This stupid ammo log is pissing me off!!

[Norton]

Any way to ask if they share the ammo log list with other places like New York city or other states?

I asked how the materials were used and disseminated. If I don't get the answer i wanted, I'll ask some others.

 

[SigMatt]

Matt,

FOPA only applies to the feds as far as I can tell. If someone can dig up some analysis on how it applies to state agencies, I'd appreciate it.

If it applied just to the Feds then what was the point? The whole point of FOPA was to give gun owners legal protections in traveling interstate. It does other things as well but if it wasn't meant to apply to the States, then it is a useless law. Given that New Jersey and other states seems to violate the interstate transport provisions of FOPA with apparently impunity, it may well be a "feel good" law for us gun owners.

That aside, the whole topic of gun registries is a sore spot with me. Mainly because of the freedom/liberty aspects but in the context of this discussion, the following language of 18 USC 926(a):

(a) The Attorney General may prescribe only such rules and regulations as are necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter, including—
(1) regulations providing that a person licensed under this chapter, when dealing with another person so licensed, shall provide such other licensed person a certified copy of this license;
(2) regulations providing for the issuance, at a reasonable cost, to a person licensed under this chapter, of certified copies of his license for use as provided under regulations issued under paragraph (1) of this subsection; and
(3) regulations providing for effective receipt and secure storage of firearms relinquished by or seized from persons described in subsection (d)(8) or (g)(8) of section 922.
No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established. Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary’s authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation.

Highlighting is mine. Clearly applies to the States to me. The only question is whether the proscription on the establishment of gun/owner registries is likewise restricted to the states by the language that precedes it. I would note that if the transfer of information from gun owner purchase records is prohibited from transmission to the States beyond the legal requirements set out and is used subsequently to create a registry at the State level even if they are allowed to do it, how is it not a violation of this section?

The data went to the state for a purpose not covered under the law. I'd argue it definitely wound up in the hands of a "political subdivision" of the government, namely whatever regulatory agency in the State responsible for managing the registry.

I'm not a lawyer and don't want to beat this horse to death repeatedly. But unless a lawyer is willing to help me to parse the above section and correct my interpretation, I read this as a blanket restriction on the establishment of gun and owner registries by any government agency or body at any level. Federal or State. The mere transmission of the records for the purpose of establishing it violates the "be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled" language as applied to the States even if the registry at the State/local level is permitted.

I know it applies at the Federal level because of the many bills that get floated out year to year, many contain language to establish gun registries (HR.2666 'Blair's Bill', for example) and have language in those bills to specifically repeal this section. That tells me the government knows full well that gun registries are presently illegal and have to modify the law to make them legal in the future.

Sorry, this is a big pet peeve of mine. The existence of gun registries in the major linchpin in any mass disarmament strategy and I try to fight against them at any turn. Anonymous firearms ownership is one of the keys in us retaining our freedom and liberty, long-term.

Matt

 

[novus collectus]

Wow, even if it did not apply to the states, it seems as if it would apply to Washington DC at least. I wonder if this means the DC firearms registration is illegal and has been this whole time?

 

[SigMatt]

novus,

I never even thought of that but I'd say you are absolutely correct. Heller did impose 2nd Amendment constraints on the District and it is a Federal enclave unencumbered by State powers issues.

I'm sure Alan Gura is aware of this. But I'd say on the whole, a clean citizen looking to purchase a gun in DC could challenge the registry requirements under this section and would be able to argue conclusively the City Council is indeed a "political subdivision" of the US Government, namely Congress. The District is another one of those places that violates the transport provisions of FOPA'86 and gets away with it.

Good catch.

Matt

 

[G35driver]

*Subs for later*

 

[novus collectus]

novus,

I never even thought of that but I'd say you are absolutely correct. Heller did impose 2nd Amendment constraints on the District and it is a Federal enclave unencumbered by State powers issues.

I'm sure Alan Gura is aware of this. But I'd say on the whole, a clean citizen looking to purchase a gun in DC could challenge the registry requirements under this section and would be able to argue conclusively the City Council is indeed a "political subdivision" of the US Government, namely Congress. The District is another one of those places that violates the transport provisions of FOPA'86 and gets away with it.

Good catch.

