Moved Here With AR's, Now What?

[DOsniper]

Ok, I have been trying to keep up with SB281, the amendments (or lack there of), etc, etc....

So here's the deal, I moved BACK to MD (unfortunately) two years ago with two AR's and a 1911. Both were purchased legally from FFLs - one is an AR pistol (RRA pistol lower), the other, an HBAR I built on a Mega lower (which I'm not so worried about through all this).

So, with all this grandfathering business before 10/1/13, I have NO idea what to do?!?!? I definitely want these guns registered to avoid issues in the future. Hell, I'm not even sure if they need to be registered even with SB281. The bill has changed so much I'm just confused at this point as to what has and has not been included.

When I moved back, I knew registration was not mandatory, and I was acting within the law, but SB281 has royally f***ed all of this up.

I know registering the HBAR and 1911 will not be an issue, but the AR-pistol is what I'm worried about. The last thing I want is to be at a range and have some on (or off) duty officer ask me about my gun.

Sorry, I know these laws are BS, but I'm not risking my background over it. Wish I could move again, but unfortunately it is not an option.

It's sad, but part of me is contemplating just selling the damn pistol lower and just SBRing one of my other lowers.

Thanks in advance.

 

[esqappellate]

Ok, I have been trying to keep up with SB281, the amendments (or lack there of), etc, etc....

So here's the deal, I moved BACK to MD (unfortunately) two years ago with two AR's and a 1911. Both were purchased legally from FFLs - one is an AR pistol (RRA pistol lower), the other, an HBAR I built on a Mega lower (which I'm not so worried about through all this).

So, with all this grandfathering business before 10/1/13, I have NO idea what to do?!?!? I definitely want these guns registered to avoid issues in the future. Hell, I'm not even sure if they need to be registered even with SB281. The bill has changed so much I'm just confused at this point as to what has and has not been included.

When I moved back, I knew registration was not mandatory, and I was acting within the law, but SB281 has royally f***ed all of this up.

I know registering the HBAR and 1911 will not be an issue, but the AR-pistol is what I'm worried about. The last thing I want is to be at a range and have some on (or off) duty officer ask me about my gun.

Sorry, I know these laws are BS, but I'm not risking my background over it. Wish I could move again, but unfortunately it is not an option.

It's sad, but part of me is contemplating just selling the damn pistol lower and just SBRing one of my other lowers.

Thanks in advance.

SB 281 does not contain a registration requirement as adopted by both houses. If you legally possess them now (or as of Oct. 1, 2013, you may continue to possess them. I have no clue what exactly an AR 15 looks like, if it is not on the current list of assault pistols or semi auto pistol with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds, or is it is not a semiauto rifle less than 29 inches in length, then it is not banned. But if everything was legal to have now, then it is legal to continue to possess them after Oct. 1, 2013.

 

[ddeanjohnson]

So, with all this grandfathering business before 10/1/13, I have NO idea what to do?!?!? I definitely want these guns registered to avoid issues in the future. Hell, I'm not even sure if they need to be registered even with SB281. The bill has changed so much I'm just confused at this point as to what has and has not been included.
When I moved back, I knew registration was not mandatory, and I was acting within the law, but SB281 has royally f***ed all of this up.
It's sad, but part of me is contemplating just selling the damn pistol lower and just SBRing one of my other lowers.
Thanks in advance.

Since you're already a Maryland resident, and you moved here with lawfully owned firearms, SB 281 does not require you to register anything. You might want to keep documents that verify your lawful ownership prior to October 1, 2013, and even have key documents notarized. But these are just prudential steps and nothing in the bill actually requires them.

If any of the guns are "assault" or so-called "copycat" weapons, then if you ever want to divest yourself of them after October 1, 2013, you'll have to sell them out-of-state through the transfer requirements spelled out in law, mostly federal law. You can also pass them on to Maryland residents by inheritance.

To raise your comfort level further, you may wish to review my summary of the bill, and subsequent questions and answers, on this thread:
http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=114585

 

[Straightshooter]

Related question.
In the future (after Oct 1) will fools who for unknown reasons look to purchasing a home in Maryland, who have legally purchased an "assault" weapon in another state of residence after Oct 1, 2013 have to choose between keeping those guns or moving here? Further, if someone brings any of these weapons into Maryland without knowledge of the restriction, what then?

Looks like one more nail in the real estate market's casket.

