HBAR build after October?

[MotoJ]

From SB-281, banned AW list:

xv)
Colt AR15, CAR15, and all imitations except Colt AR15 Sporter HBAR rifle


Hypothetically, after October, if one wanted to complete an AR build, would that be legal if the configuration was HBAR, even if the lower and other parts were not Colt? Or will builds be verboten, period? Does the rifle HAVE to be Colt?

 

[dblas]

This has been asked and answered several times.

http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=117957

http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=117017

http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=116893

Don't mean to sound short, but this has been discussed to death.

 

[MotoJ]

This has been asked and answered several times.

http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=117957

http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=117017

http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=116893

Don't mean to sound short, but this has been discussed to death.

Thanks for the links, but they don't answer my question. The first two don't address my question at all. The last essentially is my question, but in twenty pages of posts, it's not answered definitively. Discussed, not resolved.

There is mention in the third thread of some decision by the MSP that allows HBAR Colt copies, or any AR with heavy barrel, but no link to said decision that I found. So I consider it all Internet Lawyering, not an answer.

So, no resolution yet as to whether an HBAR parts build is legal, or if it MUST be a Colt, after October.

 

[dblas]

You asked about building an AR, The second link covers the entire discussion of building an AR after October 1.

The last link actually has a copy of a letter from 1998 from MSP with regards to other manufacturers of HBAR's. It also has several verbatum conversations with MSP LD, listed with regards to MSPs stance on HBARs (if an FFL considers the firearm an HBRA then it is unregulated).

As for coming to a forum and asking for a legal opinion, all you will get is internet lawyering, so use what ever information you get at your own risk.

So to put it in one single post, you may or may not be able to build an AR after October 1 (no one knows for sure, and MSP hasn't said what they will do). If the answer is yes, then it would be an HBAR and no it does not have to be a COLT, it can be on any manufacturers lower.

 

[MotoJ]

You asked about building an AR, The second link covers the entire discussion of building an AR after October 1.

The last link actually has a copy of a letter from 1998 from MSP with regards to other manufacturers of HBAR's. It also has several verbatum conversations with MSP LD, listed with regards to MSPs stance on HBARs (if an FFL considers the firearm an HBRA then it is unregulated).

As for coming to a forum and asking for a legal opinion, all you will get is internet lawyering, so use what ever information you get at your own risk.

So to put it in one single post, you may or may not be able to build an AR after October 1 (no one knows for sure, and MSP hasn't said what they will do). If the answer is yes, then it would be an HBAR and no it does not have to be a COLT, it can be on any manufacturers lower.

This is what I'm questioning. Where are you getting this? A letter from 1998 doesn't have any bearing on SB281. Only a current letter from the AG or MSP specifically addressing the language of SB281 as it was passed would answer the question. So, no one knows for sure about A or B that I can see. Amirite?

 

[dblas]

This is what I'm questioning. Where are you getting this? A letter from 1998 doesn't have any bearing on SB281. Only a current letter from the AG or MSP specifically addressing the language of SB281 as it was passed would answer the question. So, no one knows for sure about A or B that I can see. Amirite?

Umm, no a letter from 1998 that has bearing on HBARs today certainly does have bearing on SB281. If other manufacturers' HBARs are acceptable for sale as non-regulated today, per the letter, then any manufacturer HBAR will still have the same standing as a COLT HBAR after October 1.

There is no letter specifically addressing SB281 as it is not law yet, so why would any agency put out a letter on anything that isn't law?

And yes, you are right, no one knows.

 

[MotoJ]

Umm, no a letter from 1998 that has bearing on HBARs today certainly does have bearing on SB281. If other manufacturers' HBARs are acceptable for sale as non-regulated today, per the letter, then any manufacturer HBAR will still have the same standing as a COLT HBAR after October 1.

There is no letter specifically addressing SB281 as it is not law yet, so why would any agency put out a letter on anything that isn't law?

And yes, you are right, no one knows.

Well, if SB281 (assuming it will be signed) only specifically mentions Colt Sporter HBARs as exempt, and does not mention any proceeding laws or letters as having impact, then it would seem the new language supersedes such a letter. Elsewhere in the bill, if previous legislation affects language, those statutes are referenced.

From SB-281, banned AW list:

xv)
Colt AR15, CAR15, and all imitations except Colt AR15 Sporter HBAR rifle

If it said "....except Colt AR15 Sporter HBAR rifle, and imitations", then I think it would be easier to interpret that all heavy barrel ARs would remain legal for purchase after October.