Matt

The District honors the federal transportation law, they even have a similar law in their code that is even less restrictive than the federal law in some respects:

(3) With respect to firearms, any nonresident
of the District participating in any lawful recreational
firearm-related activity in the District, or on
his way to or from such activity in another jurisdiction:
Provided, that such person, whenever in
possession of a firearm, shall upon demand of
any member of the Metropolitan Police Department,
or other bona fide law enforcement officer,
exhibit proof that he is on his way to or from
such activity, and that his possession or control
of such firearm is lawful in the jurisdiction in
which he resides: Provided further, that such
weapon shall be unloaded, securely wrapped,
an carried in open view.

.

 

[Andras]

How do you provide proof you are going to a firearm related activity on the side of the road? Or proof of Ownership?

 

[novus collectus]

How do you provide proof you are going to a firearm related activity on the side of the road? Or proof of Ownership?

I asked a MPD officer and basically for proof of ownership it is if you have it registered and when I told him registration in MD is voluntary, he said then voluntariy register it.
When I asked about what if the person is a resident of Virginia where they have no registration, he said just something to prove it like a reciept maybe. So in other words it seems as if this part is unenforcible for most cases because most places have no registration and it is possible to own a firearm there is no official or unofficial record of.
But anyway, this is when transporting outside of the federal law. The federal law does not make one have to prove ownership IIRC, so if being transported by the federal law, then you should be good to go. Just remember if it is transported by federal law, it must be either in a case or in a gun rack if in the same compartment as the passengers.

As far as the firearm related activity, it is not like in NY where you have to provide proof you were going to an NRA sponsored and run event. It is loosely stated and therefore open ended. One could be going to an informal recreational shooting activity on private property which would be impossible to prove or disprove.
The impression I got from the police sergeant I asked was that unless it is obvious you are stopping in DC, or weren't passing through, or look like you are up to no good, they will see you are a MD resident and give you the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Boondock Saint]

I asked a MPD officer and basically for proof of ownership it is if you have it registered and when I told him registration in MD is voluntary, he said then voluntariy register it.
When I asked about what if the person is a resident of Virginia where they have no registration, he said just something to prove it like a reciept maybe. So in other words it seems as if this part is unenforcible for most cases because most places have no registration and it is possible to own a firearm there is no official or unofficial record of.
But anyway, this is when transporting outside of the federal law. The federal law does not make one have to prove ownership IIRC, so if being transported by the federal law, then you should be good to go. Just remember if it is transported by federal law, it must be either in a case or in a gun rack if in the same compartment as the passengers.

As far as the firearm related activity, it is not like in NY where you have to provide proof you were going to an NRA sponsored and run event. It is loosely stated and therefore open ended. One could be going to an informal recreational shooting activity on private property which would be impossible to prove or disprove.
The impression I got from the police sergeant I asked was that unless it is obvious you are stopping in DC, or weren't passing through, or look like you are up to no good, they will see you are a MD resident and give you the benefit of the doubt.

More noobness on my part, but hey, how else will I learn: You say that registration is voluntary in MD, but then what's the story with the 7 day waiting period? They know that someone is buying a handgun, have all of your information: aren't you put into a database somewhere?

 

[boatbod]

More noobness on my part, but hey, how else will I learn: You say that registration is voluntary in MD, but then what's the story with the 7 day waiting period? They know that someone is buying a handgun, have all of your information: aren't you put into a database somewhere?

There are many legal unregistered guns.
e.g. those owned prior to implementation of the "registration" system, HBARs, and ex-HBARs that were purchased cash & carry, etc, etc.

 

[novus collectus]

More noobness on my part, but hey, how else will I learn: You say that registration is voluntary in MD, but then what's the story with the 7 day waiting period? They know that someone is buying a handgun, have all of your information: aren't you put into a database somewhere?

The seven day waiting period dates back to about 1968 in the days before fax machines and was probably to allow time for the MDSP to recieve a mailed copy of the application and do the check. It has nothing to do with registration.

The law in MD is that your regulated firearms transfer is recorded and the record kept forever. This however is not registration because you are not recorded as the owner, you are just recorded as the transferee.
With registration they record you as the owner. In MD there are many ways you can no longer be the owner without the state knowing about it which is not generally possible with true registration.

