House Bill 450, AW Ban Passed

[dieselfarmboy]

Try to Open Carry in MD. See how far you get.

Didnt say MD was better, was saying if I was retiring DE would not of been on my list of states to move too. Working age and had a job in MD close to DE then maybe. You need to move FAR from the swamp and to a state with crappy living conditions to get away from all the bull. I could see DE was going to cave long time ago. I have watched Sussex county just become a extension of Northern DE and the DC metro area.

 

[AKbythebay]

Did I just see this morning Delaware has banned magazines over 17 rounds? Is this part of the AWB bill?

Sent from my Galaxy S20 using Tapatalk

 

[Lmo]

I have a question. What about a Fulton M1 Carbine, threaded barrel, with flash suppressor. Legal or illegal under HB 450?

 

[DEVE]

Did I just see this morning Delaware has banned magazines over 17 rounds? Is this part of the AWB bill?

Sent from my Galaxy S20 using Tapatalk

Mags that hold more than 17rds were banned. It was a different bill than 450 though. As of me writing this is has yet to be signed (450 also has not yet been signed).

 

[DEVE]

I have a question. What about a Fulton M1 Carbine, threaded barrel, with flash suppressor. Legal or illegal under HB 450?

I know the M1A is on the banned list, but not the M1 Garand (if I remember correctly), but I do not know about the carbine.
I’m fairly certain the flash suppressor would make it banned though (it only takes ONE feature to turn it into an “assault weapon” according to this BS legislation).

Here is a link so you can look through it for yourself:
https://legis.delaware.gov/json/BillDetail/GetPdfDocument?fileAttachmentId=572042

 

[DEVE]

M1 carbine/Garand are GTG. So is an M1A in any caliber other than .308. The Chinese M14s in .308 with metric threads are also legal. A flash suppressor would be fine…if there is no pistol grip or folding stock.

That may be the case in MD, which I think states that if it has 2 or more features it’s considered banned… but DE seems to have taken it a step further and said that even just 1 feature (even just a flash suppressor) is enough to get it on the banned list as a “copycat weapon”.

(5) “Copycat weapon” means any of the following:
a. A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that can accept a detachable magazine and has at least 1 of the following:
1. A folding or telescoping stock.
2. Any grip of the weapon, including a pistol grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other stock, the use of which would allow an individual to grip the weapon, resulting in any finger on the trigger hand in addition to the trigger finger being directly below any portion of the action of the weapon when firing.
3. A forward pistol grip.
4. A flash suppressor.
5. A grenade launcher or flare launcher.
b. A semiautomatic, centerfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches.

I WANT to be wrong on this, but from how I’m reading it, that’s my takeaway. Even just having a flash suppressor is a no-go.

 

[teratos]

That may be the case in MD, which I think states that if it has 2 or more features it’s considered banned… but DE seems to have taken it a step further and said that even just 1 feature (even just a flash suppressor) is enough to get it on the banned list as a “copycat weapon”.

Dammit. Didn’t realize this was DE…ignore me.

 

[AKbythebay]

Mags that hold more than 17rds were banned. It was a different bill than 450 though. As of me writing this is has yet to be signed (450 also has not yet been signed).

Any reason they picked 17 rather than the usual 10 limit? Seems like a strange number to settle on.

I knew it was just a matter of time before DE went the way of MD. Dems have veto-proof majorities in both houses just like Maryland.

Sent from my Galaxy S20 using Tapatalk

 

[DC-W]

Those with carry permits are exempt from the 17rd limit last I checked, unless they struck that from the bill.

Still crappy and still another law that will be enforced arbitrarily and capriciously.

 

[ArSoNZ28]

Delaware substituted the Maryland ban language for Connecticut (HA 1 amendment). Single feature test that includes pistol grips, threaded barrels, and collapsible stocks. All features the MD overlords graciously removed as evil but will significantly restrict semiauto center fire rifles in DE now.

 

[Lmo]

Well ... I can always pay $400 for a new barrel and $ for gunsmithing, I suppose.

 

[TI-tick]

This chit is flat out Democrat pandering to give Sleepy Joe a "victory"; tossing the DE citizens under the bus.

I'm no legal expert but IIRC there is already Federal litigation in the works regarding: mag capacity restrictions, age restrictions, evil feature restrictions, and manufacture/gunshop liability. A reasonable person would say let's wait and see how this litigation works out first.

From what I read the DE Legislature broke rules, avoided public comment, and jammed it through.

It's also my understanding that it goes into effect immediately when the Gov signs and there is no compensation for what will soon be "illegal".

This chit will put Steeles, and I'm sure other shops, out of business.

I think the DE Legislature is trying to out California the CA Legislature.

Morons.

 

[Mark75H]

DE folk add this to your arsenal: MD removed pistol grips as an evil feature because someone testified that they were an accommodation for his disability; they were afraid the Americans with Disabilities Act would nullify the law, at least partially. It should be taken to court in DE under that pretense.

 

[ArSoNZ28]

They’re already working on passing a law in DE that will hold gun stores and manufactures liable for what is done with that they sell (SB 302). Most dealers will choose to close up shop. Sprinkle “we must stop the online ammunition loophole” after the dealers close and they’ve gotten their wish, a (good guy) gun and ammo free utopia because it’s never gone wrong in Baltimore, California, Chicago…

With Delaware’s constitution explicitly stating “A person has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of self, family, home…” we may have a fighting chance in court when coupled with the supreme court/national cases. I won’t hold my breath though.

They’ve already mentioned permit to purchase (aka HQL) for the next legislative session too.

 

[Lmo]

Does this mean that they will not retain a database of individuals who voluntarily apply for a certificate of possession ??? Sort of tantamount to a registry.

"... (4) That the Department will not retain copies of the certificate or other identifying information relating to any individual who applies for a voluntary certificate of possession ..."

 

[ArSoNZ28]

That's what it says but it begs the question, how will they know the certificate is real without some sort of record...

 

[Lmo]

Also, what about people who move into Delaware after enactment of this law? Will they be able to get a certificate of possession if they can prove they owned the firearm prior to enactment of the law?

 

[Lmo]

And, if you move from one residence to another within Delaware, do you have to update your certificate of possession to include your new address?

 

[Lucca1]

That's what it says but it begs the question, how will they know the certificate is real without some sort of record...

If a computer is used to generate the certificate, I would have a hard time believing that it will be deleted. It seems like a bill of sale showing a purchase date prior to enactment would be sufficient.

 

[DEVE]

This chit is flat out Democrat pandering to give Sleepy Joe a "victory"; tossing the DE citizens under the bus.

I'm no legal expert but IIRC there is already Federal litigation in the works regarding: mag capacity restrictions, age restrictions, evil feature restrictions, and manufacture/gunshop liability. A reasonable person would say let's wait and see how this litigation works out first.

From what I read the DE Legislature broke rules, avoided public comment, and jammed it through.

It's also my understanding that it goes into effect immediately when the Gov signs and there is no compensation for what will soon be "illegal".

This chit will put Steeles, and I'm sure other shops, out of business.

I think the DE Legislature is trying to out California the CA Legislature.

Morons.

It’s my hopes that this will get wrapped up in the courts for a long time, just like the 3D printing nonsense from last year.
Like you pointed out, they seem to have done this in a way that pretty much ensures it’ll be nullified by a court.

And remember, none of it matters until it’s signed. So take advantage of the time you have.