HB1261 - Weapon Crimes - Assault Long Guns and Copycat Weapons

[fabsroman]

So they would not have record of those I transferred to an FFL within and without the state of MD


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They would not have a record of those that broke and got thrown away. If I am not mistaken, before October 2013 there was no law that required a person to report a stolen regulated firearm.

Then, there is the boating accident scenario.

 

[ironpony]

"When they try to take anybody's stuff we all gotta to show up!"

I'm trying to find the one where he says once they come to your house and do not find all the guns on "Their" list they will tie you to a chair and cut parts off your body until you tell them where every gun is!



Yeah, these laws are not helping the citizens.

 

[Mark75H]

Not to mention that MSP's records don't address firearms sold to dealers out of state.

Nor to dealers instate. Dealers are not required to do 77r's on themselves or each other

 

[Malachi.2.15]

I'm trying to reconcile this...

The Firearms Protection Act of 1986

"No such rule or regulation prescribed [by the Attorney General] after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or disposition be established"

With this...

As mentioned before, the database, per state law, is of regulated sales (purchases), not what you personally own. A sale (purchase), is a sale (purchase), is a sale (purchase), which means that when you bought a firearm, that sale is in the database, when you sell that firearm, it is in the database (as a purchase buy the other person), when that person sells the firearm, it is in the database.

There is no way to remove a purchase from your record.

The only sales (purchases) that do not show up in the database, are those that did NOT require a 77R to complete.

Doesn't the FPA make it illegal for MD to require registration already much less under this new proposed bill?

 

[Allen65]

Doesn't the FPA make it illegal for MD to require registration already much less under this new proposed bill?

That only affects actions by FEDGOV, not states.

 

[Malachi.2.15]

That only affects actions by FEDGOV, not states.

The Firearms Protection Act of 1986

"....be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or ANY STATE or any political subdivision thereof...

Looks like it specifically calls out a prohibition of the states to keep a record as well.

 

[Doco Overboard]

I'm trying to reconcile this...




With this...



Doesn't the FPA make it illegal for MD to require registration already much less under this new proposed bill?

Maybe that's the voluntary part. I wonder how many have been fined, incarcerated or otherwise ruined with non compliance in the past?
It would be interesting to know how it went for those who have gone before, I have no idea.

 

[dblas]

There have been other known cases of flaws in the database. I am certain they will never have the money to audit and correct it. A known flawed database is worthless for any legal action - forever.

They don't want to audit it or correct it, even though they know of the numerous flaws and mis-information that is in it. There are several members on this board that have firearms purchases attributed to them with the wrong serial number of the firearm. MSP and DCPS (The maintaining organization of the LE related databases in Maryland) are aware of the incorrect serial numbers, they refuse to correct them.

 

[dblas]

Not to mention that MSP's records don't address firearms sold to dealers out of state.

State law DOES NOT require them to, only purchase/transfers that happen IN Maryland to Maryland residents.

 

[dblas]

Looks like it specifically calls out a prohibition of the states to keep a record as well.

NO, it specifically calls out the Fed for not being able to use state resources to hold a federal database.

This is a federal law that applies to the federal AG and DOJ. Please show me in the law where it calls out STATE AGs, it doesn't.

 

[dblas]

Maybe that's the voluntary part. I wonder how many have been fined, incarcerated or otherwise ruined with non compliance in the past?
It would be interesting to know how it went for those who have gone before, I have no idea.

77R is Maryland only, the text from the FPA is Federal. Do not get the two confused.

 

[Squaregrouper]

NO, it specifically calls out the Fed for not being able to use state resources to hold a federal database.

This is a federal law that applies to the federal AG and DOJ. Please show me in the law where it calls out STATE AGs, it doesn't.

18 U.S. Code, citation 926 (a), (3)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/926

It appears pretty cut and dry to me. What am I missing?

 

[Doco Overboard]

United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or disposition be established"

Yes seems pretty confusing and the reason I'm just a humble servant.

 

[Allen65]

United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or disposition be established"

Yes seems pretty confusing and the reason I'm just a humble servant.

