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

[camo556]

It was my understanding that he had 30 days in total to veto, but that the bill would become law if unsigned after 6 days. Essentially, the veto would erase the law, and he still has the time to do it.

no. 17(b) states:

(b) If any Bill presented to the Governor while the General Assembly is in session is not returned by the Governor with objections within six days (Sundays excepted), the Bill shall be a law in like manner as if he signed it, unless the General Assembly, by adjournment, prevents its return, in which case it shall not be a law.

Maryland Constitution - Article II - Executive Department

Unfortunately, the bill is law as of 4/9 as if he signed it.

He did veto the other bill on FFL security requirements.

 

[trickg]

Ok - there's also this:

"Example 2— Frame or receiver: A partially complete billet or blank of a frame or receiver with one or more template holes drilled or indexed in the correct location is a frame or receiver, as a person with common hand tools may readily complete the billet or blank to function as a frame or receiver."

So how does this apply to an 80%? Do the holes drilled for the takedown pins that are used to correctly attach it to the jig count as "one or more template holes?"

 

[euler357]

I would argue that an AR 80% can't be readily completed with common hand tools since jigs are not common hand tools (you can't buy them at Lowes/HD/HF/other tool stores). I think that this example is included for bent AK blanks. I think that it's saying that they can be flat and have holes OR be bent and have no holes and be a non-receiver.

 

[trickg]

So are we to surmise that the new ATF ruling is pages and pages of eyewash that actually changes very little when it comes to where the rubber hits the road? There's no need for serialization on PMFs unless one is trying to sell them through a dealer - that's pretty clearly stated.

There's also a way around selling parts kits. For example, most poly 80s are sold with the jig. That would be easy enough to split out and then set up the algorithms on the website so that if a person orders a poly 80 frame, there are other "suggestions" - sort of a "people who purchased this item also purchased these other items" listing. Would that skirt the ATF reg and still be legal?

 

[elwojo]

So are we to surmise that the new ATF ruling is pages and pages of eyewash that actually changes very little when it comes to where the rubber hits the road? There's no need for serialization on PMFs unless one is trying to sell them through a dealer - that's pretty clearly stated.

There's also a way around selling parts kits. For example, most poly 80s are sold with the jig. That would be easy enough to split out and then set up the algorithms on the website so that if a person orders a poly 80 frame, there are other "suggestions" - sort of a "people who purchased this item also purchased these other items" listing. Would that skirt the ATF reg and still be legal?

I don't believe so. The Final Rule itself has (pg 329):

(c) Partially complete, disassembled, or nonfunctional frame or receiver. The
terms “frame” and “receiver” shall include a partially complete, disassembled, or
nonfunctional frame or receiver, including a frame or receiver parts kit, that is designed
to or may readily be completed, assembled, restored, or otherwise converted to function
as a frame or receiver, i.e., to house or provide a structure for the primary energized
component of a handgun, breech blocking or sealing component of a projectile weapon
other than a handgun, or internal sound reduction component of a firearm muffler or
firearm silencer, as the case may be. The terms shall not include a forging, casting,
printing, extrusion, unmachined body, or similar article that has not yet reached a stage of
manufacture where it is clearly identifiable as an unfinished component part of a weapon
(e.g., unformed block of metal, liquid polymer, or other raw material). When issuing a
classification, the Director may consider any associated templates, jigs, molds,
equipment, tools, instructions, guides, or marketing materials that are sold, distributed, or
possessed with the item or kit, or otherwise made available by the seller or distributor of
the item or kit to the purchaser or recipient of the item or kit. The following are
nonexclusive examples that illustrate the definitions:

This means that the Director of the AFT will be able to make the determination on what is a frame or receiver (or suppressor). This is explicitly written to make Poly80 kits regulated as firearms such that they require serial numbers and background checks. Even if Poly80 stops making jigs and then a new company called Jig80 comes out that only sells jigs for Poly80s - I bet they'll still consider those unfinished frames as firearms because of the vagueness in the rule. 3D Printers however will go BRRRRR.

