Timonium Fairgrounds Jan 16 & 17

[PapiBarcelona]

Yeah, I know there are some rare stuff that people collect. I've seen like 15 year old box of .45acp priced ridiculous that's makes tracking down a sporting goods employee at Wal Mart worth anyone's time

I always think why? You're worn to hell Winchester box with cardboard almost as thin as paper is $15 more than a big box store, or for that matter the table across the aisle.

 

[Varnski]

Did anyone pick up the $300 Enfield Mk3 that some guy had by the back wall in the corner. I looked over it a little but had told myself beforehand that I wasn't going to buy anything other than ammo and now I'm really kicking myself for not taking a closer look at it.

 

[Broncolou]

I went sunday morning looking for an MOE rifle stock.I found it at Precision. I was disappointed that no one had any quality optics in mil/mil, I was looking for a 3-9/3-15/4-14 for my spr. There were some reasonable MD compliant ar's. I guess nobody told the vendors crappy 22's weren't fetching $.20 a round anymore....looked like pistol selection was ok, didn't look at pricing.

 

[Pinecone]

That's not a runned over look.

That's "Patina".

FTFY

 

[RoadDawg]

That's not a runned over look.

That's "Panteena".

She lived down on Fulton Ave... Just below Riggs...

But that was many years ago.

 

[lee2]

She lived down on Fulton Ave... Just below Riggs...

But that was many years ago.

wasnt she hooking outside St Agnus?

 

[iH8DemLibz]

FTFY

Was joking about putina being spelled many different ways in firearm auction listings.

People think a firearm has to have pitina or it won't sell.

 

[chooks9]

what does Duffy's have for VZ.58's?

They www CSA VZ-58s with black furniture. Very nice, I like mine!

 

[j_h_smith]

Talking to a few folks that were at the show. Many said they thought the show sucked. I don't understand it. There were more vendors than the last 10 shows. Other than 1 vendor, the prices were decent. After all, this is a sellers market at this time. The crowds weren't that bad. I just can't say it was a bad show. I went with money to spend, but didn't find anything that yelled BUY ME, but it was a decent show.

I don't understand why folks thought this was a terrible show.

 

[protegeV]

What are they comparing it to? Apples to apples, this was the best timonium show in recent memory. If you're comparing to a PA show, just stop it...

 

[Doug S]

Talking to a few folks that were at the show. Many said they thought the show sucked. I don't understand it. There were more vendors than the last 10 shows. Other than 1 vendor, the prices were decent. After all, this is a sellers market at this time. The crowds weren't that bad. I just can't say it was a bad show. I went with money to spend, but didn't find anything that yelled BUY ME, but it was a decent show.

I don't understand why folks thought this was a terrible show.

What are they comparing it to? Apples to apples, this was the best timonium show in recent memory. If you're comparing to a PA show, just stop it...

I think both of these guys nailed it. I saw some cool stuff, at decent prices, with a good (not crazy) crowd. I was a little bummed that I couldn't find anything I was interested in, but I'm pretty specific in my searching lately, so that's on me, not the show.

Overall, as everyone says: not as good as a show NOT in MD. It did give me some hope tho...

 

[protegeV]

I think both of these guys nailed it. I saw some cool stuff, at decent prices, with a good (not crazy) crowd. I was a little bummed that I couldn't find anything I was interested in, but I'm pretty specific in my searching lately, so that's on me, not the show.

Overall, as everyone says: not as good as a show NOT in MD. It did give me some hope tho...

I know what you mean. So far I've pretty much only bought trinkets for the kids to give their grandparents. The one time I went to a show with a specific gun in mind, there just happened to be a stellar deal on one(and at an IP booth nonetheless) so I jumped on it.

 

[RoadDawg]

Best show I have seen here in the PRoMD since pre-Sandyhook... Bar none.

 

[Sundazes]

Best show I have seen here in the PRoMD since pre-Sandyhook... Bar none.

Yup

 

[JoeRinMD]

Thinking about other recent MD shows, last winter a couple of buddies and I went to the show at the Howard County Fairgrounds during a snowstorm. I thought it had many more "interesting" used guns as well as other parts and accessories than the Timonium show.

JoeR

 

[j_h_smith]

Thinking about other recent MD shows, last winter a couple of buddies and I went to the show at the Howard County Fairgrounds during a snowstorm. I thought it had many more "interesting" used guns as well as other parts and accessories than the Timonium show.

JoeR

Please don't bring up that show after this snowstorm. It brings back way too many bad memories...

 

[Hawkeye]

I am happy that you shared a laugh with the salesman... Because, after telling him that the KelTec SU16C was a MDSP BANNED ITEM... I then realized that he did not take it serious... Soooo, I talked to the FFL and SHOWED him the MDSP BANNED RIFLE list. (Effective 11/09/15)

The rifle was then removed from the table... WHILE SOMEONE WAS ATTEMPTING TO BUY IT!

