SB387 "Public Safety - Untraceable Firearms" - The Ban on Private Firearm Making

[lennyk]

Short answer. Yes it can within the bounds of reason. In the absence of a direct conflict, Federal law does not preempt state law. Ps. The amended bill deleted the block of aluminum part of the definition. MSI made that happen. So your zeros are fine to possess

The issue is that this thing is by far worst than California. Even in Cali 80's are fine pending the build.

 

[Allen65]

How much does a laser engraving machine capable of engraving to ATF specs cost?

No need for a laser engraver, mechanical engraving works just fine to meet ATF size and depth requirements. I have a benchtop CNC mill with an air turbine spindle for engraving both text and graphics in aluminum and other metals. A complete system like that could be had for maybe ~$5k, or a little less if you already have a compressor and computer.

 

[JTH20]

How much does a laser engraving machine capable of engraving to ATF specs cost? Are any ffls going to want to put out tens of thousands of dollars so that they can engrave maybe a couple of hundred frames and receivers? And what FFL wants to take on the liability of having their license number associated with a gun they did not manufacture or sell? I can completely see one of these guys falling into the wrong hands, being used in a mass shooting and then the FFL that did the engraving be sued by the victims or the victims families. This whole thing is a real charlie foxtrot. And I'm sure that's being done on purpose.

The liability concern is going to scare off most FFL's.

 

[light12pdr]

Thanks for your efforts.

Care to speculate what you think will happen if someone brings in a rifle in a now-banned configuration to be marked and registered that was legally made before 2013?

For the purposes of marking a receiver, wouldn't you only need to bring the receiver and not the entire rifle for the required markings? Only you would know what configuration you have

 

[lennyk]

The liability concern is going to scare off most FFL's.

Exactly, so is the inability to comply a point for litigation?

 

[Bertfish]

Exactly, so is the inability to comply a point for litigation?

Impossible to comply with the bump stock ban

Litigation is ongoing

 

[Muleskinner]

No need for a laser engraver, mechanical engraving works just fine to meet ATF size and depth requirements. I have a benchtop CNC mill with an air turbine spindle for engraving both text and graphics in aluminum and other metals. A complete system like that could be had for maybe ~$5k, or a little less if you already have a compressor and computer.

What about those who don't own a machine that can do that? How about engraving that little tiny piece of metal riveted to the underside of the frame on a Glock pistol? The general assembly knows that jumping through these hoops is going to be next to impossible especially if no ffls will cooperate with the serialization. And I'm certain that it's all been done on purpose so that it will be next to impossible to comply with.

 

[PumpkinScissors]

Can one register 800 non-existent pistol frames before the deadline, then print them at leisure?

Asking for a friend.

And how are printed frames engraved? No metal.

This guy managed to add a plate to his 3d printed AR https://www.reddit.com/r/GunnitRust/comments/s7t2aq/how_do_yall_feel_about_this_mostly_3d_printed/

I don't recall if he shared the files but he does provide documentation as to how he did it. Still doesn't help those with existing builds or preferance for a particular aesthetic nor have I seen anything similar for the glock or any other available parts kit builds.

 

[esqappellate]

Impossible to comply with the bump stock ban

Litigation is ongoing

Practical difficulties are hard to litigate. Legal impossibilities are what counts

 

[esqappellate]

What are the chances that the following gets defined by COMAR / MSP for either interpretation of the House / Senate bills:

1) The act of the FFL serializing the firearm will be considered "making" it
2) The now-serialized firearm will be "new" and require transfer back to the owner
3) You will have to fill out a 77R to receive the firearm after serialization
4) If the new firearm doesn't meet new transfer requirements, you won't be able to receive it from the FFL

The way the bills are written now is too nebulous for me to understand the whole machine. But I can't see MSP allowing an FFL to serialize a handgun and then hand it back to literally anyone without a background check.

1. Probably zero, given the ATF regs
2. Zero, given the ATF regs that won't require the FFL to use a 4473
3. Zero, the registration gives the MSP the same info sufficient for them to do a background check on the person doing the registration
4. There are no transfer requirements imposed by the bill.

 

[esqappellate]

I think the concern is that FFL won't want to serialize a banned gun? At least not without some assurance that IF it was built after 2013, they have no liability.

