Question about Bushmaster HBAR

[davidr145]

Got a question about my Bushmaster AR-15 HBAR. When I bought it was an un-regulated firearm, cash and carry. Since it is a Bushmaster, has a telescoping stock and flash suppressor it would now be considered a banned weapon. I know that it is grand fathered so I can keep it, but my question is would I have to register it with the state police after Oct 1? From what I can tell if it was a regulated gun you don't need to re-register it, but in my case it looks like I am going from un-regulated to regulated/banned. Any help greatly appreciated.

 

[occbrian]

LEGALLY OWNED BEFORE 10/1/13 = LEGIT, NO WORRIES, NO REGISTRATION

 

[occbrian]

But don't ask me how you are supposed to prove that you owned a cash and carry before 10/1/13.

 

[davidr145]

Thanks for quick response. It was more like credit card and carry so I have a receipt as well as the paper work. Was trying to think of a way to take a picture of it with some sort of time source in the picture. Was thinking a cell phone with the date being displayed might work. I have seen on the forum people recommending getting something notarized. But wouldn't that entitle taking the AR to a place where there is a notary. Thay might not go over well.

 

[occbrian]

If you have the receipt, you have nothing to worry about.

 

[davidr145]

Jus to clarify, by paper work I mean the store bill of sale as well as the credit card machine receipt.

 

[anil]

Still questionable. What happens if you lose the receipt in 20 years? Though, I guess they did admit that most everything transferred through a storefront in the last dozen years is in some system some where.

Stupid f*king law is so complicated you need a team of lawyers to figure it out.

 

[davidr145]

Agreed that the law is f*ck*d up and some gun owner will get screwed by it because they don't have the paper work. I did scan in copies of all the paper work of my various guns as well as pictures of them. Stored locally on my computer and encrypted out on cloud based backup service just in case. Probably would be good to put copies in a safe deposit box as well.

 

[501st]

Agreed that the law is f*ck*d up and some gun owner will get screwed by it because they don't have the paper work. I did scan in copies of all the paper work of my various guns as well as pictures of them. Stored locally on my computer and encrypted out on cloud based backup service just in case. Probably would be good to put copies in a safe deposit box as well.

Worst case scenario, the gunstore should have the 4473 available.

 

[Rhino]

This is still America ... We are supposed to be innocent until PROVEN guilty. So as far as I can tell, the onus is on the state to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that you didn't own it prior to OCT. 1, not the other way around.

 

[davidr145]

But this is MD, and they don't play by the rules

 

[Threeband]

You can post a picture of it here, showing the serial number. The internet is forever.
Or send a picture to yourself as an attachment. That will be dated. Scan your paperwork, and save to a disk.


Meanwhile, the flash hider and telescoping stock won't be a problem.

The fact that your AR is a Bushmaster brand should be irrelevant. The "Bushmaster" mentioned on the old "assault rifle" list does not refer to the AR clones made by Bushmaster. It refers to an entirely different rifle, which I believe saw few sales in the US.

http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=6&f=2&t=222400

 

[gmkoh]

Thanks for quick response. It was more like credit card and carry so I have a receipt as well as the paper work. Was trying to think of a way to take a picture of it with some sort of time source in the picture. Was thinking a cell phone with the date being displayed might work. I have seen on the forum people recommending getting something notarized. But wouldn't that entitle taking the AR to a place where there is a notary. Thay might not go over well.

A notary does not verify the information in a document, just act to officially record the signing and the identity of the signer, so you would not have to present the firearm to the notary.

The idea of notarizing an inventory is that you will have listed your firearms and serial numbers on a dated document and had that notarized on a articular date. This should be sufficient to show that you possessed that/those firearms on the date recorded by the notary.
Personally, I would not take a picture for this purpose- If I should modify the firearm (like adding a feature such as a different stock) at a later time, I would be hesitant to muddy the waters if the original picture did not match the current firearm configuration, even though it is allowed under the current bill. I believe in providing the minimum information necessary.

