To build a legal AR

[Archangel]

Right the legislature did specifically state that a receiver is a FIREARM and "includes the receiver or frame of such a weapon". THEY DID NOT STATE THAT A RECEIVER IS A REGULATED FIREARM. In fact, just a few paragraphs down in the same code section, they specifically did not include that in the definition of a regulated firearm!!! So why not?

Because they never INTENDED to regulate frames and receivers, only handguns and assault weapons. No where does it say that "regulated firearm" included "the receiver or frame of such a weapon".

Actually, it does.

(MD Code in plain text, emphasis added by me in bold, my commentary in italics)

Maryland Code

Public Safety

Title 5. Firearms

Subtitle 1. Regulated Firearms

§ 5-101. Definitions
​

(a) In this subtitle the following words have the meanings indicated.
.....
(h)

(1) "Firearm" means:

(i) a weapon that expels, is designed to expel, or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; or
(ii) the frame or receiver of such a weapon.
​

.....
(p) "Regulated firearm" means:

(1) a handgun; or
(2) a firearm (we're still in Subtitle 1, so when they say "firearm" here, the definition from 5-101(h)(1) above applies.) that is any of the following specific assault weapons or their copies, regardless of which company produced and manufactured that assault weapon:

.....
(xv) Colt AR-15, CAR-15, and all imitations except Colt AR-15 Sporter H-BAR rifle;
​

And just in case that's not enough, note that the entire subtitle is entitled "Regulated Firearms" - all it deals with are regulated firearms, and yet it includes the "receiver = the firearm" definition. What does that tell you about the legislature's intent?

Really, the stripped lower doesn't function at all like a listed assault weapon. Not until you add components to it, as a result you cannot determine it's classification until it is assembled.

True, it doesn't "function," but it is dimensionally identical. It accepts all the same fire control parts, takedown pins, magazines, grips, and buffer tubes.

Remember that the definition of Assault weapons includes the 45 enumerated Firearms (and their receivers, per the definition in 5-101(h)(1)), "or their copies, regardless of which company produced and manufactured that assault weapon."

Considering we also have an AG's opinion stating that "an analysis of whether the ... receiver of given firearm are similar to the ... receiver of an enumerated firearm would appear to be one criterion that could be considered in determining whether a firearm is a "copy" of an assault weapon" can you HONESTLY say that a receiver that is is dimensionally identical to an AR-15 receiver is NOT "similar" to an AR-15 receiver?

Also consider that stripped AR-15 receivers ARE transferred as regulated firearms, and consider whether that means that the MSP is reading the law the same way I am. (ie, correctly )

Take the Mini-14 receiver and SKS receivers, most Mini-14's and SKS's are not regulated weapons, are you going to say that the Mini-14 and SKS receivers are regulated firearms? Seriously?

Let's look at those, and the Mossberg that you mentioned earlier.

.....
(xv) Colt AR-15, CAR-15, and all imitations except Colt AR-15 Sporter H-BAR rifle;
.....
(xxx) Mossberg model 500 Bullpup assault shotgun;
.....
(xxxiii) Ruger mini-14 folding stock model (.223 caliber);
.....
(xxxv) SKS with detachable magazine;
​

Note that the Mossberg, Mini-14, and SKS all have some additional feature required to get them on the list. (Bullpup, folding stock, and detachable magazine, respectively.) The stripped receiver for those firearms does not have those features, so it does not meet the definition required to get it on the list. So those receivers are not regulated.

Conversely, the AR-15 has a feature (HBAR) that will get it OFF the list. The stripped receiver does not have that feature***, so it does not meet the definition of the EXCEPTION. So without the exception, it stays on the list, and is regulated.



***(Except maybe a marked Colt Sporter HBAR receiver, but again, we still don't have a clear ruling on that so most dealers will err on the side of not getting arrested, and transfer it as regulated.)



.

 

[b00sh]

So that means lowers will be banned, correct?

 

[Archangel]

Correct.