A fair concern, but it may be misplaced. Hard to see any liability for a FFL who only does markings no questions asked in accordance with ATF regs. as required by State law.

 

[esqappellate]

The issue is that this thing is by far worst than California. Even in Cali 80's are fine pending the build.

There is at least an argument (it is very unclear) that you might still be able to build as long as you register it. See language of new Section 704 in SB 387:
(A) A PERSON WHO MAKES, COMPLETES, OR INITIALLY ASSEMBLES A FIREARM, OR THE CURRENT LEGAL OWNER OF THE FIREARM, SHALL REGISTER THE FIREARM WITH THE SECRETARY.
(B) THE SECRETARY SHALL MAINTAIN A SYSTEM TO REGISTER FIREARMS IMPRINTED WITH SERIAL NUMBERS UNDER § 5–703(B)(2)(II) OF THIS SUBTITLE.

 

[Muleskinner]

1. Probably zero, given the ATF regs
2. Zero, given the ATF regs that won't require the FFL to use a 4473
3. Zero, the registration gives the MSP the same info sufficient for them to do a background check on the person doing the registration
4. There are no transfer requirements imposed by the bill.

Will you be required to have a hql to get your firearm serialized and then receive it back?

 

[lazarus]

Glocks have a permanently embedded metal plate in them that’s engraved with the number.

Polymer80 frames contain the same; they’re just blank.

Gen 1 doesn’t. I’ve got one that’ll have to be destroyed.

 

[esqappellate]

Will you be required to have a hql to get your firearm serialized and then receive it back?

Nope. Self builds do not require an HQL, per MSP 2014 Advisory. See attached.

 

[lazarus]

Its a cluster....this is thing is ripe for litigation. Can a State decide what is a firearm? A block of aluminum or plastic? I thought those definitions are on the federal level.

A state can ban left handed monkey wrenches if they wanted. So long as it didn’t violate a constitutional right or run up against conflicting with a federal law, states can do what they want.

And yes, sure, gun bans I think violate the 2A. Does a ban on 3D printers and aluminum ingots unless you are licensed do that? It would be hard to argue it does. It might violate common sense.

 

[Bertfish]

Gen 1 doesn’t. I’ve got one that’ll have to be destroyed.

Or not?

 

[esqappellate]

https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Details/HB0425?ys=2022RS
In the House - Third Reading Passed (94-41)

https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Details/SB0387?ys=2022RS
In the Senate - Second Reading Passed with Amendments

At this point when is joint conference between senate and house?

Edit: Really how many FFL's are or will do the engraving?

TBD. It hasn't passed third reader in the Senate yet. Then each bill gets transmitted to the other chamber with the request to accede. Only if each chamber refused to accede, will conf. committee members be appointed and a conference scheduled. So this has a ways to go.

 

[NoMoreTreadingOnUs]

Just received a response from one of my reps (Guyton) explaining that she “really could not ignore the danger” and so had no choice but to vote in favor of banning. She went on to say that “in this year alone, almost 40% of illegal guns taken off the street in Baltimore were ghost guns.” Not that it matters, but does anyone have a clue where she got that statistic?

Interestingly, she has been willing to engage in a back and forth with me on this. Again, not that it matters. Chris West, who was similarly open to discussion in previous years has not responded to my email this year.

 

[lazarus]

Or not?

It actually has some reliability issues as a wallowed out one of the block pins holes. I “replaced” it with a serialized gen 3 frame a couple of years ago. Been sitting in a box since. I could only getting it running about 98% and that wasn’t good enough for me.

I have some other 80s I have concerns over, but that “not great” one is the only V1 I’ve got. So if it can’t comply and I need to destroy it, or hey, maybe MSP will run a buy back and take frames. Well it pisses me off in principle. But that’s about as far as my level of being mad about that ONE goes.

The others, fugh them. Since they aren’t built, I am looking to sell them because I just don’t have the bandwidth to deal with this. Yes I’ve written stuff to my legislators over it. But call me a boot licker if you want, but I am not in the WWNC crowd (not yet anyway). If it proves too difficult to sell and get some value back out, I’ll see if I can jump through the hoops to serialize and register them if that is possible before engraving “FU FROSH” on each one with a soldering iron and turning them in to my local MSP barracks.