keep them off my lowers while at home, and never use them except at ranges in Virginia. (In other topics, I've seen people say that they do that.)

Tbh, the reason that I follow the law is not that I'm worried about MSP ever checking my rifles at the range; my bigger concern is maintaining my security clearance. I've literally been asked in clearance interviews whether I've ever violated federal or state gun laws (I received that question from the interviewer for my most recent investigation, which was just last year). I'd rather have a clear conscience that I'm not doing anything that would jeopardize my employment prospects, especially in the event that I ever have to get polygraphed.

All of my pre-13 lowers have pre-13 uppers.

You have BGOS, and need to be held by a man in a gimp suit.

 

[Muleskinner]

Well, you're a braver person than me, then. If any of my uppers were not converted to HBARs, I would at least keep them off my lowers while at home, and never use them except at ranges in Virginia. (In other topics, I've seen people say that they do that.)

Tbh, the reason that I follow the law is not that I'm worried about MSP ever checking my rifles at the range; my bigger concern is maintaining my security clearance. I've literally been asked in clearance interviews whether I've ever violated federal or state gun laws (I received that question from the interviewer for my most recent investigation, which was just last year). I'd rather have a clear conscience that I'm not doing anything that would jeopardize my employment prospects, especially in the event that I ever have to get polygraphed.

I don't blame you one bit. Your clearance is your livelihood. I was always straight laced when I held mine...but that was a lifetime ago. The law doesn't define what is an HBAR so I feel no obligation to comply. (not that I would anyway even if there were a legal definition)

 

[MattFinals718]

All of my pre-13 lowers have pre-13 uppers.

You have BGOS, and need to be held by a man in a gimp suit.

Pre-2013 lowers and pre-2013 uppers? Huh? That doesn't violate the law. Did you mean "post"?

And no, I don't have BGOS. I'm just not a good liar, especially to federal investigators. Even when I think I'm morally in the right and being questioned about something that is none of the govt's business, I just can't lie. Too much Catholic guilt, I guess.

I don't blame you one bit. Your clearance is your livelihood. I was always straight laced when I held mine...but that was a lifetime ago. The law doesn't define what is an HBAR so I feel no obligation to comply. (not that I would anyway even if there were a legal definition)

Are you retired now?

I probably wouldn't care as much if I were retired from federal service and drawing a pension. Alas, I don't have that luxury right now. And by the time I'm retired, I'll also probably be back living in VA, anyway.

 

[Art3]

Well, you're a braver person than me, then. If any of my uppers were not converted to HBARs, I would at least keep them off my lowers while at home, and never use them except at ranges in Virginia. (In other topics, I've seen people say that they do that.)

Tbh, the reason that I follow the law is not that I'm worried about MSP ever checking my rifles at the range; my bigger concern is maintaining my security clearance. I've literally been asked in clearance interviews whether I've ever violated federal or state gun laws (I received that question from the interviewer for my most recent investigation, which was just last year). I'd rather have a clear conscience that I'm not doing anything that would jeopardize my employment prospects, especially in the event that I ever have to get polygraphed.

All of my pre-13 lowers have pre-13 uppers.

You have BGOS, and need to be held by a man in a gimp suit.

He does, but I respect his reasons and integrity. I'd bet it's easier to beat a polygraph if you're confident that you aren't lying...

I don't blame you one bit. Your clearance is your livelihood. I was always straight laced when I held mine...but that was a lifetime ago. The law doesn't define what is an HBAR so I feel no obligation to comply. (not that I would anyway even if there were a legal definition)

Yeah...most of us working stiffs do have to make minor real world compromises about compliance to put food on the table...at least for a while

Man, I wish my Dad was President.

 

[Biggfoot44]

It would be an Ugly Banned Rifle . ( Banned by name) .

OTOH , if you've got the $$ , an actual M16A1 is legal .

 

[Allen65]

He does, but I respect his reasons and integrity. I'd bet it's easier to beat a polygraph if you're confident that you aren't lying...

The people who have the easiest time with polygraphs are:

- sociopaths, who feel no guilt over lying to the polygrapher,
- pathological liars/narcissists, who believe their own fabrications, and
- spies trained to thwart polygraph exams

Polygraphs are wonderful, however, at catching otherwise normal, honest people with minor issues.

 

[MattFinals718]

It would be an Ugly Banned Rifle . ( Banned by name) .

OTOH , if you've got the $$ , an actual M16A1 is legal .

I'd love to own one someday, but right now, transferrable M16A1s sell for more than the value of my entire gun collection. Not to mention that it's a lot harder to justify ownership here in MD than any free state.

The people who have the easiest time with polygraphs are:

- sociopaths, who feel no guilt over lying to the polygrapher,
- pathological liars/narcissists, who believe their own fabrications, and
- spies trained to thwart polygraph exams

Polygraphs are wonderful, however, at catching otherwise normal, honest people with minor issues.

Yeah, exactly - it's always been a fundamental flaw of the process. Many of the worst spies and traitors in our nation's recent history (e.g., Aldrich Ames, Robert Hanssen, Edward Snowden) passed multiple polygraphs during their government careers, and were never caught.

I once talked to an OPM investigator who flat-out admitted to me that the security clearance process is fundamentally incapable of catching the people who are capable of causing the most harm to national security, but like so many other outdated and obsolete government processes, it won't go away because too many people's jobs depend on it.

 

[dblas]

Well, you're a braver person than me, then. If any of my uppers were not converted to HBARs, I would at least keep them off my lowers while at home, and never use them except at ranges in Virginia. (In other topics, I've seen people say that they do that.)

Tbh, the reason that I follow the law is not that I'm worried about MSP ever checking my rifles at the range; my bigger concern is maintaining my security clearance. I've literally been asked in clearance interviews whether I've ever violated federal or state gun laws (I received that question from the interviewer for my most recent investigation, which was just last year). I'd rather have a clear conscience that I'm not doing anything that would jeopardize my employment prospects, especially in the event that I ever have to get polygraphed.

I am in the same boat as you with a clearance, I have pre-2013 lowers that legally have pre-2013 uppers on them. I've shot them at ranges with LE present. I, like MS, have had LE shoot my rifles, including my SP-1 while at the range, all with no issues.

When it came time for my clearance, I got asked the same question and with a clear conscience, answered no.

You sir, have extreme BGOS and if you tailor your behavior to suit the ruling class, then you are a servant, not a citizen.

 

[teratos]

You sir, have extreme BGOS and if you tailor your behavior to suit the ruling class, then you are a servant, not a citizen.

One of the worst cases of BGOS I’ve ever seen.

Nobody is under any obligation to obey unconstitutional laws, and may proceed as though those “laws” have never been passed.