 

[Rabu Rabu]

They don't have to do anything. If they come and bring their guns, there's literally nothing to do, however, if they move out of state and then for some reason have to come BACK they cannot bring their guns.

In Op's case, he's fine, because he's moved back in before the enactment. So the only way this becomes an issue is if he moves out of state AGAIN then moves back HERE again.

How they'd prove anything in relation to your guns is beyond me, but this is how I interpreted it.

 

[phx223]

They don't have to do anything. If they come and bring their guns, there's literally nothing to do, however, if they move out of state and then for some reason have to come BACK they cannot bring their guns.

In Op's case, he's fine, because he's moved back in before the enactment. So the only way this becomes an issue is if he moves out of state AGAIN then moves back HERE again.

How they'd prove anything in relation to your guns is beyond me, but this is how I interpreted it.

I missed the part where the rifle had to be in MD come 1 Oct, I see that you have to own it or have purchased it prior to 1 Oct (pg14 line 9) but nothing that I saw in the bill bars Private Pile from buying an AR here in Vegas today, and then take it with him to MD next year when he gets stationed at Walter Reed. I believe this applies to anyone who had a banable weapon before the ban went into effect.

If you can, please reference the line in the bill that says otherwise.

 

[Straightshooter]

I missed the part where the rifle had to be in MD come 1 Oct, I see that you have to own it or have purchased it prior to 1 Oct (pg14 line 9) but nothing that I saw in the bill bars Private Pile from buying an AR here in Vegas today, and then take it with him to MD next year when he gets stationed at Walter Reed. I believe this applies to anyone who had a banable weapon before the ban went into effect.

If you can, please reference the line in the bill that says otherwise.

This is my thought also. Otherwise it would be possible for someone to move here ten years from now with a brand new AR yet I would be prohibited from purchasing one. My guess is they'd either have to leave them out of state, sell them out of state before moving here or face confiscation.

 

[phx223]

This is my thought also. Otherwise it would be possible for someone to move here ten years from now with a brand new AR yet I would be prohibited from purchasing one. My guess is they'd either have to leave them out of state, sell them out of state before moving here or face confiscation.

As long as they bought it before 1 Oct 2013 I don't think it matters where they bought it or how many times they made the mistake of coming back here.

This wording in all these bills, from CO to MD and the others is very important to me as I move around a bunch while with the military and need to know which states are permenantly off the wish list or if there are steps I can take now to keep my rights even if I don't live there yet (or in the case of MD plan on leaving and will likely be back).

 

[Rabu Rabu]

I missed the part where the rifle had to be in MD come 1 Oct, I see that you have to own it or have purchased it prior to 1 Oct (pg14 line 9) but nothing that I saw in the bill bars Private Pile from buying an AR here in Vegas today, and then take it with him to MD next year when he gets stationed at Walter Reed. I believe this applies to anyone who had a banable weapon before the ban went into effect.

If you can, please reference the line in the bill that says otherwise.

Again, I'm far from an expert. I'm just a simple Nasty Girl Chris Costa wanna be, lol. I'm only picking up what I read from others.

But yeah, That was what I meant, if you live out of state and buy them there you can bring them in, no strings attached, but if you leave and try to come back with them after that, then you're not allowed to apparently.

Again though, I don't pretend to know anything about what I'm talking about so.

 

[Straightshooter]

As long as they bought it before 1 Oct 2013 I don't think it matters where they bought it or how many times they made the mistake of coming back here.

This wording in all these bills, from CO to MD and the others is very important to me as I move around a bunch while with the military and need to know which states are permenantly off the wish list or if there are steps I can take now to keep my rights even if I don't live there yet (or in the case of MD plan on leaving and will likely be back).

My scenario has nothing to do with weapons purchased before Oct 1, 2013. The law is clear on those. Move in or out of MD with those as often as you please. My question had to do with those bought after that date while residing in another state, then moving here.

 

[BleedinPurple]

now even though we will be able to keep the AR's that we currently own, or will own before the bill becomes law, what does that do to the magazines that we already own under current law...am i not going to be allowed to use my 30 rounders when i go to the range?? or will they just be banned from purchasing??

ill be making sure that i build 1 more ar before the ban comes into effect...probably a 10.5 inch ar pistol...that would compliment my 14.5 inch midlength

 

[phx223]

My scenario has nothing to do with weapons purchased before Oct 1, 2013. The law is clear on those. Move in or out of MD with those as often as you please. My question had to do with those bought after that date while residing in another state, then moving here.