If you're going to share a laugh about someone... Get your facts straight FIRST.
We do NOT need the news to report that a rifle on the MDSP BANNED RIFLE list was sold in some damn gun show loop hole.

And FYI ... That FFL thanked me for saving his bacon.

That rifle is not banned, and the "banned rifle list" that MSP publishes is not, by their own admission, legally binding. They have said, in a written response to the lawsuit filed against them by Engage Armament, that the list on their website is provided only as "assistance" and is not meant to be legal guidance. There are all sorts of rifles on that list that don't, by law, belong there.

What IS legally binding is the actual statute itself, which lists a bunch of specific rifles that are banned, and then lists the criteria by which a rifle not on that list can be banned for being a "copycat." The Kel-tec is not on the list of specifically banned rifles in the statute. Therefore it has to be subjected to the copycat test.

AIUI ... Someone DID... THAT is what got it on the list.


3 evil features...
Threaded barrel for flash hider [check]
Removable magazine [check]
Under-folding stock [check]

As to the copycat test, in order to be banned as a copycat, a rifle must be a centerfire rifle capable of accepting detachable magazines AND have two or more of the following features:
1) a flash hider
2) a grenade launcher
3) a folding stock.

OR any rifle shorter than 29" in OAL is also automatically banned as a "copycat."

A threaded barrel is not one of the features. Nor is a removable magazine. A folding stock is, but as long as the rifle doesn't have both a folding stock and a flash hider, and is longer than 29" in OAL, it is NOT banned, no matter what the MSP's "helpful" website says about it.

Period.

Like it or don't... The model is specifically listed as BANNED.

Again, it is not. Nothing made by Kel-tec is on the list of specificaly enumerated banned weapons, and it does not fail the copycat test.

Selling it would have ended in an arrest of the FFL AND the customer...

No, it would not have. There are plenty of shops that sell them, even some IPs. The MSP is not going to arrest anyone based on a list that they have admitted, in writing, isn't legally binding.

Jim was perfectly correct in this instance. There is nothing wrong with selling that rifle here.

 

[protegeV]

Again, it is not. Nothing made by Kel-tec is on the list of specificaly enumerated banned weapons, and it does not fail the copycat test.

hate to burst your bubble.

But I do agree that it shouldn't be banned and that the list is not law.

 

[Hawkeye]

hate to burst your bubble.

But I do agree that it shouldn't be banned and that the list is not law.

Not the non legally binding website list. The only list that matters, legally, is the one in the actual statute. If a rifle is not on this list, it is not banned unless it is a copycat. The Kel-tec is not a copycat, and is not on the list in the statute, so it is not banned.

MSP is way overstepping their bounds with the website, which is full of erroneous information. They themselves have said, in writing, that it is not legally binding.

Here is the list of banned rifles from the actual law (which I am lifting from MSI's webpage, so the commentary in parentheses is theirs):

American Arms Spectre da Semiautomatic carbine (uncommon Italian 9mm rifle; SITES is the pistol version)
AK-47 in all forms
Algimec AGM-1 type semi-auto (uncommon 9mm bullpup rifle)
AR 100 type semi-auto (might be a repeat of the Daewoo AR-100 mentioned later)
AR 180 type semi-auto (semi-auto AR-18)
Argentine L.S.R. semi-auto (FN FAL derivative)
Australian Automatic Arms SAR type semi-auto (Leader Dynamics T2 Mk5 in assault rifle config; less than 2000 imported)
Auto-Ordnance Thompson M1 and 1927 semi-automatics (tommy guns)
Barrett light.50 cal. semi-auto (only the semi-auto)
Beretta AR70 type semi-auto (very few imported)
Bushmaster semi-auto rifle (this is a very specific rifle (not an AR-15 or M17S) originally manufactured by Gwinn Firearms, and is not "all Bushmaster rifles")
Calico models M-100 and M-900
CIS SR 88 type semi-auto (never imported to the US, to the best of my knowledge)
Claridge HI TEC C-9 carbines
Colt AR-15, CAR-15, and all imitations except Colt AR-15 Sporter H-BAR rifle
Daewoo MAX 1 and MAX 2, aka AR 100, 110C, K-1, and K-2 (may exclude the DR-200?)
Dragunov Chinese made semi-auto (but not the Russian version?)
Famas semi-auto (.223 caliber)
Feather AT-9 semi-auto
FN LAR and FN FAL assault rifle (LAR is also known as FALO heavy barrel model)
FNC semi-auto type carbine
F.I.E./Franchi LAW 12 and SPAS 12 assault shotgun
Steyr-AUG-SA semi-auto
Galil models AR and ARM semi-auto (Galil ACE and Micro don't seem to be included?)
Heckler and Koch HK-91 A3, HK-93 A2, HK-94 A2 and A3 (but only these specific models, apparently)
Holmes model 88 shotgun (I don't think these were ever made)
Avtomat Kalashnikov semiautomatic rifle in any format (notice that it only says rifles)
Manchester Arms "Commando" MK-45, MK-9 (tommy gun clone)
Mandell TAC-1 semi-auto carbine (I don't think these really exist)
Mossberg model 500 Bullpup assault shotgun (this was a very specific factory model)
Sterling Mark 6
P.A.W.S. carbine (Sterling clone)
Ruger mini-14 folding stock model (.223 caliber) (this was a very specific factory model)
SIG 550/551 assault rifle (.223 caliber) (has generally been interpreted to not include the 556 or 556R)
SKS with detachable magazine (this is referring to the SKS-M and SKS-D, but accidentally catches after-market detachables)
AP-74 Commando type semi-auto (Italian 22lr rifle; looks a bit like an M16)
Springfield Armory BM-59, SAR-48, G3, SAR-3, M-21 sniper rifle, M1A, excluding the M1 Garand (note that this includes the HK-91 with fixed stock)
Street sweeper assault type shotgun
Striker 12 assault shotgun in all formats (revolver shotgun; it's a destructive device now)
Unique F11 semi-auto type (22lr FAMAS; extremely rare in the US, if it was ever imported)
Daewoo USAS 12 semi-auto shotgun
UZI 9mm carbine or rifle (not immediately apparent if this includes the Uzi Pro)
Valmet M-76 and M-78 semi-auto
Weaver Arms "Nighthawk" semi-auto carbine (weird 9mm Uzi-like carbine; takes Uzi mags; only 850 made)
Wilkinson Arms 9mm semi-auto "Terry" (very limited production; magazine goes in the pistol grip)