Anyway, guess we'll find out eventually.

 

[janklow]

Well, if SB281 (assuming it will be signed) only specifically mentions Colt Sporter HBARs as exempt, and does not mention any proceeding laws or letters as having impact, then it would seem the new language supersedes such a letter.

this is why he's telling you to read that link, because this is the topic being debated to death there.

SB281 turns the regulated list into a ban list; thus, the argument is that if the HBARs aren't regulated now (and that's where the letter comes into play), then they're not going to be banned 10.01. but again, see that link.

 

[dblas]

Well, if SB281 (assuming it will be signed) only specifically mentions Colt Sporter HBARs as exempt, and does not mention any proceeding laws or letters as having impact, then it would seem the new language supersedes such a letter. Elsewhere in the bill, if previous legislation affects language, those statutes are referenced.

From SB-281, banned AW list:

xv)
Colt AR15, CAR15, and all imitations except Colt AR15 Sporter HBAR rifle

If it said "....except Colt AR15 Sporter HBAR rifle, and imitations", then I think it would be easier to interpret that all heavy barrel ARs would remain legal for purchase after October.

Anyway, guess we'll find out eventually.

Here is how the bill works, you are looking at a line in the bill that has been there since 1996, since it not in BOLD, it is not added to the bill, it is current law. It is not new language.

Since it is current law from 1996 (and not new language), the letter from 1998 adds further clarification to the law from MSP.

For the entire back and forth on this subject, I suggest you read this thread: http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=116893 in its entirety.

 

[dblas]

this is why he's telling you to read that link, because this is the topic being debated to death there.

SB281 turns the regulated list into a ban list; thus, the argument is that if the HBARs aren't regulated now (and that's where the letter comes into play), then they're not going to be banned 10.01. but again, see that link.

Thanks for the asset, I'm not sure I can go through all of that a third time.

 

[Markp]

this is why he's telling you to read that link, because this is the topic being debated to death there.

SB281 turns the regulated list into a ban list; thus, the argument is that if the HBARs aren't regulated now (and that's where the letter comes into play), then they're not going to be banned 10.01. but again, see that link.

Next you're gonna say that the constitution plays a role in how laws are ruled upon today?

What? That 200 year old rag? Get serious!

 

[dblas]

Next you're gonna say that the constitution plays a role in how laws are ruled upon today?

LOL....Stop that or move back here a defend yourself sir.

 

[MotoJ]

All I can say after perusing all this speculation is that if I got pulled over on the way home from the range and the LEO wanted to inspect my HBAR, I would sure want it to say COLT on it instead of having to rely on a 15 year old letter that may or may not be relevant after Oct. 1st.

 

[dblas]

All I can say after perusing all this speculation is that if I got pulled over on the way home from the range and the LEO wanted to inspect my HBAR, I would sure want it to say COLT on it instead of having to rely on a 15 year old letter that may or may not be relevant after Oct. 1st.

You know what dude, I am going to tell you what I tell everyone else. If you don't like the smell of the letter, then call MSP directly and talk to them, several of us already have.

To save you time, here are the actual posts with the conversations, the name of the Corporal, and the number to contact him:

http://www.mdshooters.com/showpost.php?p=2394784&postcount=326

http://www.mdshooters.com/showpost.php?p=2395467&postcount=338

Why don't you call Cpl. Rasinski at 410-653-4510 and ask him your self.

You came on a forum and asked for information, you were given information, you don't "like" the answers. Fine, then ask somewhere else.

 

[Biggfoot44]

In addition , back in post #7 , Motoj limped together two things that are very much seperate issues.

There is strong evidence to sugguest that HBAR RIFLES will still be able to be sold. That does NOT automatically equate with you being permitted to buy a lower reciever so as to BUILD an HBAR .

 

[Merlin]

Thanks for the links, but they don't answer my question. The first two don't address my question at all. The only last essentially is my question, but in twenty pages of posts, it's not answered definitively. Discussed, not resolved.

There is mention in the third thread of some decision by the MSP that allows HBAR Colt copies, or any AR with heavy barrel, but no link to said decision that I found. So I consider it all Internet Lawyering, not an answer.

So, no resolution yet as to whether an HBAR parts build is legal, or if it MUST be a Colt, after October.