They have defined "readily" (pg 323) as:

Readily. A process, action, or physical state that is fairly or reasonably efficient,
quick, and easy, but not necessarily the most efficient, speediest, or easiest process,
action, or physical state. With respect to the classification of firearms, factors relevant in
making this determination include the following:
(a) Time, i.e., how long it takes to finish the process;
(b) Ease, i.e., how difficult it is to do so;
(c) Expertise, i.e., what knowledge and skills are required;
(d) Equipment, i.e., what tools are required;
(e) Parts availability, i.e., whether additional parts are required, and how easily
they can be obtained;
(f) Expense, i.e., how much it costs;
(g) Scope, i.e., the extent to which the subject of the process must be changed to
finish it; and
(h) Feasibility, i.e., whether the process would damage or destroy the subject of
the process, or cause it to malfunction.

The Final Rule is pretty much "anything could be a firearm if we want to declare it as such". I agree though that if you have to bend metal and rivet and weld, it's not "readily" in my opinion. If they consider it "readily", I'd love to see one of their untrained agents "readily" convert it without a lot of expense and at great odds of feasibility.

I will be lobbying, however, to make Ace Hardware and Home Depot turn their lumber and piping sections into FFLs - since 3/4" and 1" pipe can be used to "readily" make a shotgun.

 

[euler357]

That's what it sounds like to me for the federal level. The SB387 is still going to require that they be serialized after being built into a firearm in MD though. Still don't think that this is an effective way to keep guns from criminals since you can't compel them to engrave a receiver in their possession because this is self-incrimination.

There are a couple of good things in it (not nearly enough to be overall positive though). Gunsmith/Dealers (FFL-01s) now have the ability to buy firearms, repair them, then sell them. Previously they were only allowed to do the gunsmithing on *customer-owned* firearms. There is also now allowance for a non-FFL to do engraving for an FFL without a variance. There are a few other admin clean-up things.

 

[trickg]

I read section "c" to be an 80 frame to be one that is sold as part of a kit. I think it's intentionally vague.

 

[stricer555]

From the ATF document: "The current regulations and this rule already require that identification marks be placed in a manner not susceptible of being readily obliterated, altered, or removed."

So the serial numbers on a commercially produced gun, engraved as they are now, meet the definition of not being "readily" removed. Having worked with metal before I can only theorize that it would not be difficult to remove these numbers with something as simple as a hand held dremel or drill. So this means that the effort of "readily" falls below power tools.

Since I could only imagine you'd have a heck of a time finishing an 80% without the use of power tools then no 80% should qualify as "readily" convertible.

 

[elwojo]

Since I could only imagine you'd have a heck of a time finishing an 80% without the use of power tools then no 80% should qualify as "readily" convertible.

If the ATF says that serial numbers cannot be "readily obliterated" because the serial number plate is made of metal unlike a Poly80's unfinished portions, then Poly80 just has to put a piece of metal equivalent to a serial number plate in the way of one of their drilling holes and then it is no longer "readily" convertible.

 

[camo556]

The reality of the ATF rules is that its a firearm if they say it is, same as it ever was.

The defined "readily." It's no more clear than it ever was. If it takes me an hour to finish a polymer AR lower, is that readily or not? It will be because they threaten people and send out nasty letters, same as it ever was.

They will threaten makers of and only those with super deep pockets will be able to afford the ensuing litigation.

 

[elwojo]

Is anyone else scratching their heads wondering if 80% AR-15s are going to be legal to buy and sell in Maryland given the definition of "readily" and Example 4 in the ATF's Final Rule?

Example 4— Not a receiver: A billet or blank of an AR-15 variant receiver
without critical interior areas having been indexed, machined, or formed that is not sold,
distributed, or possessed with instructions, jigs, templates, equipment, or tools such that it
may readily be completed is not a receiver.

 

[hammer67]

quote:

"Is anyone else scratching their heads wondering if 80% AR-15s are going to be legal to buy and sell in Maryland given the definition of "readily" and Example 4 in the ATF's Final Rule?"



I thought 80% AR-15s won't be legal to buy and sell in MD because of SB387. Nothing to do ATF's final rule.

