NFA Untouched by Post Oct 1st Laws

[swinokur]

As long as it NEVER had a rifle stock on it. If it did, it's illegal.

IANAL

 

[Robert]

SNIP


Me I will be doing none of this, if i need another ar-15 post 1 oct and and hbar will not do ( not sure why ) and normal sbr will not do ( not sure why) , and the law is not struck I will be leaving MD.

But I think it interesting ....

you will be here for a looong loooong while.. (or until the support money runs out)

 

[annihilation-time]

Give them time. They don't know what a SBR is. They will, I'm sure, at some point. It will be interesting to see what kind of bills they introduce next session. I can envision some jackass on "our side" getting up and testifying that he can still get SBR AK's and AR's and just needs to pay $200 more and wait 6 months, and their laws are stupid. Then that avenue will be closed.....

I'm pretty sure most of them think they're already banned. During the committee hearings, many of the legislators talked about NFA items like they were already banned under the federal legislation.

 

[Flipz]

There is one exception... If you have a lower with a pistol buffer tube you are GTG until you get your stamp.

The ATF makes no distinction between a pistol buffer tube and a standard buffer tube. They look at both of them as the same thing. The only thing that matters is if it ever had a stock installed, regardless of buffer tube type.

 

[tc617]

The ATF makes no distinction between a pistol buffer tube and a standard buffer tube. They look at both of them as the same thing. The only thing that matters is if it ever had a stock installed, regardless of buffer tube type.

IMHO I would caution anyone having a SBR upper attached to a pistol lower utilizing a standard rifle buffer tube, and you just happen to posses the buttstock that will readily attach to it.

That constructive possession is a bitch, and even if you beat the rap, that could be a very expensive ride.

 

[Flipz]

IMHO I would caution anyone having a SBR upper attached to a pistol lower utilizing a standard rifle buffer tube, and you just happen to posses the buttstock that will readily attach to it.

That constructive possession is a bitch, and even if you beat the rap, that could be a very expensive ride.

I agree. Just telling you what the facts are. Many paracord wrap their standard buffer tubes when using them on AR pistols to make it obvious that they have no intention of mounting a stock.

Oh, and its not an SBR upper unless its mounted to an SBR lower. Its just called a pistol upper. As I'm sure you know, SBR stands for Short Barrel RIFLE. If there's no stock, its not a rifle.

 

[tc617]

I agree. Just telling you what the facts are. Many paracord wrap their standard buffer tubes when using them on AR pistols to make it obvious that they have no intention of mounting a stock.

Oh, and its not an SBR upper unless its mounted to an SBR lower. Its just called a pistol upper. As I'm sure you know, SBR stands for Short Barrel RIFLE. If there's no stock, its not a rifle.

Yeah my mistake. I should have said <16" upper.

Word from the MSP meeting today is all this SBR nonsense is not needed. The question that everyone has been wondering about was asked and answered.
/thread

- Can you legally build a pre-10/1 stripped receiver or a receiver picked up after 10/1 but ordered before 10/1 into a banned configuration after 10/1? YES, right from the mouth of the Major. Got it on audio.

- Will SBRs and SBSs being exempt from the copycat and assault long gun criteria since they are NFA items? Yes, it's a federal issue.

 

[Flipz]

Yeah my mistake. I should have said <16" upper.

Word from the MSP meeting today is all this SBR nonsense is not needed. The question that everyone has been wondering about was asked and answered.
/thread

This was answered at the first MSP meeting earlier this week. Thats why I started this thread............ For some reason, people didnt want to believe it.

 

[Brooklyn]

Maryland doesn't disagree with "silent de-SBR'ing" or whatever you want to call it. Maryland judges something to be an SBR purely by the current OAL and barrel length. "Fix" those, and you're back to having a rifle. I wish federal law were so simple!

This would seem to conflict directly with federal law. Assuming no transfer it still an sbr under federal law... quite a pickle..

 

[anderson76]

This was answered at the first MSP meeting earlier this week. Thats why I started this thread............ For some reason, people didnt want to believe it.

We all wanted to believe. It was not a personal attach against you. If you took it that way, then I apologize.

 

[rico903]

The lawsuit has not been dropped. It was Dismissed Without Prejudice, which means it can be brought again if need be. However, the lawsuit's only focus was getting MSP to issue a Disapproved or Not-Disapproved within 7 days or to allow dealers to release on the 8th day. The Attorney General admitted that there is no State law preventing dealers from releasing on the 8th day, so the lawsuit accomplished what it was supposed to do. The law is also pretty clear that MSP has to respond within 7 days for a Disapproved, but there is no time frame in which it has to respond for a Not-Disapproved. So, the premise of that lawsuit has pretty much been taken care of.