You asked about building an AR, The second link covers the entire discussion of building an AR after October 1.

The last link actually has a copy of a letter from 1998 from MSP with regards to other manufacturers of HBAR's. It also has several verbatum conversations with MSP LD, listed with regards to MSPs stance on HBARs (if an FFL considers the firearm an HBRA then it is unregulated).

As for coming to a forum and asking for a legal opinion, all you will get is internet lawyering, so use what ever information you get at your own risk.

So to put it in one single post, you may or may not be able to build an AR after October 1 (no one knows for sure, and MSP hasn't said what they will do). If the answer is yes, then it would be an HBAR and no it does not have to be a COLT, it can be on any manufacturers lower.

The only thing I can add is when I/we spoke to the MSP just last week I ask will anything change of with the way HBARs are handled after 10/1. The trooper told me that he did hear there were going to be some changes, but he did not know if any of the changes had anything to do with the HBARs.

 

[Merlin]

Thanks for the asset, I'm not sure I can go through all of that a third time.

Your right about how 281 shows nothing has changed with HBAR'S. The problem is, or could be the MSP could wake up one morning and decide to change their opinion on how they want to interpret HBARs. I don't think they will change, but I would not bet all that I have they will not. Everything happens for a reason and there is a reason they would not give us anything in writing when you asked them.

 

[Merlin]

This has been asked and answered several times.

http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=117957

http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=117017

http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=116893

Don't mean to sound short, but this has been discussed to death.

dblas, question for you;

And forgive me if we covered this. But we, or should I say I now know that (as it stands now, and hopefully continues), the MSP lets a FFL to sell any rifle that either has HBAR stamped on the barrel, or, any rifle that the FFL can categorize as an HBAR even if HBAR is not stamped in the barrel over the counter without regulated paperwork.

But I'm assuming my statement above deals with commercially manufactured rifles.

My question is, does this also extend to an AR we build with an HBAR?

My first thought that is does not on guns we build because when you buy just a receiver from any manufacture it has to go through an FFL with regulated paperwork no matter what. And you can claim that your intentions are to build an HBAR rifle all you want, but they will still require the FFL/regulated paperwork.

Also, is it your opinion that we will still be able to buy complete AR receivers after 10/1 if we are going to build a HBAR rifle?

 

[iH8DemLibz]

Does anyone know if we will be allowed to build HBAR rifles after 10-1?

Or is this a question for a new Thread or Topic?

I can't find any information on this.

 

[Merlin]

All I can say after perusing all this speculation is that if I got pulled over on the way home from the range and the LEO wanted to inspect my HBAR, I would sure want it to say COLT on it instead of having to rely on a 15 year old letter that may or may not be relevant after Oct. 1st.

What the letter does is show that other manufactures are OK to sell over the counter as unregulated if it is an HBAR, not just Colts.

Let me save you from a mountain of grief. The reason that letter came up was because of me being the poster boy of telling everyone and anyone that the law ONLY intended a Colt AR15 Sporter HBAR rifle as the one and only rifle that could be sold over the counter without regulated paperwork. My opinion formed by having many FFL's that have been in business for years tell me that very same thing. They would tell me that is the ONLY rifle they would sell over the counter without regulated paperwork. If it did not say COLT SPORTER on the side of the gun, they would not sell it over the counter.

So we were in one of the listed threads going back and forth about this when I decided that I would contact the MSP and ask them how this all works, and I was ASSUMING they were going to back up what I was saying and not the guys that said that not just Colt Sporter rifles, but any and all HBAR's could be sold over the counter.

So a longer story short, I talked to a trooper (that you can call as well) that works in the Firearms Licensing Unit and I asked him how the MSP looks at this issue. Guess what......I was completely wrong. The trooper told me that "any HBAR, by any manufacture can be sold over the counter without regulated paperwork just like any shotgun or long gun."

The trooper went on to also say, "if the FFL has the professional opinion that the given AR rifle has a barrel that can be categorized as an HBAR rifle due to it's design, Even if the barrel is NOT stamped HBAR, it is OK for the FFL to sell the rifle over the counter without regulated paperwork."


Now you can say like many have already said, your conversation with the MSP doesn't mean spit. That fine, you can say that. And I can say call them and ask them yourself if you do not want to believe me. Cpl. Rasinski will be more than glad to answer your question, you can reach him@410-653-4510