 

[elwojo]

I thought 80% AR-15s won't be legal to buy and sell in MD because of SB387. Nothing to do ATF's final rule.

ATF says that 80% AR-15 receivers are NOT "designed to or may readily be completed, assembled, restored, or otherwise converted to function as a frame or receiver". Otherwise Example 4 would be a "frame or receiver", and it is decidedly NOT.

Maryland's new law states:

(H) “UNFINISHED FRAME OR RECEIVER” MEANS A FORGED, CAST, PRINTED,
EXTRUDED, OR MACHINED BODY OR SIMILAR ARTICLE THAT
HAS REACHED A STAGE IN MANUFACTURE WHERE IT MAY READILY
BE COMPLETED, ASSEMBLED, OR CONVERTED TO BE USED AS THE FRAME OR
RECEIVER OF A FUNCTIONAL FIREARM

This seems abundantly clear to me that 80% AR-15 receivers are NOT considered an "unfinished frame or receiver". This isn't a logical leap here. This is obvious fact to me.

Looks like Euler357 beat me to this thought process.

From this, it would seem that an 80% AR lower isn't an "UNFINISHED FRAME OR RECEIVER."

The "logical leap" comes from stricer555, which makes it seem like a little bit of metal in the way of the milling process would make any 80% receiver "not readily" into a receiver, else it is kind of a complete ban on firearms since serial number plates would need to be able to withstand common power tools.

 

[camo556]

I am totally expecting facts and logic to rule the ATF when they start enforcing these rules.

I also have a big jar of unicorn poo that I use as a get out of jail free card with my wife.

The only thing abundantly clear to me is that people who expect facts and logic to run the ATF have not been paying attention for 90 years.

 

[trickg]

I am totally expecting facts and logic to rule the ATF when they start enforcing these rules.

I also have a big jar of unicorn poo that I use as a get out of jail free card with my wife.

The only thing abundantly clear to me is that people who expect facts and logic to run the ATF have not been paying attention for 90 years.

At this point it's going to be tougher to be in compliance with Maryland's BS law than whatever restrictions the ATF is proposing.

 

[hammer67]

At this point it's going to be tougher to be in compliance with Maryland's BS law than whatever restrictions the ATF is proposing.

that's my point! The MD ban on sales will go into effect before the ATF ban. my takeaway-buy now whatever you may want in the future before MD law takes effect and then move them (or yourself!) out of state before 3/23.

 

[Nickberg500]

Ive been printing my own hand gun frames and if I understand correctly, the ATF rules don't prevent 3d printed frames from being used to make a firearm. The maryland law however, would prevent a printed frame from being used since it can't be properly serialized in metal. Essentially banning all plastic DIY lowers. Is this correct?

Without redesigning and reprinting in such a way that metal plates could be embedded in the firearm, yes. Don't throw them away just yet, we have until March to sort things out. If I find a way to comply in the interim, I'll share it, but otherwise we're boned.

 

[hammer67]

quick look on gunbroker and the cost of 80 lowers has gone up significantly. If you wanted any should have bought a week or so ago.

 

[elwojo]

Without redesigning and reprinting in such a way that metal plates could be embedded in the firearm, yes. Don't throw them away just yet, we have until March to sort things out. If I find a way to comply in the interim, I'll share it, but otherwise we're boned.

Epoxy or super glue can be used to add a 3d-printed embossed frame with an inserted serializable metal plate to any already-existing 3d-printed firearm.

 

[euler357]

Epoxy or super glue can be used to add a 3d-printed embossed frame with an inserted serializable metal plate to any already-existing 3d-printed firearm.

My thoughts on this are to machine out a spot in the polymer frame if needed and epoxy in the plate with high-temp permanent epoxy. Using an epoxy with "permanent" in its description and a working temp higher than the ABS/PLA/other plastic seems more likely to survive scrutiny.

It's unclear whether I'll be doing this as an FFL-07 given the potential to weaken the structure of the firearm. There is no way I could accept responsibility for the structure/performance of something that I didn't make/design myself.