I here you! This year i have learned more about politics than i ever wanted too.This is a travesty of justice and i for one will fight to the end of my life on this one.It does nothing to address the CRIMINALS that are the problem.
SB 281 third reading printed
- Thread starter Gbh
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast
Member Benefits:
No ad networks! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
smokey
2A TEACHER
- Jan 31, 2008
- 31,589
ar's are in common use. This bill is unconstitutional. It's clear the govt in md is not afraid of the people. The fact we're being so careful to word our resistance to this shows we ARE afraid of our govt. I was born in to a family with over 100 years of naval service between my dad and his brothers. My family knows the constitution and our american history. This is where I would smile and nod in person.
You are forgetting the Sandy Abrams language they stuck in there. You don't think the MSP will be instructed to go through all the FFL bound books and find all the HBARs sold? Next, they will cross reference that with their registry and start knocking on doors of those who may have an unregistered gun.
OldLawman
Member
HBAR
"Oh, that rifle ? I sold it to an individual, as I was allowed. His/her photo ID matched their face. A record ? Why, no. That is not required."
Simple as that. Prove otherwise. There is no requirement in the law that a private individual keep copies of their transactions.
It would take them years to track down every lawfully sold rifle sold with only a 4473 documenting the transaction.
Go find a friend/relative who lives in PA/WV/VA, and store it there if you are worried, while you are looking for your new home out of Maryland. I know I am.
"Oh, that rifle ? I sold it to an individual, as I was allowed. His/her photo ID matched their face. A record ? Why, no. That is not required."
Simple as that. Prove otherwise. There is no requirement in the law that a private individual keep copies of their transactions.
It would take them years to track down every lawfully sold rifle sold with only a 4473 documenting the transaction.
Go find a friend/relative who lives in PA/WV/VA, and store it there if you are worried, while you are looking for your new home out of Maryland. I know I am.
fabsroman
Ultimate Member
Transfer is not the only issue, possess is an issue too? The bill will make it illegal to transfer OR possess any of the banned firearms, whether you build them on a CNC machine or not. Once you finish machining out that lower and it falls under the definition of an "Assault Weapon", you will be in possession of an unregistered assault weapon.
4–303.
(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, a person may not:
(1) transport an assault [pistol] WEAPON into the State; or
(2) possess, sell, offer to sell, transfer, purchase, or receive an assault [pistol] WEAPON.
(b) (1) A person who lawfully possessed an assault pistol before June 1, 1994, and who registered the assault pistol with the Secretary of State Police before August 1, 1994, may:
[(1)] (I) continue to possess AND TRANSPORT the assault pistol; or
[(2)] (II) while carrying a court order requiring the surrender of the assault pistol, transport the assault pistol directly to the law enforcement unit, barracks, or station if the person has notified the law enforcement unit, barracks, or station that the person is transporting the assault pistol in accordance with a court order and the assault pistol is unloaded.
(2) A LICENSED FIREARMS DEALER MAY CONTINUE TO POSSESS, SELL, OFFER FOR SALE, OR TRANSFER AN ASSAULT LONG GUN OR A COPYCAT WEAPON THAT THE LICENSED FIREARMS DEALER LAWFULLY POSSESSED ON OR BEFORE OCTOBER 1, 2013.
(3) (I) A PERSON WHO LAWFULLY POSSESSED AN ASSAULT LONG GUN OR A COPYCAT WEAPON BEFORE OCTOBER 1, 2013, AND WHO REGISTERS THE ASSAULT LONG GUN OR COPYCAT WEAPON WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE POLICE BEFORE NOVEMBER 1, 2013 JANUARY 1, 2014,
MAY:
1 (I) 1. CONTINUE TO POSSESS AND TRANSPORT THE
2 ASSAULT LONG GUN OR COPYCAT WEAPON; OR
That is quoted from the Third Reading that is the initial post to this matter. So, while is does not say it is illegal to manufacture them in this state, it surely is illegal to possess them UNLESS you have purchased them before October 1, 2013 AND registered them with the Maryland State Police by January 1, 2014.
gmhowell
Not Banned Yet
Reminder, please?
fabsroman
Ultimate Member
I agree and I am hoping that the US Supreme Court will strike that portion of the bill out should this pile of dung actually pass. Hoping they approve shall issue too when it finally gets to them. This stuff sure keeps the attorneys in business.
P226RN
Not your average girl
- Jun 28, 2010
- 104
Please excuse my confusion...
Can someone help me understand a bit?
If you currently own an AR with the "two features" (or more) will it be banned?
