The Daniel Defense S2W bbl is (was???---not sure if they still produce/offer it) their heavy barrel option several years ago. They wouldn't tell you that this made it MD legal over the phone-- but it was part of their marketing description on their website. Can't speak to the "government profile" but unless DD describes it as heavy barrel in writing somewhere I'd be hesitant.
Isn't this ridiculous that a bunch of responsible citizens are dancing around a bunch of ambiguous laws created by people who don't have the slightest idea what they are passing laws about. I wonder how many criminals spend this amount of time trying to figure out if their guns are legal or not.
I agree. Let's see...let the rioters burn down buildings, they;re just kids.
I don't reload and I know the 6.5 Grendel is more expensive than 223 but I bought several boxes about 5 years ago when I bought the upper. The price I paid back then was about half of what it costs now. The Wolf steel cased ammo isn't too expensive but I need to see how it behaves for me. It gets mixed reviews. The problem with 223/5.56 ammo is that you can't use it to hunt deer in MD. I currently don't hunt but I come from a family of hunters. My father, brothers and a sister hunts. So do 2 of my brothers-in-law. One of my brother's daughters hunt too. He bought her a 410 shotgun for her 7th birthday (they don't live in MD). With a Grendel it would be suited for hunting if I change my mind.
Not really. When the “banned” list in FSA2013 was previously a regulated list (established in the 1990s), HBAR AR-15s were exempted from it because marksmenship programs did not want to go through the extra hoops that govern Regulated Firearms, and at the time, MGA listened to them. When the Regulated list became a banned list in 2013, MGA apparently didn’t consider the loophole that they were creating. (And they’re clearly ignorant about what it means. I’m sure most legislators to this day have no idea how many holes exist in FSA 2013 compared to any other state AWB in the U.S.)
WRT the original HBAR requirement; I found a reference (which I need to find again and this time bookmark) that explains the history behind that. Apparently, there was a Colt exec in the early 90's that convinced the Dems in MGA that the Colt HBAR Sporter was a recreational rifle, and not an assault rifle, and there fore should not be banned. And then as Matt explained above, the whole thing just carried over from the 1994 ban to the 2013 ban.
Right?
Hmm. This thread might end up getting deleted. File system glitches happen from time to time.
This has been very educational... to the wrong people.
If you think the MGA doesn't read these pages and plan future bills accordingly, you may be a bit naive. They have been after ARs ever since 2013. Other things have taken precedence since then, but they have not forgotten their mistakes in allowing the AR 15 Hbar to live on.