 

[b00sh]

Correct.

I should probably buy another one. Sigh.

 

[raff696]

heres the thing about lowers... what about 80% lowers... no Serial numbers! per the ATF rules.. we are allowed to build our own firearms. they do not need to be REGed. So if some one was to build a AR from a 80% lower, then take it to the range. what does the law say about that?

 

[b00sh]

heres the thing about lowers... what about 80% lowers... no Serial numbers! per the ATF rules.. we are allowed to build our own firearms. they do not need to be REGed. So if some one was to build a AR from a 80% lower, then take it to the range. what does the law say about that?

You cannot manufacture a weapon that falls within the ban list. That would fall in that category unless it's an HBAR.

 

[Markp]

Actually, it does.

(MD Code in plain text, emphasis added by me in bold, my commentary in italics)


And just in case that's not enough, note that the entire subtitle is entitled "Regulated Firearms" - all it deals with are regulated firearms, and yet it includes the "receiver = the firearm" definition. What does that tell you about the legislature's intent?





True, it doesn't "function," but it is dimensionally identical. It accepts all the same fire control parts, takedown pins, magazines, grips, and buffer tubes.

Remember that the definition of Assault weapons includes the 45 enumerated Firearms (and their receivers, per the definition in 5-101(h)(1)), "or their copies, regardless of which company produced and manufactured that assault weapon."

Considering we also have an AG's opinion stating that "an analysis of whether the ... receiver of given firearm are similar to the ... receiver of an enumerated firearm would appear to be one criterion that could be considered in determining whether a firearm is a "copy" of an assault weapon" can you HONESTLY say that a receiver that is is dimensionally identical to an AR-15 receiver is NOT "similar" to an AR-15 receiver?

Also consider that stripped AR-15 receivers ARE transferred as regulated firearms, and consider whether that means that the MSP is reading the law the same way I am. (ie, correctly )



Let's look at those, and the Mossberg that you mentioned earlier.

.....
(xv) Colt AR-15, CAR-15, and all imitations except Colt AR-15 Sporter H-BAR rifle;
.....
(xxx) Mossberg model 500 Bullpup assault shotgun;
.....
(xxxiii) Ruger mini-14 folding stock model (.223 caliber);
.....
(xxxv) SKS with detachable magazine;
​

Note that the Mossberg, Mini-14, and SKS all have some additional feature required to get them on the list. (Bullpup, folding stock, and detachable magazine, respectively.) The stripped receiver for those firearms does not have those features, so it does not meet the definition required to get it on the list. So those receivers are not regulated.

Conversely, the AR-15 has a feature (HBAR) that will get it OFF the list. The stripped receiver does not have that feature***, so it does not meet the definition of the EXCEPTION. So without the exception, it stays on the list, and is regulated.



***(Except maybe a marked Colt Sporter HBAR receiver, but again, we still don't have a clear ruling on that so most dealers will err on the side of not getting arrested, and transfer it as regulated.)



.

You have to read the whole sentence... it say a firearm that is a specific assault weapon, not it say a firearm that is a specific assault weapon and the receiver of such weapon.

You're trying the same old tired this as saying an SBR is a rifle, when it's NOT.

This is so damn tired.

 

[Markp]

So that means lowers will be banned, correct?

Correct.

You are not correct... You really want that to be the way the law is interpreted? It's not written that way.

The definition of firearm and the definition of regulated firearm stand alone, just like the definition of handgun, rifle, and shortbarreled rifle unless explicitly incorporating another definition (such as done in handgun and firearm.)

 

[b00sh]

You have to read the whole sentence... it say a firearm that is a specific assault weapon, not it say a firearm that is a specific assault weapon and the receiver of such weapon.

You're trying the same old tired this as saying an SBR is a rifle, when it's NOT.

This is so damn tired.