In other words would one have to sell it or move out of state before the bill goes into effect?
Or is it already registered from the original purchase and will be grandfathered in?
And pump shotguns are or are not included in the two feature ban?
My brain hurts from all the emailing and phone calls not to mention listening to the audio and reading threads....
HELP a sistah out.
Can someone help me understand a bit?
If you currently own an AR with the "two features" (or more) will it be banned?
In other words would one have to sell it or move out of state before the bill goes into effect?
Or is it already registered from the original purchase and will be grandfathered in?
And pump shotguns are or are not included in the two feature ban?
My brain hurts from all the emailing and phone calls not to mention listening to the audio and reading threads....
HELP a sistah out.
gmhowell
Not Banned Yet
I believe it starts to get into the convoluted view MD has of HBAR. And rimfire.
Suppose I have a lower and put a .22 upper on it. With less than 2 evil features. Why would I register it? The problem is in trying to define "assault weapon" in a manner that is inconsistent with the ATF's views on what constitutes a 'weapon' in regards to the AR (and AK) platform.
"Oh, that rifle ? I sold it to an individual, as I was allowed. His/her photo ID matched their face. A record ? Why, no. That is not required."
Simple as that. Prove otherwise. There is no requirement in the law that a private individual keep copies of their transactions.
It would take them years to track down every lawfully sold rifle sold with only a 4473 documenting the transaction.
Go find a friend/relative who lives in PA/WV/VA, and store it there if you are worried, while you are looking for your new home out of Maryland. I know I am.
All understood and I agree. If this bill comes to pass, I will move my rifles out of state. However, the whole idea of that happening should frighten everyone.
It gives the MSP the same power the ATF has when it comes to record keeping over FFLs.
ThawMyTongue
Ultimate Member
Why less than two evil features? Centerfire is mentioned for long gun copycats, but not rimfire.
This bill was written by dolts, but we already knew that...
fabsroman
Ultimate Member
Why would you move your rifles out of state when you could easily move out of state and buy them there anyway? From what I have read, the bill now allows these rifles to be "transported" as long as they are registered. Still trying to figure out what "transport" means though.
Once they attempt to confiscate these rifles, that is when you should be thinking about moving them out of state and/or moving yourself.
fabsroman
Ultimate Member
Again, I have no idea why everybody is only paying attention to the Copycat definition when it comes to AR's. There is the Assault Long Gun definition which specifically makes a Bushmaster semi-auto rifle an Assault Weapon, no matter who the manufacturer is.
If it wasn't for the Bushmaster semi-auto rifle being listed in the long list of Assault Long Guns, I would be jumping up for joy. That list makes things a little more complicated when looking at the AR platform.
mike_in_md
Ultimate Member
Let me see if I have this straight. If you bought a H-BAR AR-15 with a flash suppressor like the Rock River National Match in Maryland from a Licensed dealer 5 years ago, it will be considered a Assault Weapon, and you would have to register it, but if you did one of the following conversions it would not need to be registered and could be transported in and out of state legally...correct?
1. Replace the flash suppressor with a muzzle break. In my case I think I would prefer a muzzle break anyway for competition, but the suppressor works just fine as well for recoil management and I would rather not have to take this thing to a gunsmith if I had one.
2. Replaced the bolt with a 22 rimfire conversion bolt. This would make it a rim fire and not a center fire weapon and this would allow 2 or more evil features.
1. Replace the flash suppressor with a muzzle break. In my case I think I would prefer a muzzle break anyway for competition, but the suppressor works just fine as well for recoil management and I would rather not have to take this thing to a gunsmith if I had one.
2. Replaced the bolt with a 22 rimfire conversion bolt. This would make it a rim fire and not a center fire weapon and this would allow 2 or more evil features.
stu929
M1 Addict
What does this mean for all the people that have stripped lowers that are waiting for pieces to finish them?
I refuse to register my rifles and I will make the decision on moving at that time. I am not conceding defeat at this moment and no one else should.
You would have to pin or weld that muzzle break to avoid the feature test.
madchestermonkey
Pond straddler
I could be wrong but I read it as the lower is already registered, no need to register. I could very well be wrong, reading that bill gave me a headache and im no political whiz, that's for sure. The part that makes no sense to me is swapping out a stock makes it a banned firearm? or any other item from the list of evil. And where do I buy a Grenade launcher before Oct 1st? They must be safer than the ones available Oct 2nd right?
mike_in_md
Ultimate Member
Where does it say that? Would I also need to weld the A2 stock so that I could not put on a adjustable stock?
