Montgomery Co. & Shipping Ammo

[silver78]

I have known the guys who own Atlantic for almost 30 years and I remember when they sued. For those who complain about Atlantic's pricing please remember that they spent legal dollars on this matter that benefits every gun owner in Montgomery Co.

For those of you who were not around, the ammo regulation issue came up years ago when some ultra liberal mayor in a small town in Mo Co (I think it was Friendship Heights) tried to get around the state law pre-empting local gun regulation by banning ammo. It generated a lot of publicity and of course the state did not like the idea of some two bit mayor circumventing their state law so the state AG wrote an opinion that the state pre-emption law also covered ammo since it is an integral component of a firearm. Then when the nit wit Montgomery County council passed this BS ammo regulation, it was a slam dunk case for Atlantic's attorney to get the law invalidated.

 

[novus collectus]

I have known the guys who own Atlantic for almost 30 years and I remember when they sued. For those who complain about Atlantic's pricing please remember that they spent legal dollars on this matter that benefits every gun owner in Montgomery Co.

For those of you who were not around, the ammo regulation issue came up years ago when some ultra liberal mayor in a small town in Mo Co (I think it was Friendship Heights) tried to get around the state law pre-empting local gun regulation by banning ammo. It generated a lot of publicity and of course the state did not like the idea of some two bit mayor circumventing their state law so the state AG wrote an opinion that the state pre-emption law also covered ammo since it is an integral component of a firearm. Then when the nit wit Montgomery County council passed this BS ammo regulation, it was a slam dunk case for Atlantic's attorney to get the law invalidated.

Is there any way to get a copy of the AG's opinion? There is a PG co law that I think violates the state preemption.

 

[SigMatt]

If someone comes up with a copy of the AG's opinion on this, I would love a copy for my files.

Matt

 

[MikeTF]

I have known the guys who own Atlantic for almost 30 years and I remember when they sued. For those who complain about Atlantic's pricing please remember that they spent legal dollars on this matter that benefits every gun owner in Montgomery Co.

For those of you who were not around, the ammo regulation issue came up years ago when some ultra liberal mayor in a small town in Mo Co (I think it was Friendship Heights) tried to get around the state law pre-empting local gun regulation by banning ammo. It generated a lot of publicity and of course the state did not like the idea of some two bit mayor circumventing their state law so the state AG wrote an opinion that the state pre-emption law also covered ammo since it is an integral component of a firearm. Then when the nit wit Montgomery County council passed this BS ammo regulation, it was a slam dunk case for Atlantic's attorney to get the law invalidated.

I've purchased from them. The staff are outstanding. It is a great place to window shop. They have just about everything that you could imagine in stock.

 

[swinokur]

I've purchased from them. The staff are outstanding. It is a great place to window shop. They have just about everything that you could imagine in stock.

I agree. They aren't cheap, but everything I wanted for a handgun purchase was in stock. Helpful as well.

Stu

 

[silver78]

Is there any way to get a copy of the AG's opinion? There is a PG co law that I think violates the state preemption.

Based on my middle age memory, the AG's opinion for the Friendship Heights ammo ban was not part of a specific case so I would think it would be difficult to find. Although an attorney may prove me wrong on this.

Can anyone pull the case law text from the Atlantic Guns case? There may be a reference to the AG's opinion in that case. This case seems like the best place to start.

 

[boricuamaximus]

Based on my middle age memory, the AG's opinion for the Friendship Heights ammo ban was not part of a specific case so I would think it would be difficult to find. Although an attorney may prove me wrong on this.

Can anyone pull the case law text from the Atlantic Guns case? There may be a reference to the AG's opinion in that case. This case seems like the best place to start.

first page of this thread 3rd post is the text.

 

[silver78]

OK - maybe I'm missing something, I see the reference to the Atlantic Guns case. What I do not see is where I can read the whole text of the Atlantic Guns case. Can some help point me to this?

Thanks!

 

[K-Romulus]

Guys, I have both the AG opinion on MoCO's BS law and the MD Ct. App opinion, but can only upload them from home. I'll get them both up tonight . . .

