Quoted:
Quoted: Follow up:
When I talked to the MSP today, they informed me that HBAR has to be stamped on the firearm. I verified if it needs to be stamped on the reciever or the barrel and they said that either would be acceptable.
|
Really? So, an upper witha heavy barrel can make the gun an HBAR gun? That just doesn't seem right, even though that's what they said. I always thought the lower/receiver determined the gun not the other way around.
|
Just one more example of how stupid and convoluted this business of infringing on the second amendment really is.
W/O looking up the actual text to quote, the law basically exempts the Colt "HBAR" heavy barreled models **only** from the restricted weapons list, identifying them by the receiver marks. Due to trademark/copyright/whining rights, Colt is the only one with the receiver so marked, even though they don't have the monopoly on heavy barrelled ("target") guns.
To follow the "letter of the law", it DOES have to be marked on the receiver, however. MSP has demonstrated that they understand the situation well enough to accept the barrel marks as complying with the "spirit of the law".
It has been rumored that the MSP "will accept" barrel markings, since the barrel is what they are trying to ensure is "heavy" anyway, and thus the response that Glockabilly got.
There is nothing in the law to prevent the acquisition on a HBAR lower receiver as an unrestricted long gun, then swapping uppers. As long as it says "HBAR" the letter of the law is satisfied.
Cool, huh?