This is how it works, as I understand it. The receiver is classified as the weapon it resembles, which in this case, would be the AR-15. When it is ASSEMBLED, either in SBR or HBAR configuration, only then does the definition of what it is change. But even if you change it to an HBAR, it's still classified as a regulated assault rifle because you can't UNregister it. But if you change the configuration to an SBR, it then changes classification, due to more hoops to jump through.

Did I get that right?

 

[necrodude]

I think this thread confuses people more then it helps... including me.

 

[Archangel]

You have to read the whole sentence...

You have to read the whole subtitle.

You're trying the same old tired this as saying an SBR is a rifle, when it's NOT

I'm doing no such thing. Rifles are defined under the GCA '68 (in Title I) and SBR's are defined in the NFA (Title 2). Those definitions are exclusive of one another, both in how they are written (ie >16" barrel is exclusive of <16" barrel) and by the fact that they are in separate Titles.

I'm showing you definitions from a single Subtitle (not two completely different Titles) that are in no way exclusive of one another. Look at the other definitions in 5-101. Many of them refer to other definitions in the subtitle.

5-101 (a) says "In this subtitle the following words have the meanings indicated." It does not say "except in the definitions part" or "except in 5-101(p)." It says in this subtitle. Period.


Thus, anywhere in 5-101 that you read the word "firearm," it means "a weapon that expels, is designed to expel, or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; or the frame or receiver of such a weapon."

Thus, 5-101(p) (which is still "in this subtitle") is correctly read as:

"Regulated firearm" means:
(1) a handgun; or
(2) a [a weapon that expels, is designed to expel, or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; or the frame or receiver of such a weapon] that is any of the following specific assault weapons or their copies, regardless of which company produced and manufactured that assault weapon:

That is how the law is interpreted. That is why stripped AR receivers are transferred as regulated.

 

[Maxsplat]

I think this thread confuses people more then it helps... including me.

I'm so glad someone said it.

 

[fabsroman]

Oh, you mean on the internet with no legal citation, no reference to state law or code, and no other legal basis for saying so?

You can't just make the law up by pulling it out of your butt!



Ok, ya... I'll go with that. And you've decided that his opinion is right, why?

You do understand that a stripped AR-15 lower is currently considered a regulated firearm and that you have to currently complete a Form 77r Application to Purchase a Regulated Firearm before you can walk out the store with a stripped AR-15 lower. Somewhat insane to think that NOBODY has challenged this yet and made the argument that a stripped AR-15 is NOT actually the regulated portion of the firearm.

Based upon your description of this entire thing, as long as I toss an upper on my completed lower before October 1, it is good to go as a completed AR-15 and I can POSSESS it after October 1, 2013. So, I can take the same upper and mount it to every completed lower I have for all of 1 second, and then I am in compliance with the law according to what you are proposing. Yeah, I really want to see law enforcement prove that I did not have a completed upper on my completed lower for all of 1 second prior to October 1, 2013.

I am scared to even ask this question, but after October 1, 2013, what happens if I want to change the upper on a specific lower? Have I then violated the law?

I think you are making problems where none exist. However, if this the position you need to take to get approval from the SO to complete those AR-15 lowers, just let us know and we will back you up. My wife has given me carte blanche to buy whatever handguns/"assault weapons" I want, with the only qualification being that the AC gets fixed prior to it getting hot.

Anybody know a good HVAC repair person in the Howard County area? Need to have the coolant line brazed and the system charged with R-410a.

 

[fabsroman]

You cannot manufacture a weapon that falls within the ban list. That would fall in that category unless it's an HBAR.