Nowhere on that list is anything made by Kel-tec. The rifle in question is over 29" in OAL, so it is not banned as a copycat due to length. Though it is centerfire and does accept detachable magazines (which are the two conditions for being considered for banning as a copycat under the feature test) it only has one "evil feature," which is the folding stock. It does not have either a flash hider or a grenade / flare launcher.

Therefore, it is not banned, PERIOD, no matter what the MSP site says.

Sorry for the long windedness. It's just that the vast overstepping by MSP on stuff like this really pisses me off. That website is a giant pile of BS, which they put in place in order to scare people away from buying a ton of rifles that are perfectly legal. Then, when Nate and Engage challenged them on it, they kind of said "oh, well, you know.... it's not like, legally binding or anything. It's just a helpful guide."

 

[RoadDawg]

Not the non legally binding website list. The only list that matters, legally, is the one in the actual statute. If a rifle is not on this list, it is not banned unless it is a copycat. The Kel-tec is not a copycat, and is not on the list in the statute, so it is not banned.

MSP is way overstepping their bounds with the website, which is full of erroneous information. They themselves have said, in writing, that it is not legally binding.

Here is the list of banned rifles from the actual law (which I am lifting from MSI's webpage, so the commentary in parentheses is theirs):



Nowhere on that list is anything made by Kel-tec. The rifle in question is over 29" in OAL, so it is not banned as a copycat due to length. Though it is centerfire and does accept detachable magazines (which are the two conditions for being considered for banning as a copycat under the feature test) it only has one "evil feature," which is the folding stock. It does not have either a flash hider or a grenade / flare launcher.

Therefore, it is not banned, PERIOD, no matter what the MSP site says.

Sorry for the long windedness. It's just that the vast overstepping by MSP on stuff like this really pisses me off. That website is a giant pile of BS, which they put in place in order to scare people away from buying a ton of rifles that are perfectly legal. Then, when Nate and Engage challenged them on it, they kind of said "oh, well, you know.... it's not like, legally binding or anything. It's just a helpful guide."

Your argument is not with me. It is with whom ever published the list on the MDSP Website. They list it as banned. They are the ones who will be making the arrests... But feel free to argue the point with them. As I stated several times during this whole thing... I do not like the fact that it is listed as banned... But it IS listed as banned on THEIR website. They can say that list is not to be used as proof, or legally binding... Yet THEY publish the list, and THEY called it a copycat weapon...

Furthermore, I have also stated that my interest in this entire ordeal is to save this community from any negative impact by anyone trying to prove a point in the news. We do NOT need nor want to see the MSM 6 o'clock news reporting that "...a rifle listed on the MDSP BANNED RIFLE LIST was sold in a gun show loophole at Timonium." The fallout from that would be a devistating blow to the community. ANYONE can pull up the website and read where it is banned. So, WHO do you think the voters in this PRoMD are going to believe? You? Me? Or the words they read in the website of the MDSP?

I happen to own a SU16C... I will NOT be selling it nor will I offer it for sale anywhere or to anyone in this state until it is removed from the MDSP website banned rifle listing as a copycat weapon. The damage risk to our community is not worth the trouble at this time.

Want to do something? Argue the point where it matters. That is with the person who entered the rifle into the list as banned on 11/09/15.

Like this little gem... From the banned rifle list which you quoted...

Bushmaster semi-auto rifle (this is a very specific rifle (not an AR-15 or M17S) originally manufactured by Gwinn Firearms, and is not "all Bushmaster rifles")

Just try to by a Bushmaster branded AR-15 in this state right now. Not happening...