 

[Boondock Saint]

The seven day waiting period dates back to about 1968 in the days before fax machines and was probably to allow time for the MDSP to recieve a mailed copy of the application and do the check. It has nothing to do with registration.

The law in MD is that your regulated firearms transfer is recorded and the record kept forever. This however is not registration because you are not recorded as the owner, you are just recorded as the transferee.
With registration they record you as the owner. In MD there are many ways you can no longer be the owner without the state knowing about it which is not generally possible with true registration.

Somehow that seems worse - the MSP thinking I have a regulated firearm when I in fact do not. The tinfoil hat me in wants to find a legal way to own a handgun without someone in "power" knowing about it.

 

[Tootall]

Somehow that seems worse - the MSP thinking I have a regulated firearm when I in fact do not. The tinfoil hat me in wants to find a legal way to own a handgun without someone in "power" knowing about it.

C&R will take care of that

 

[Boondock Saint]

C&R will take care of that

But then the state knows I can collect millions of firearms without them knowing exactly what I have. I could be a real threat to the concept of democracy and all, me and "all of my guns."

What else ya got besides a C&R?

 

[novus collectus]

But then the state knows I can collect millions of firearms without them knowing exactly what I have. I could be a real threat to the concept of democracy and all, me and "all of my guns."

What else ya got besides a C&R?

There are a number of ways.
A C&R at an address in another state even though you live in MD. That way MD would have no way to know you have a C&R without the ATF telling them for some reason.
Make your own which is perfectly legal in MD.
Buy antiques.
Have dual residence and when residing in the other state buy your handguns and bring them back.
Get a trust and buy AOW pistols without having to go through the state.
Get a trust and make an NFA firearm (pistol) from a rifle with the tax stamp.

There probably a few other ways I am missing at the moment.

 

[Boondock Saint]

There are a number of ways.
A C&R at an address in another state even though you live in MD. That way MD would have no way to know you have a C&R without the ATF telling them for some reason.
Make your own which is perfectly legal in MD.
Buy antiques.
Have dual residence and when residing in the other state buy your handguns and bring them back.
Get a trust and buy AOW pistols without having to go through the state.
Get a trust and make an NFA firearm (pistol) from a rifle with the tax stamp.

There probably a few other ways I am missing at the moment.

Don't you need a C&R to buy an antique?

 

[SigMatt]

Nope. Antique guns are not considered "firearms" under the law. They can be delivered straight to your door with no license or paperwork.

Matt

 

[Boondock Saint]

Nope. Antique guns are not considered "firearms" under the law. They can be delivered straight to your door with no license or paperwork.

Matt

Well that's outstanding, if that's actually the law. So why don't all of our tinfoil hatters own antiques exclusively?

Where can I can info on what makes an antique and how to get one?

 

[Boondock Saint]

"Antique firearm.- "Antique firearm" means:

(1) a firearm, including a firearm with a matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar ignition system, manufactured before 1899; or

(2) a replica of a firearm described in item (1) of this subsection that:

(i) is not designed or redesigned to use rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition; or

(ii) uses rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition that is no longer manufactured in the United States and is not readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade. "

As I read this, any antique weapon wouldn't be viable for HD, or just a day at the range?

 

[SigMatt]

Wrong. Several 1898 and before Turkish Mausers were rechambered for 8mm Mauser and fire that cartridge just fine. You used to be able to get them for $129-$199 delivered to you door out of history and shooting magazines. There are many antiques that fire modern smokeless centerfire and rimfire ammunition. As long as it would made in or before 1898, it would work fine for HD or range fun. You'll want to have the fun inspected to ensure it will be safe to fire but other than that, find what you like and enjoy.

Other antiques are black powder only or fire the aforementioned rare ammunition. What's interesting about the black powder stuff is pre-1898 breechloaders are antiques but post-1898 BP breechloaders and their replicas are considered firearms and have to be transferred through an FFL. But any BP muzzleloader, original or replica, is cash-and-carry. That includes cannon and mortars, by the way.

You can certain use a Nagant or old Colt revolver for home defense. Not ideal but some old gun is always better than no gun.

As to tinfoil hatters owning antiques exclusively, yes, they certainly could. But given that it is also perfectly legal to build modern firearms on your own if you want to avoid attention, you can do that too. Why take an antique when a modern gun can be obtained pretty much the same way?

Matt