[gun-fucious]

Diane and Sarah have been busy:

1 (W) "PISTOL GRIP THAT PROTRUDES CONSPICUOUSLY BENEATH THE ACTION
2 OF THE WEAPON" MEANS A GRIP THAT ALLOWS FOR A PISTOL STYLE GRASP IN
3 WHICH THE WEB OF THE TRIGGER HAND BETWEEN THE THUMB AND INDEX FINGER
4 CAN BE PLACED BELOW THE TOP OF THE EXPOSED PORTION OF THE TRIGGER WHILE
5 FIRING.

also

25 (J) "DETACHABLE MAGAZINE" MEANS ANY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICE
26 THAT CAN BE REMOVED READILY FROM THE FIREARM WITHOUT DISASSEMBLY OF
27 THE FIREARM ACTION OR USE OF A TOOL, INCLUDING A BULLET OR CARTRIDGE,
28 BEING REQUIRED.


http://mlis.state.md.us/2003rs/billfile/hb0844.htm

[Calanctus]

Note also, that this bill redefines what constitutes an "assault weapon":

(2) A SEMIAUTOMATIC, CENTERFIRE RIFLE THAT CAN ACCEPT A
2 DETACHABLE MAGAZINE AND ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:

(List of Evil Features follows)

Looks like the Maryland legislature is trying to capitalize on this "sniper" nonsense to further their agenda. :fire:

[gun-fucious]

The sponsor is a Delegate named Quinter
he was Diane Feinsteins chief legal council

it either gets stopped in Maryland or it will spread

[hammer4nc]

Am I reading this right...the new wording will outlaw the mak 90 and so-called dragunov style stocks? These two styles were conceived to avoid the original "pistol grip" ban...

I don't know if you could physically shoot an ak47 variant or fal rifle (whatever stock design) without having the web of your hand under the receiver...the trigger guard sits forward in the receiver.

The phrase can be placed below could be interpreted to outlaw just about any rifle with a conventional stock style, if one chose to grip the rifle improperly. I wouldn't put it past them.

What a steaming POS!! What's the current assessment of the chance of this bill getting passed?

[DJJ]

This wording comes right out of california's "assault weapon" ban.

[gun-fucious]

this bill also makes a semi auto with a magazine and a thumbhole stock an AW

[Sactown]

You don't want to end up like us in Kali. Nip it in the bud. Do what you can to stop it.

[JoshM]

I wonder if the proposed detachable magazine rule would include the internal magazine of the Browning BAR series or the Garand clip ?

I 'm guessing it depends on what is considered "disassembly of the firearm action" in removing the "feeding device".

[bad_dad_brad]

They are at work in Illinois as well. A similarly silly bill is being debated next week.

[LostOneToo]

They can make anything they want an AW, as long as they don't get the illusion that they can come and take mine away from me. That would be a gross error in mentation on their part!!!!!:fire:

[redhead]

This wording comes right out of california's "assault weapon" ban.

Yes, it does. I THOUGHT it sounded familiar. An example are the AR rifles. Can't legally have one in California, unless you have a receiver with a non-detachable magazine. Someone came up with one - the FAB 10. Even the legality of that is debatle in some jurisdictions. The receiver come with a letter from the Cal DOJ saying that their interpretation is that it is legal, but that some local DA's may not agree. IOW, use at your own risk. You really don't want this legislation to take hold nationally.

[carp killer]

But those f***ing "duck hunters" will say it is OK, it won't affect me. :cuss:

[redhead]

The duck hunters might be saying it's OK, for now, but California legislature has a drafted a bill to outlaw training and use of hunting dogs. I'd just love to see those hunters swim out to retrieve their own ducks. If they continue to sit back with the belief that anti-gun legislation, doesn't affect them, well, when they come for their shotguns, there won't be anybody left to object.

I have to make a correction to my post - the anti-hunting dog bill applies to using the dogs for hunting mammals. So, duck hunters can relax.

[chaim]

My first thought was, "darn, I guess I will have to hurry up and save for the Bushmaster now afterall". I can't really afford one right now but if there is a bill to ban "assult" rifles I guess I should get one while I can. However, looking at the wording I guess I shouldn't. Not only would it ban buying and selling them and grandfather current owners but the bill in question seems to also outlaw "possession" of such a gun. I guess if I hurried up to buy one, if the bill should become law I would only be hurrying up to buy a gun I can't afford right now so that I could then have it confiscated. :banghead:

Making it a misdemeanor with specified exceptions to transport, possess, sell, offer to sell, transfer, purchase, or receive an assault weapon; requiring the Handgun Roster Board to compile, maintain, and publish a roster of prohibited assault weapons under specified circumstances; etc.

Maybe the "specified exceptions" will include prior owners, but knowing my home state I'm not willing to gamble nearly $1K on that. My guess is that the exceptions will be for police, active military and National Guard and only while in the line of duty.

Time to start writing my state representatives (and the governor's office).

[gun-fucious]

This wording comes right out of california's "assault weapon" ban.

thats cause the sponsor is Diane Feinsteins ex chief council

[Calanctus]

chain, it's worse than that. Read the text of the bill.

22 (2) A PERSON WHO IS NOT A FIREARMS DEALER MAY CONTINUE TO
23 POSSESS AN ASSAULT WEAPON THAT THE PERSON LAWFULLY POSSESSED AND THAT
24 THE PERSON REGISTERED WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE POLICE ON OR BEFORE
25 JULY 31, 2003.

There it is... Maryland is trying to register all assault weapons. Where's the tar and feathers when you need them?

[chaim]

That decides it. I'm going for the M1 Carbine, Mini-14, M1 Garand or Remington 7400 NOT a FAL or AR!:cuss:

[gun-fucious]

read the bill
for some reason AR sportster HBARs are exempt

:confused:

[hps1]

But those f***ing "duck hunters" will say it is OK, it won't affect me.

MY PET PEEVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What does it take to get some folks' attention?:mad:

Isn't it strange how NRA membership (and other pro-gun organizations) falls off during the lulls in anti-gun activity? It is a crying shame that, for the price of a couple of boxes of shells, the majority of firearms owners will not support the fight to preserve our rights? Just think of the clout a 10 million member NRA would have in the legislatures across the country.

Sorry for the rant, folks, I know I'm preachin' to the choir.

Regards,
hps