SBR and SRS ruling by MSP

[OrbitalEllipses]

See the following threads for ongoing discussion:

http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=151744
http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=153314
http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=153071

Of interest will be the make & model, overall length, date purchased, date submitted, and the name of the disapproving agent.

 

[viiper]

See the following threads for ongoing discussion:

http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=151744
http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=153314
http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=153071

Of interest will be the make & model, overall length, date purchased, date submitted, and the name of the disapproving agent.

Thank you, will jump on those threads later tonight and supply all that info.

 

[Brooklyn]

You completely lost me there.

Basically all new guns are sold as a unit. The dealer can not just not transfer the Mags as that would be theft. Any discount would be the dealer bying back the magazines, in state, which would be unlawful.

The dealer could take ownership of the package, and then resale only the firearm, but the gun would be pre-owned. I figure that's the only way to ensure that no mags are transferred to any non ffl holder. Anything else could be considered a transfer.


Not that I don't think this is all crap.. but this is the only way I see to be clean..

Now I think I recall used guns do not need a bore lock ... which may be a way around the fact that a 5.56 bore-lock may be hard to find esp for barrels that meet the oal issue.


I should be obvious that they have orders to figure out how to ban a lot of stuff that fsa2013 could have banned but didn't...

And the real purpose is to put ffl's out of business ..at least those domicled in MD..

 

[clandestine]

Basically all new guns are sold as a unit. The dealer can not just not transfer the Mags as that would be theft. Any discount would be the dealer bying back the magazines, in state, which would be unlawful.

The dealer could take ownership of the package, and then resale only the firearm, but the gun would be pre-owned. I figure that's the only way to ensure that no mags are transferred to any non ffl holder. Anything else could be considered a transfer.


Not that I don't think this is all crap.. but this is the only way I see to be clean..

Now I think I recall used guns do not need a bore lock ... which may be a way around the fact that a 5.56 bore-lock may be hard to find esp for barrels that meet the oal issue.


I should be obvious that they have orders to figure out how to ban a lot of stuff that fsa2013 could have banned but didn't...

And the real purpose is to put ffl's out of business ..at least those domicled in MD..

No, No, No.

 

[pwoolford]

OK, now I have some details from my FFL, and it is NOT good. If anyone has any pointers on how to get this unscrewed and not go through another year of waiting on paperwork, please let me know.

Paraphrasing, but my FFL was informed by ATF that my Form 4 was "Disapproved", the stated reason being that it is now banned in MD as an assault weapon. He contacted the approving ATF agent for MD, and said that this was not the case (and fmy FFL even forwarded an email from a Cpl from MSP Licensing Division to that fact). The ATF agent said that they were given strict orders not to approve AR-15's. My FFL asked if he would reopen the file and approve it with the clarification from the MSP. The ATF agent said that it was already disapproved and can't be reopened, that we would have to resubmit a new Form 4.

Unreal, back to the end of the line and roll some dice I guess. If ATF incorrectly interpreted MD law and "Disapproved" my Form 4, why would I need to start over?

Has anyone else had this issue, of a Form 4 SBR bought prior to Oct 2013 now being "Disapproved"? I've had several other Form 1 and Form 4 items come back in the last year (one as recent as last week) on my NFA Trust, so I know it is not that issue... just this goofy current situation on this Rifle wants to be a Handgun nonsense.

That REALLY sucks! I had 6 form 1's disapproved from December so we all are going through this hell MD caused. I think the ATF just wanted to clear the books of all MD form 1's and 4's so they blew through them all really quick and denied 99%. They figure we will all apply on paper and that gives Maryland a year to remove its head from its ass.
While we all waste hours trying to abide by Maryland's never ending BS laws and restrictions, some crackhead is buying a handgun out of a trunk and laughing. Way to go MD...good job screwing the one's trying to do things legally.

 

[coopermania]

No, No, No. ???????

Just try to make me go to rehab, I won't go, go, go.

 

[Kingjamez]

Basically all new guns are sold as a unit. The dealer can not just not transfer the Mags as that would be theft. Any discount would be the dealer bying back the magazines, in state, which would be unlawful.

The dealer could take ownership of the package, and then resale only the firearm, but the gun would be pre-owned. I figure that's the only way to ensure that no mags are transferred to any non ffl holder. Anything else could be considered a transfer.


Not that I don't think this is all crap.. but this is the only way I see to be clean..

Now I think I recall used guns do not need a bore lock ... which may be a way around the fact that a 5.56 bore-lock may be hard to find esp for barrels that meet the oal issue.


I should be obvious that they have orders to figure out how to ban a lot of stuff that fsa2013 could have banned but didn't...

And the real purpose is to put ffl's out of business ..at least those domicled in MD..

I understand what you are saying now, but I completely disagree. When a dealer buys a gun to resell, it doesn't magically become a used gun. What about when a dealer buys a gun from a distributor, them sells it to you, is it now "double used"? Nope. The dealer buys the magazines, he owns them and the gun, just like he owns the rest of his inventory.