67 Op. Atty Gen. Md. 316
December 10, 1982

OPINIONBY:
STEPHEN H. SACHS, Attorney General

OPINION:
You have each requested our opinion on the authority of local governments to enact legislation that would ban or restrict the possession or sale of handgun ammunition. Mr. Elmendorf has specifically requested our views on the legality of: (i) a proposed Montgomery County ordinance to restrict the sale of handgun ammunition in Montgomery County; and (ii) a regulation adopted by the Friendship Heights Village Council to ban the possession of ammunition in the Villages of Friendship Heights and the Hills, a "special tax area or district" under the Montgomery County Code. Both of these measures are pending before the Montgomery County Council. (...)

There is also a third AG opinion from 1991 about the MoCO handgun lock sale law.

 

[K-Romulus]

OK, here they are

AG opinion from 1982 on MoCO's proposed ammo ban

AG opinion from 1991 on MoCO's proposed child access law

Atlantic Guns v. MoCO

 

[novus collectus]

AG opinion from 1982 on MoCO's proposed ammo ban

AG opinion from 1991 on MoCO's proposed child access law

Atlantic Guns v. MoCO

State law contains three separate preemption provisions concerning local handgun restrictions. One deals with
"possession":
"All restrictions imposed by the laws, ordinances or regulations of all subordinate jurisdictions within the State of
Maryland on possession or transfers by private parties of pistols and revolvers are superseded by this section and The
State of Maryland hereby preempts the right of such jurisdictions to regulate the possession and transfer of pistols and
revolvers." Article 27, § 445(a)

Interesting.....

So, by looking at the old code, 445(a) and 445, it includes what is covered in the section I keep pointing out for state preemption in 5-133 in the new code. So it seems possible looking at legislative history I might be right that when it says in 5-133 "This section supersedes any restriction that a local jurisdiction in the State imposes on the possession by a private party of a regulated firearm, and the State preempts the right of any local jurisdiction to regulate the possession of a regulated firearm" that it applies to all forms of regulation of possession in all circumstances.
However, the new code does seperate the possession from the transfer and from transfer of private party from a dealer when it mentions the state preemption which could support the argument the legislature just wanted the content of that section to be preempted and not an all complete preemption on all regulation of regulated firearms (superceding or adding to 4-209 with regards to regulated). But the AG's letter IMHO supports my reading that when it says "the State preempts the right of any local jurisdiction to regulate the possession of a regulated firearm" it is all emcompassing.

It is obvious that the local legislative proposals in question would be preempted if they directly restricted
possession or sale of handguns. In our view, State law mandates the same result with respect to restrictions on handgun
ammunition.
Ammunition is an integral element of a handgun. Indeed, the ability to detonate and propel projectile ammunition is
the very factor -- the sine qua non -- that distinguishes firearms [*7] from other devices. Howell v. State, 278 Md. 389
(1976); 61 Opinions of the Attorney General 647 (1976). See also Article 27, § 441(g) (defining "antique pistol or
revolver").
The State handgun laws recognize this reality. For example, the law specifies that when one travels between places
where one may lawfully carry a handgun even without a permit -- e.g., one's home or business -- "[the] handgun shall be
unloaded and carried in an enclosed case or enclosed holder". Article 27, § 36B(c)(3) (emphasis added). This
requirement strongly suggests that the General Assembly intended the converse as well: persons who are at a place
where they may lawfully carry handguns without a permit, like their homes or businesses, may also load them with
ammunition -- the very element that renders the handguns operable as such.

HA! Just as I thought! I havn't read the other opinion yet, but it seems by this that PG county's ban on loaded firearms within 1,000 feet (not 100) of a structure violates state preemption because there is a state preemption on the ammunition for ALL firearms in the current code. So if one were to have a loaded long gun (regulated or not), it seems as if PG county cannot convict them for violeting county code because the ban on loaded firearms is a ban on the possession of ammunition violating state preemption on possession of ammunition.