That does not mean another lawsuit cannot be filed regarding the rest of this mess, and at some point I bet there will be another one. Heck, there might be even more of them further on down the road as the law is figured out (i.e., people charged with crimes based upon a poor interpretation of the law).

Talking to my closest FFL dealer, he told me that his girl from ATF advised him against doing a release w/o a NICS #. Just saying. As happy as I am that dealers are doing 8th day releases, I sure hope it doesn't come back to bite them in the future. So much conflicting BS out there, all intentional no doubt.

 

[erwos]

This would seem to conflict directly with federal law. Assuming no transfer it still an sbr under federal law... quite a pickle..

Maryland law is under no obligation to perfectly line up with federal law.

Sounds like there was explicit confirmation of the "SBRs are exempt from copycat tests and named list tests" at the meeting yesterday, so that's promising progress.

 

[teratos]

Of course, we need to remember that the things people say, and even letters from the AG cannot be relied on entirely. They always have the little "YMMV" line in them.

 

[swinokur]

Yep. An AG opinion is just that. An opinion.

Not law.

 

[IMBLITZVT]

Of course, we need to remember that the things people say, and even letters from the AG cannot be relied on entirely. They always have the little "YMMV" line in them.

Yep. An AG opinion is just that. An opinion.

Not law.

Guys, time to give it up and accept that things not banned in the law are not banned! This really is not monumental news! I have been saying that from the start. Of course it feels like a victory for gun owners after all thats been said here but man, MSP and the AG have said it. Even if a future MSP or AG change it in the future, it gives them little hope in any court battle. Plus they are correctly reading the law now, so we are ok. Give it up, SBRs are going to be OK. You can build your lower. You can get your gun with a purchase order post Oct!

The only question I still have is what is a purchase order, legally! No opinions please.

 

[erwos]

The information given at the MSP briefing was that a purchase order needed to specify the gun and have some sort of monetary deposit/payment as part of it.

 

[teratos]

Guys, time to give it up and accept that things not banned in the law are not banned! This really is not monumental news! I have been saying that from the start. Of course it feels like a victory for gun owners after all thats been said here but man, MSP and the AG have said it. Even if a future MSP or AG change it in the future, it gives them little hope in any court battle. Plus they are correctly reading the law now, so we are ok. Give it up, SBRs are going to be OK. You can build your lower. You can get your gun with a purchase order post Oct!

The only question I still have is what is a purchase order, legally! No opinions please.

I am not trying to argue that they are currently banned. Except for a couple of things I wasn't clear on, I have always thought SBRs were going to be OK. I'm more concerned about the future.

 

[IMBLITZVT]

The information given at the MSP briefing was that a purchase order needed to specify the gun and have some sort of monetary deposit/payment as part of it.

So my life come September will be sending out $1 deposit POs! I really hope barrett light 50 will take one for delivery in about 5 years. I also need to send some out to LRB for a M14 and Nodak Spud for a Retro AR.

Frankly with the HBAR just referring to barrel DIA, I don't expect the flow of ARs to slow that much. Aren't a lot of the M4s coming with that HBAR anyway? I guess I need to know my ARs better but I think I will be fine there.

I am not trying to argue that they are currently banned. Except for a couple of things I wasn't clear on, I have always thought SBRs were going to be OK. I'm more concerned about the future.

Yeah, you never know. However I don't expect them to move on firearms any more for a good while. MD and firearm laws have always been about the politics and not the reality. MD can claim to have one of the heaviest Firearm restrictions and they are fine with that. No care about the details. Look at the mag ban... its the best worst gun law ever!

 

[teratos]

Yeah, you never know. However I don't expect them to move on firearms any more for a good while. MD and firearm laws have always been about the politics and not the reality. MD can claim to have one of the heaviest Firearm restrictions and they are fine with that. No care about the details. Look at the mag ban... its the best worst gun law ever!

I think they will be satisfied. NFA stuff is not on most people's radar, so they won't really be getting any brownie points with their liberal donors who think this stuff is already banned. I'm glad we have "official" word on the issue, since NFA stuff is really all I am interested in at this point, at least where modern sporting firearms are concerned.

 

[IMBLITZVT]

I ...since NFA stuff is really all I am interested in at this point, at least where modern sporting firearms are concerned.

Yeah I think I will not be tortured to much by this ban for a good while. Most of what I am looking to get is NFA or historic. The few items that are not I have either bought in the last few months or will get on PO like a M1A. I am a bit of an odd collector/shooter. So I am all over the place in what I wish to buy. Right now I have a FA M16/AR18, 1860 Henry Lever gun, P226 with suppressor, Ruger MKIII with suppressor, a FA Chauchat and a 13mm German T-Gewehr... So as you can see, really all over the place!