 

[ddeanjohnson]

Following up on gmkoh, the notary public just helps establish that certain documents (photos could be included) existed on a certain date, and that a certain person whose identity was established first signed those documents in the presence of the notary, and/or swore and signed an oath or affirmation in the notary's presence, on a certain date and in a certain place. You can type up a document containing whatever information you wish -- an inventory, whatever -- and put a statement on the bottom swearing that it is a truthful record of certain firearms that you own on the date of the document. Attach photos if you wish. The notary establishes your identity (looks at your driver's license, whatever), witnesses you sign the affirmation, and signs and stamps the document as a witness. The stamp imprints right through the paper. (You might even be able to get the notary to imprint the photos.) The notary keeps a record of the notarial act in his bound book, which provides an additional proof that the documents existed and were attested to on that date.

The notary does not in any way validate the truth of what is asserted in the documents -- for all the notary knows, you might be swearing an affirmation that to the best of your knowledge and belief, the moon is made of green cheese. The notary's role is to establish a record that you, Joe Smith, signed that affirmation in her presence on the date recorded. Since you cannot sign and the notary cannot notarize the rifle itself, there would be no point in taking it with you.

 

[davidr145]

Thanks for the responses everyone. I think I will get something notarized and also publish a picture on the site. Hopefully doing all this will satisfy any future inquistion about when I purchased the gun. Thanks again.

 

[balttigger]

Got a question about my Bushmaster AR-15 HBAR. When I bought it was an un-regulated firearm, cash and carry. Since it is a Bushmaster, has a telescoping stock and flash suppressor it would now be considered a banned weapon. I know that it is grand fathered so I can keep it, but my question is would I have to register it with the state police after Oct 1? From what I can tell if it was a regulated gun you don't need to re-register it, but in my case it looks like I am going from un-regulated to regulated/banned. Any help greatly appreciated.

I have not looked at the listing of specific weapons to be banned but the feature test mentions folding stocks and not telescoping stocks, so I would say that it will still be GTG unless specifically mentioned. Just my $0.02

 

[LongTom]

If you have the receipt, you have nothing to worry about.

See, this is exactly what I'm talking about. What if the prosecutor determines that the receipt isn't "good enough." That's happened before in court, too. What if you lost the receipt? What if you never had one to begin with?

What the HELL IS GOING ON IN THIS SHIT HOLE STATE - I WANT TO ****ING CRY.

 

[Applehd]

I think the new list of "banned" specifies "Bushmaster Semi Automatic rifles"... I am going to look at it again, but I thought the language was all-encompassing.

 

[davidr145]

That is what confused me. From what have seen on the forum though, is that reference is not for Bushmaster AR's but some other Bushmaster guns so I shouldn't have to register. I guess if it does mean Bushmaster AR's though, I would have to register it. This is one of the reasons why this bill sucks as it could get me in trouble because I fail to interpret teh bill correctly.

 

[Threeband]

I think the new list of "banned" specifies "Bushmaster Semi Automatic rifles"... I am going to look at it again, but I thought the language was all-encompassing.

The important point I want to make:

The "Bushmaster" named on the List is a very obscure rifle not manufactured for many years. It is not an AR15. The List does not regulate everything bearing the Bushmaster brand name. I think some people think it does. We must not allow that misconception to take hold.



But you are 100% right. The "Bushmaster" is not the bullpup: it is an almost unknown rifle that looks like this:

Here is a write up, with more photos and links which I found on Arfcom:

http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=6&f=2&t=222400


Thank you for the correction, erwos. This rifle is very obscure, and we can thank our wise Legislature for saving us from it's menacing malevolence.

I edited my previous post to reduce further confusion.

The list is very old, and has lots of guns that have been unavailable for many, many years. Some, such as the Bushmaster, were never available in any numbers. It is a list of forgotten Retro guns from the 80s, like the Calico and the SPAS.