-Jim

 

[Brooklyn]

I understand what you are saying now, but I completely disagree. When a dealer buys a gun to resell, it doesn't magically become a used gun. What about when a dealer buys a gun from a distributor, them sells it to you, is it now "double used"? Nope. The dealer buys the magazines, he owns them and the gun, just like he owns the rest of his inventory.

-Jim

Just to be clear -- I am not saying I agree with the fairytale I just told. But if i can make the claim so can the state.


What I am saying is that at least one arms length transaction preferably out of state in which the mags are striped from the sku will eliminate the issue.

In a state where sbrs are handguns I think nothing is beyond them ...

Now a properly crafted Bill of sale may also work.. but I think we all know that some large ffls will not allow you to take the mags at time of purchase and ship the gun to MD. This suggests enough ambiguity over the terms of sale that we need to start being much more explicit.

And now that I think of it a sales contact might work here.. but under the standard industry terms of trade there is an ambiguity -- if they let you take the mags sale is out of state and so is transfer -- if not then sale is pending so which state has jurisdiction?


There is a way ...

 

[Mike OTDP]

OK, now I have some details from my FFL, and it is NOT good. If anyone has any pointers on how to get this unscrewed and not go through another year of waiting on paperwork, please let me know.

Paraphrasing, but my FFL was informed by ATF that my Form 4 was "Disapproved", the stated reason being that it is now banned in MD as an assault weapon. He contacted the approving ATF agent for MD, and said that this was not the case (and fmy FFL even forwarded an email from a Cpl from MSP Licensing Division to that fact). The ATF agent said that they were given strict orders not to approve AR-15's. My FFL asked if he would reopen the file and approve it with the clarification from the MSP. The ATF agent said that it was already disapproved and can't be reopened, that we would have to resubmit a new Form 4.

Unreal, back to the end of the line and roll some dice I guess. If ATF incorrectly interpreted MD law and "Disapproved" my Form 4, why would I need to start over?

Contact a good pro-2A organization, get ready to file a lawsuit.

You've purchased the legal firearm in good faith, and have already had a considerable amount of money tied up in it waiting for ATF to process the Form 4. Now they've screwed that up...and their response is to have you wait another 8-12 months.

I think a good lawyer could make a Due Process case out of the inordinate wait in general, but a case like this would be all the better.

 

[swinokur]

Litigation is very expensive. Not everyone can afford to litigate . I know I wouldn't.

 

[whitelightning777]

Can a SBR have a folding stock in MD since some have none at all?

Is a Draco pistol turned into a SBR "made from a rifle" because originally the AK was a rifle not a pistol?

 

[annihilation-time]

According to MSP, Copycat rules apply to SBRs. With that being said, yes: a SBR can have a folding stock. However, there can be no flash hider or grenade/flare laucher on your SBR sporting a folding stock. You only get one evil feature.

 

[OldGunner]

Okay, I'm confused.

I'd like to purchase a custom built bolt action, suppressed rifle which just happens to be a short barreled rifle.

How about a Serbu super shorty shotgun?

Is it no longer possible to purchase these in Maryland?

 

[swinokur]

A bolt action is not semi automatic there fore not a banned copycat AFAIK

The super shorty is a pump correct? It's also not banned as it's not a copycat. NFA rules would apply however. see below as well


IANAL.

ETA-Inigoes brings up a good point about AOW and stuff on the handgun roster however.

MD 5-101
A handgun is a firearm with a barrel less than 16 inches in length.

 

[Inigoes]

How about a Serbu super shorty shotgun?

This is where it gets interesting, because of the "AOW" designation.

It would be awesome to see knife guns on the handgun roster

 

[fleaman64]

Rulings can change with the wind so this is another reason MSP and the state of MD is full of BS.

Shall not be infringed means cannot be limited, encroached upon or undermined. What part of the Constitution do these Bozos not understand? I guess they take their marching orders from their masters in Annapolis. At what point do they grow a pair and cease being the useful idiots when it comes to the Bill of Rights? Are they waiting for a court ruling to do the right thing?

Sorry for venting but this is just more of the same from these clowns.

 

[pablo]

Noveske build ordered from John himself before the accident – 12/12
Build complete and From 3 submitted – 9/13
Form 3 approved – 12/13
Form 4 submitted – 1/14
Form 4 approved – 7/14
Not on the handgun list, of course.
Form 5 submitted by FFL for Sept board – 8/14

Rifle: 10.5 inch barrel; 29 inches overall
Examiner: Cook

This sucks.

 

[redeemed.man]

No, No, No.

Love that response.

 

[MDElite]

We submitted the Serbu Super Shorty to the roster board.

 

[OrbitalEllipses]

Oh boy, a new form: 77R-2B.pdf