The New Maryland Gun Laws: What They Mean For Gun Buyers

| October 21, 2013
Share

New Maryland Gun LawsMaryland’s strict new gun control law is already here. The firearm bill passed in the last legislative session took effect on October 1, 2013. Considered as one of the nation’s toughest firearm regulations, many—especially gun sellers, gun owners, and gun buyers—are scrambling to understand the bill.

So what is it about? How will it affect new gun buyers or those who have not picked up their order before October 1? How about those who purchased before the effective date? Read on below and find out the answers.

A More Onerous Gun Possession Process

First of all, The Firearm Safety Act of 2013, which lawyers and judges refer to when they speak of the bill, bans the sale of 45 specific types of assault weapons. In addition to these banned firearms, the law also prohibits Maryland residents to purchase any magazines with more than 10 rounds. Those who already possess magazines with greater capacity before the deadline can keep them.

If you’re a would-be gun buyer, you can expect more stringent background checks. You will be obliged to submit a fingerprint and undergo gun safety training. These requirements apply to new guy buyers only. The Maryland Attorney General has made it clear that those who legally owned and purchased a handgun before October 1 will not be violating the law.

Some Exceptions to the New Gun Law

The state attorney general has recently explained that those who have legally owned or purchased a handgun before October will not be violating the law. Clearly, the law only applies to those who buy after the deadline.

There are also exceptions that apply to magazine possession. Basically, the law bans the manufacture, sale and transfer of magazines with a capacity of over 10 rounds. Active and retired law enforcement officers and law enforcement agencies, however, are exempted from this rule.

What’s more, shotguns and hunting rifles will not be affected by the new law. So Maryland residents don’t need to worry about hunting guns, typical deer rifles and bolt-action rifles. They can buy a hunting rifle or shotgun without getting fingerprinted and licensed.

The New Standard Firearm Application

There’s been a huge backlog of firearm applications since the bill was passed. To apply, you have to fill out a form with your full name, address, date of birth and social security number. The 10-year license will cost you $50. Another $20 will be charged for a renewal license.

For first-time violators, there will be a fine not exceeding $500. Second-time or subsequent violators will be charged the same and imprisoned for no longer than 90 days.

In addition to the background checks, there are also mental health provisions included in the law.  For instance, those involuntarily committed to mental institutions are barred from owning any regulated firearm and even a shotgun or rifle.

The new gun law can be quite difficult for laypeople to decipher. If you think it’s going to affect you personally, do your homework and talk to a lawyer.

This blog originally appeared onwww.drewcochranlaw.com. To read the original, or to read more from Drew Cochran, click here.

Image credit: kadmy / 123RF Stock Photo

 

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Category: Local News, POLITICAL NEWS, State & National Politics

About the Author ()

Drew Cochran is an experienced criminal defense attorney who has spent his entire career fighting for justice for his clients. He specializes in defending people who have been charged with drunk driving, traffic violations and criminal offenses throughout Maryland.
  • DucatiRider

    The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed — seems to me like this is an obvious infringement.

  • Shipwreck Pep

    What about Active Duty Military moving to VA that owns guns purchased in other states?

  • Marbran

    “Active and retired law enforcement officers and law enforcement agencies, however, are exempted from this rule.”

    Isn’t this a violation of the equal protection clause? Why should active and retired police be allowed to purchase any of 45 now banned firearms? Because they’ve had training? That’s BS, since anyone else can also get training, as required. This carve out is unconstitutional since it provides one group of citizens a benefit another group cannot enjoy.

    • KeepingMyAR15

      Very true as I purchased six AK47’s, but no one else can after October 1st, 2013. This places me in a privileged position over other would be law-abiding gun enthusiast citizens which violates the 14th Amendment.

    • Steve

      Because they have put hundreds of criminals in jail and when those criminals get out some of them come looking for payback. We are letting them protect themselves – in return for protecting us.

  • motoman172

    What you all seem to forget is that Maryland doesn’t have a second amendment in it’s state constitution. It is only one of 3 states who don’t.
    I don’t much like it either but Federal Constitution applies to Federal government not to the states…
    Essentially Maryland can pass any gun law it pleases…

    • KeepingMyAR15

      No Maryland can’t! The 2010 US Supreme Court case of McDonald v. Chicago had the justices make a final ruling that will not be revisited that no state, city, or county in the US can ban commonly owned firearms. Of course this case was about handguns, but semi-automatic rifles, like the AR15, are very common and would also fall under the “commonly owned” category.

    • http://bullpasturechronicles.blogspot.com/ BullPasture

      Wrong. Article 2 of the Maryland Constitution incorporates the US Constitution and makes it the supreme law of Maryland. The Second Amendment is not excluded.

  • Chris Petersen

    When the lawless make the so called laws it is time to get rid of the lawless! Bush , Miller and most of the rest of the Maryland legislators need to be removed from office and never aloud to run again! They morons in Annapolis have not a clue about life or care about anyone else! O’Malley and every one of his cronies need to leave the state! Maybe N Korea would be more to their liking! One Com-me to another!

  • KeepingMyAR15

    My understanding of the 2nd Amendment as interpreted by the US supreme Court in 2008 and 2010 is that all US citizens in every part of the nation have a Constitutionally guarantee right to own firearms for defense of the home. The 14 Amendment makes every state have to obey every part of the of the US Constitution. