(2010-02-16) Most readers know that in Maryland a regulated firearm is defined to be either a handgun or an assault weapon, and a long gun becomes the latter for no other reason than appearing on a list of ‘bad guns.’ For a number of years, the transfer of a regulated firearm has been subject to many more restrictions than apply to other guns: a ban on private transfer, one-gun-a-month rationing, special training obligations, ‘voluntary’ registration in MSP’s databases and more. For example, Ruger Mini-14 and HK-91 rifles become regulated if fitted with a folding or collapsible stock. So does the SKS if adapted for a removable magazine. Any AK-47 is defined as such, and so on. Unfortunately, and this leads to the news, the law also says any “copies” of a listed firearm are deemed to be an assault weapon.
Last year MSP began treating some .22 rimfire rifles as regulated, based only having the cosmetics of AR-15’s (that are regulated so long as not sporting a heavy barrel) under an assertion that they are a copy. This is absurd, of course – copy language was chosen in order not have to distinguish all possible manufacturers of a specific rifle (the Chinese SKS versus the Russian SKS, for example), and nothing of a centerfire rifle could be confused with that of a rimfire. It’s hard to argue two products are copies of one another if key parts don’t interchange, much less work by the same principles. They aren’t even close – except in cosmetics, which is the aggressive standard MSP applied.
If MSP’s cosmetic standard is upheld, then someone who dresses up a generic rimfire rifle (like a Ruger 10-22) with aftermarket bling (like surplus AK-47 grips and sights, as are cheaply available) might be portrayed as having “manufactured an assault weapon.” As the standard loosens more, anything can become regulated – after all, assault weapons have a barrel and trigger, so gosh, anything with a barrel and trigger must be bad, especially if it is black.
MSP requested an Attorney General opinion in the fall, so far without response. (As we always warn, never ask for an AG opinion, because you might get an AG opinion. Don’t expect anything sensible from Doug Gansler’s office.) However to understand the General Assembly’s clear intent, let’s review the law’s history. The term assault weapon first appeared in Maryland law in 1989 as SB531. The bill as proposed used a cosmetic, ‘feature’ based definition – and it was voted down early in session. Late in the session, Governor Schaefer intervened, making a pitch to revive it. After arm-twisting, legislators agreed to narrow the scope via membership on a specific list so as to avoid exactly the bureaucratic expansion as MSP has just pushed. Legislators were specific as to make, configuration and caliber of affected guns, and once that was clear, the bill passed with bipartisan support. (“It’s a good bill. We’re ready to take on the NRA on this one,” said Delegate Bob Flanagan, later an official in the Ehrlich administration.) In order to regulate new firearms (or even existing ones in new calibers or configurations) police need a new law.
The present situation is likely to remain unchanged until AG Gansler issues an opinion.