You can manufacture it as long as you do NOT possess it. lol

A PERSON WHO LAWFULLY POSSESSED OR PLACED A VERIFIABLE PURCHASE ORDER FOR, HAS A PURCHASE ORDER FOR, OR COMPLETED AN APPLICATION TO PURCHASE AN ASSAULT LONG GUN OR A COPYCAT WEAPON BEFORE OCTOBER 1, 2013, MAY:
(I) 1. (I) CONTINUE TO POSSESS AND TRANSPORT THE ASSAULT LONG GUN OR COPYCAT WEAPON


Since an 80% lower is not considered an "assault long gun" until it is completed, they need to be completed prior to October 1, 2013. Again, I have no idea how law enforcement would prove that a particular 80% lower was not completed prior to October 1, 2013 and that is a burden that law enforcement has to meet for you to be found guilty. Of course, they could set up stings wherein they establish some out of state entity that ships 80% lowers into Maryland with a distinguishing mark somewhere on them and then later on they execute a search warrant to see if that particular 80% lower was made into a completed lower. Seems like a lot of work for something that really is not a problem.

 

[Markp]

I think you are making problems where none exist. However, if this the position you need to take to get approval from the SO to complete those AR-15 lowers, just let us know and we will back you up. My wife has given me carte blanche to buy whatever handguns/"assault weapons" I want, with the only qualification being that the AC gets fixed prior to it getting hot.

Anybody know a good HVAC repair person in the Howard County area? Need to have the coolant line brazed and the system charged with R-410a.

I'm glad you've gotten permission... I did not have to ask anyone's permission before purchasing anything recently (except maybe the governments) but that is currently unavoidable for anything you purchase through an FFL that requires a 4473 filled out.

Mark

 

[Markp]

You have to read the whole subtitle.


"Regulated firearm" means:
(1) a handgun; or
(2) a [a weapon that expels, is designed to expel, or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; or the frame or receiver of such a weapon] that is any of the following specific assault weapons or their copies, regardless of which company produced and manufactured that assault weapon:

That is how the law is interpreted. That is why stripped AR receivers are transferred as regulated.

If that's the case, then HBAR receivers are NOT regulated, right? It specifically calls them out as not being regulated, correct?

 

[Maryland998]

Bought 3 uppers.

 

[fabsroman]

If that's the case, then HBAR receivers are NOT regulated, right? It specifically calls them out as not being regulated, correct?

I think you can make the argument that a stripped AR-15 lower stamped Sporter H-Bar should be unregulated as long as there is some law that requires such a stripped lower to only be built as a HBAR rifle (i.e., you violate the law by building an AR lower as anything other than what it is stamped as).

 

[fabsroman]

I'm glad you've gotten permission... I did not have to ask anyone's permission before purchasing anything recently (except maybe the governments) but that is currently unavoidable for anything you purchase through an FFL that requires a 4473 filled out.

Mark

Ah, now we are getting even smarter. You happen to be happily married or single? If married, do you keep your money together or separately?

I seriously doubt there will be many people on this board that have more firearms than me, so I will gladly ask "permission" before buying something. Few people have better gear than me when it comes to a hobby of mine.

My wife and I have a $100 rule. Anything below $100 does not require a discussion about buying it. Everything above that does. We seldom veto another's purchase and the only time I can really remember that happening was right after we got married and I wanted to buy 2 layout blinds while she wanted to buy a Coach purse and we did not have the money for both.

You happen to know a good HVAC company/guy/gal in the Howard County area?

 

[Markp]

Ah, now we are getting even smarter. You happen to be happily married or single? If married, do you keep your money together or separately?

I seriously doubt there will be many people on this board that have more firearms than me, so I will gladly ask "permission" before buying something. Few people have better gear than me when it comes to a hobby of mine.

My wife and I have a $100 rule. Anything below $100 does not require a discussion about buying it. Everything above that does. We seldom veto another's purchase and the only time I can really remember that happening was right after we got married and I wanted to buy 2 layout blinds while she wanted to buy a Coach purse and we did not have the money for both.

Was married for 22 years before I decided to leave. Never fought about money (except maybe in the first few years when we were figuring each other out). I have well over 50 rifles, a bunch of handguns, and a ton of accessories. Money was co-mingled. Divorce cost me $82, although I did walk away from significant assets. Still I kept my tools, my firearms, and my Ferrari, so I can't complain.

So currently, I am single, have a girlfriend, and I am very happy.