HB 638 Untraceable & Undetectable Firearms
- Thread starter Kicken Wing
- 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:
- Dec 30, 2012
- 6,996
LOL. Should have. All my initials followed by numbers. Maybe I’ll do some more with some witty models and serials.
Hope my friend has to register his.
Attachments
ohen cepel
Ultimate Member
The record log requirement needs a lot more clarity in of itself.
Written on a bar napkin? Is it something they can come check and if so how/when? Digital version OK?
I'm not an 80% guy but this is bad law to put it mildly.
Written on a bar napkin? Is it something they can come check and if so how/when? Digital version OK?
I'm not an 80% guy but this is bad law to put it mildly.
Bolts Rock
Living in Free America!
You mean like this?
Attachments
Muleskinner
Ultimate Member
what would the purpose of said log be if the person who owns the firearm and engraves the firearm keep the log? No that's not the intent of what they're saying here. They are clearly indicating that the engraving needs to be at least logged by an FFL if not engraved by them. Neither of which is covered under the scope of their federal firearms license. In fact I'm fairly certain that as the law is written right now that would be a violation of federal gun statute.
PowPow
Where's the beef?
“If the opposition disarms, well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves.” (Joseph Stalin) Coming to our country soon...
As I read it they want you to engrave a serial number to atf specs and keep a record on any post 1968 builds before the cutoff. Afterwards any other “unfinished receiver” must be serialized and logged by a FFL. I see problems with this. Please don’t expect any of these proposed laws, or current laws to make sense. This is Maryland.
whistlersmother
Peace through strength
As posted upthread, this is true for anything built after 1/1/2022.
For anything built before that, the person making it does the engraving and keeps the log.
At least that is my interpretation.
Mine as well. As much as legal language can suck, this is fairly clear on pre/post.
You serialize and you record keep on anything made before 1/2022. After than an FFL must. I am sure the record keeping is as much so if it is lost/stolen/turns up the police can ask to check your record and tell them when you made it. Since you can’t sell or transfer it to anyone, it’s not like it has any real use like a manufacturer or importer’s log book would where you can trace it to the FFL. Then FFL to next owner. etc.
I’d imagine one more “you’ve been naughty” thing to check if they ever take your guns. “Gee we see you have a few “ghost guns” and no record that you built them.
Would make more sense if you CAN transfer the gun and if you do, you are required to turn over a copy of the record to MSP.
Kicken Wing
Snakes and Sparklers
"You've been naughty". I remember you from Naptown last year. I was pretty sure that was you when you first posted. You gave it away with the naughty list comment. Good to hear from you!
I need to weed through this bill and take notes. I have not put it under the microscope. There are gray areas for sure.
Growler215
Ultimate Member
I too read it that prior to 1 Jan 2022 you engrave it (or have it engraved) and keep a log of serial numbers. I'm thinking FU MGA 001, FU MGA 002, FU MGA 003, etc. CAL: MULTI
A pita but doable I guess. To me it's still prudent to have an 80% lower for each stripped lower I've bought in MD, since there are 77R's associated with the stripped lowers and there won't be for any 80% lowers purchased before 2022 (engraved in 2021 or not) if this passes as written. When they come for the rifles and pistols made from stripped lowers, they're getting stripped lowers back. At most. Unless I lost them in a boating accident....
I also noticed the not being able to sell a firearm you've made language, which is currently legal under federal law as long as you didn't manufacture the firearm with the intent to sell it, but I guess this was written under the assumption that the veto on prohibiting non-FFL long gun sales will be overturned. I suppose FFLs can't really transfer privately serialized firearms.
I also read this bill to make it illegal to sell an 80% lower/receiver to anyone without a hql as soon as the bill is inacted unless they are exempt. This makes little sense since a hql isn't required to buy a completed stripped lower currently or after the bill is inacted the way it's written. It will make it harder to get anything mail order.
A pita but doable I guess. To me it's still prudent to have an 80% lower for each stripped lower I've bought in MD, since there are 77R's associated with the stripped lowers and there won't be for any 80% lowers purchased before 2022 (engraved in 2021 or not) if this passes as written. When they come for the rifles and pistols made from stripped lowers, they're getting stripped lowers back. At most. Unless I lost them in a boating accident....
I also noticed the not being able to sell a firearm you've made language, which is currently legal under federal law as long as you didn't manufacture the firearm with the intent to sell it, but I guess this was written under the assumption that the veto on prohibiting non-FFL long gun sales will be overturned. I suppose FFLs can't really transfer privately serialized firearms.
I also read this bill to make it illegal to sell an 80% lower/receiver to anyone without a hql as soon as the bill is inacted unless they are exempt. This makes little sense since a hql isn't required to buy a completed stripped lower currently or after the bill is inacted the way it's written. It will make it harder to get anything mail order.
How coincidental, and convenient, almost like it was planned that way. They aren't banning firearms, just those the manufacturer refuses, or can't comply. "You can have any firearm you'd like" "as long as it has the complete Webster dictionary engraved on it" says the state of Maryland.
You're giving them way too much credit. The MGA has consistently demonstrated they don't really know how federal firearms,laws work. All of this is going to be news to them.
Wholeheartedly agree. Most of MGA isn't mentally capable of conspiratorial cunning or attention to even obvious detail.
PowPow
Where's the beef?
They simply follow the select few that are.
OneGunTex
Escaped Member
Wait you mean y'all don't already scratch "Sept 2013" into all your lowers? 
whistlersmother
Peace through strength
While all of this bothers me, the unfinished receiver baffles me.
What is an unfinished receiver? An "80%"? A "5%"? A bunch of unmelted beer cans? Dirt? All can be "unfinished", just takes varying amounts of effort to finish it.
What is an unfinished receiver? An "80%"? A "5%"? A bunch of unmelted beer cans? Dirt? All can be "unfinished", just takes varying amounts of effort to finish it.
What a shit show. They really are trying to make it something that current owners won't go apeshit about: grandfather it in with a requirement that the owner/maker must mark it and record it, but nothing more (I reviewed the bill text - there is no requirement until 2022 that the markings be made or logged by an FFL). That little Trojan Horse may well be enough to sneak this through. I'm sure a large number of current owners will take the easy route of shrugging their shoulders and say "well, it doesn't impact me in any meaningful way, so I can live with it."
.... Until in the 2022 session or after they make a requirement that everyone register such guns. Now you have an item with your name and city on it, which can't be obliterated, and if it turns up in your possession unregistered you get bent over by the .gov overlords. Like I said, this is bad not just for what it does, but for the fact that a lot of homemade owners will shrug and ignore it.
On the other end of the spectrum is the ammunition NICS check right out of California, which is just a train wreck. All. The. Way. Around.
.... Until in the 2022 session or after they make a requirement that everyone register such guns. Now you have an item with your name and city on it, which can't be obliterated, and if it turns up in your possession unregistered you get bent over by the .gov overlords. Like I said, this is bad not just for what it does, but for the fact that a lot of homemade owners will shrug and ignore it.
On the other end of the spectrum is the ammunition NICS check right out of California, which is just a train wreck. All. The. Way. Around.