I think the law is clear on the date in general. If I were to buy another AR at my next duty station and then got orders to come back here I would not be able to bring the rifle here.

Gun owners, as well as dog owners (and I'm sure other groups) have to research the laws of the places they are going. I did it before I came here from California (misread it and bought mags before coming here, but I error on the side of caution), if someone neglects to follow the law do to ignorance I think they are guilty of willingly violating it, not as bad as knowingly violating it, but still bad and I believe the full criminal penalties still apply.

I am on the road and do not carry while I am doing so, for one guns are not allowed in the hotels I stay in, but the main reason is that no two states have the same firearms laws, and I'm not about to give up a dime or a minute of freedom because I didn't keep a firearm locked up and 300 meters away from its ammo or whatever ******** obscure law a state I'll drive through in an hour has on the books.

No worries, some jack hole just moving to MD in ten years isn't going to have the latest greatest AR lower while you are stuck with your old school fenced forged lower. Unless we get this whole bill canned, but then who cares, we will all have the coolest new rifles with more shoulder things that go up than you can shake a disposable banana clip at.

 

[zombiehunter]

Since you're already a Maryland resident, and you moved here with lawfully owned firearms, SB 281 does not require you to register anything. You might want to keep documents that verify your lawful ownership prior to October 1, 2013, and even have key documents notarized. But these are just prudential steps and nothing in the bill actually requires them.

If any of the guns are "assault" or so-called "copycat" weapons, then if you ever want to divest yourself of them after October 1, 2013, you'll have to sell them out-of-state through the transfer requirements spelled out in law, mostly federal law. You can also pass them on to Maryland residents by inheritance.

To raise your comfort level further, you may wish to review my summary of the bill, and subsequent questions and answers, on this thread:
http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=114585

PEOPLE NEED TO STOP SUGGESTING THIS CRAP.

Let's pretend this is still America, let's pretend we still have rights and let's stop with the BGOS. In America you ARE innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof lies on THEM to prove you're GUILTY not the other way around.

You have no obligation to prove you owned them legally. They CANNOT ask you to prove it. If they do "I'm sorry officer. Am I under arrest? Am I being detained?" If they say no, politely inform him you've no interest in answering the question. If he says yes, call a lawyer, shut up and get ready to get paid because 'oh that looks like a banned gun' can't be probable cause...I mean, right? It isn't, is it?

I'm not a lawyer, just sick of all the people forgetting how the system is supposed to work.

 

[phx223]

PEOPLE NEED TO STOP SUGGESTING THIS CRAP.

Let's pretend this is still America, let's pretend we still have rights and let's stop with the BGOS. In America you ARE innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof lies on THEM to prove you're GUILTY not the other way around.

You have no obligation to prove you owned them legally. They CANNOT ask you to prove it. If they do "I'm sorry officer. Am I under arrest? Am I being detained?" If they say no, politely inform him you've no interest in answering the question. If he says yes, call a lawyer, shut up and get ready to get paid because 'oh that looks like a banned gun' can't be probable cause...I mean, right? It isn't, is it?

I'm not a lawyer, just sick of all the people forgetting how the system is supposed to work.

Forgive us for being situationally aware. I for one wouldn't trust my freedom to this state, and that includes depending on them to do the right thing without me having to prove anything.

 

[Pinecone]

1) If you purchased banned guns while residing outside MD after Oct 1, 2013, you CANNOT bring them into MD. To live or to even shoot an event.

2) It is up to the prosecutor to prove your banned guns are not legal. Unless you bought them in a FTF transfer prior to Oct 1996 or a FTF transder outside MD, there is paperwork on the transfer. If there is an issue, the prosecutor would subpoena the records of when you say you bought it, and it would show that you did buy it pre-10/1/13. Would be a stupid prosecutor to take a case to court where his/her own discovery documents show that there is no crime.

 

[spclopr8tr]

Per SB281:5–143 and as amended by the House:
(A) (1) A PERSON WHO MOVES INTO THE STATE WITH THE INTENT OF BECOMING A RESIDENT SHALL REGISTER ALL REGULATED FIREARMS WITH THE SECRETARY WITHIN 90 DAYS AFTER ESTABLISHING RESIDENCY.

From this I would infer even if the regulated weapons were bought legally out of state after 1 OCT 13, you can still move back to MD with the weapons as long as they are registered within 90 days of moving back. Those that moved here prior to 1 OCT 13 are not required to register the regulated firearms.

Is this not correct?