Their own FAQ on the Brady law, in particular Question #57 (the first example is almost exactly a description of the situation in our "Free" state). IANAL, but I would guess that any lawyer defending an FFL would bring that to the table.
77R lawsuit successful
- Thread starter Todd S
- 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:
Yeah, the casing does not go to MSP until after the buyer takes possession of the firearm. According to my FFL the casing is supposed to be photographed/scanned and put into an MSP database but they do not have the funds to buy the necessary equipment. So, they currently just store the casings in barrels. The whole point of the law was to be able to identify the firearm used when spent casings are found at the crime scene. Without a database to search the law serves no purpose. Apparently granting funding to enforce existing laws does not win as many votes as passing new laws.
- Apr 4, 2012
- 840
o well this doesnt help me out any
I'll believe it when I see it!
Today marks day 70 for me and 41 for my wife (two separate dealers, both previously hard NOs. I really don't see where this provides enough motivation (cover) for them to change their minds. Again, I'll believe it when I see it.
Today marks day 70 for me and 41 for my wife (two separate dealers, both previously hard NOs. I really don't see where this provides enough motivation (cover) for them to change their minds. Again, I'll believe it when I see it.
Thanks! This is what I needed to see! Now, FFLs should see that too.
chris1205
Member
shouldn't that go back to the MSP for not doing there job?? FFL's tried to do this but the MSP stopped them therefore creating the problem, and intentionally I might add. The MSP should be open to law suits in the event of something bad happening, not the FFL. The MSP is acting irresponsible in this situation.
The lawsuit achieved and formally made the MSP and attorney general acknowledge the law as it is already written. The informed already knew that the 8th day release was legal (right or wrong is another discussion). Did the lawsuit reduce the backlog? Did the lawsuit accelerate the processing time of MSP (35 applications/day - read that somewhere)? Did the lawsuit change the POC for NICS to the FFLs? Guys, nothing really changed. Those that have firearms in the "definite no" release dealers, well guess what, they are not coming home tonight.
Agreed.
The MSP probably a good laugh about it anyway. The most annoying part (as with most of the GA session) is that now the powers that be are touting this a a "win". Seems like a huge waste of resources, time and energy.
I don't get it.
Streetgang
OP4
As much as I'd love to say you are wrong....You're not. I know at least two dealers, who still won't release until MSP comes back with an ND and that doesn't change until MSP get's off their butt and processes some paperwork.
Brooklyn
I stand with John Locke.
And maybe sue to allow ffls to do a nics check after the 7 days.
The msp is out of it my their own policy....
Mr H
Unincited Co-Conservative
... and some which were hesitant may now begin making their customers happy.
Haides
Ultimate Member
This, seriously. I'm sure even the anti-gun idiots would get all riled up if you tell them "people in Maryland are getting guns without background checks!
" right now.We should be making a bigger deal about this. Call it a public safety issue (whether it really is or isn't is irrelevant); use their own BS against them.
scottp999
Active Member
- Feb 11, 2008
- 222
Seems a little too early to celebrate anything. If a MD resident has to wait 90-100 days+ to bring home a regulated firearm, then this accomplished nothing. Stop the congrats and patting on the back until the actual actions change.
30 days is to receive a regulated firearm. you can buy regulated firearms a day apart, once you receive the first one, you have to wait 30 days to receive the second one.
l730dc
Active Member
I feel like the law doesnt say possession. . It says purchase.. and ive heard msp considers that the entire purchase process.. It seems it can be interpretated different ways
Ab_Normal
Ab_member
They have just confirmed what most of us have known since the mid 90's.
Ab_Normal
Ab_member
Agreed.
The MSP probably a good laugh about it anyway. The most annoying part (as with most of the GA session) is that now the powers that be are touting this a a "win". Seems like a huge waste of resources, time and energy.
I don't get it.
And after getting PM's to stop being so outspoken because people are working on it behind the scenes, this is what we get.