That's out of context. Here is the full text of that section of law:
-
"No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established. Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary’s [1] authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation."
-
It's pretty specific to actions of the Federal GOV, i.e. the Feds can't require states to keep records. It does not forbid states from establishing their own system of records under their own authorities. And there's an argument made that under the 10th Amendment, the Feds can't forbid a state from doing so on its own.

 

[IDFInfantry]

I'm trying to find the one where he says once they come to your house and do not find all the guns on "Their" list they will tie you to a chair and cut parts off your body until you tell them where every gun is!



Yeah, these laws are not helping the citizens.

Cut off body parts not likely but here where he mentions they’ll magically make up other shit to charge you with is true. They’ll miraculously find drugs in your residence and then charge you with that. I would not at all put that out of the realm of possibility. How many times have we seen that before? Too many to count! They will coerce and threaten you into compliance and when that doesn’t work they will just pick off / target the people that refused to comply one by one. This is no longer a joke this is serious. We need to stick together and help each other out. Think Bundy Ranch Style. You can beg and plead to keep your rights all you want in the end they won’t show you any mercy nor do they care!

 

[CanDoEZ]

I used the MSP PIA email for a data request. Be interesting to see the results.

 

[Malachi.2.15]

That's out of context. Here is the full text of that section of law:
-
"No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established. Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary’s [1] authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation."
-
It's pretty specific to actions of the Federal GOV, i.e. the Feds can't require states to keep records. It does not forbid states from establishing their own system of records under their own authorities. And there's an argument made that under the 10th Amendment, the Feds can't forbid a state from doing so on its own.

Understand it is a federal law...but there are elements of the FOPA that are absolutely binding to the states. Why doesn't that apply here?

To me...it is confusing enough to be interpreted that the states can't keep a registry either.

 

[Allen65]

Understand it is a federal law...but there are elements of the FOPA that are absolutely binding to the states. Why doesn't that apply here?

To me...it is confusing enough to be interpreted that the states can't keep a registry either.

Those elements you're asking about are very specific that following the requirements of FOPA serves as a defense against charges in Federal or State courts. The language specifically includes non-Federal jurisdictions.

But even in FOPA, the Federal law can only affect firearms moving in interstate commerce under the authority granted to Congress in the COTUS Commerce Clause (Article 1, Section 8). Granted, the reach of the Commerce Clause has been really stretched on occasion, and the FEDGOV can coerce states by threatening to withhold Federal funding. But the 10th Amendment specifically limits the power of the Federal Government to legislate behavior and laws of states absent a specific COTUS authority such as interstate commerce regulation and enforcement of the 14th Amendment (Due Process).

 

[ironpony]

Cut off body parts not likely but here where he mentions they’ll magically make up other shit to charge you with is true. They’ll miraculously find drugs in your residence and then charge you with that. I would not at all put that out of the realm of possibility. How many times have we seen that before? Too many to count! They will coerce and threaten you into compliance and when that doesn’t work they will just pick off / target the people that refused to comply one by one. This is no longer a joke this is serious. We need to stick together and help each other out. Think Bundy Ranch Style. You can beg and plead to keep your rights all you want in the end they won’t show you any mercy nor do they care!

yeah, I don't like bringing up the "Country of Attorneys" thing again but one could easily come to the conclusion that these laws are written vague so they can play with them later! Job security. If they accuse you of doing something wrong you will definitely need one so I hope I am not biting the hand that feeds me.



Given the fact we have three branches of .gov (Legislative, Judicial and Executive) what percentage of the seats in these branches are held by attorneys?

 

[Allen65]

Given the fact we have three branches of .gov (Legislative, Judicial and Executive) what percentage of the seats in these branches are held by attorneys?

Judicial Branch is 100% except for folks in clerical and other support functions.

Legislative Branch, roughly 50% actually worked occupationally as attorneys, anecdotally I'd guess another 10-15% have law degrees but haven't practiced.

Executive Branch, probably less than 2%, especially if you include the military in the definition of Executive Branch. Many local offices and installations with hundreds of employees may have no attorney on site at all.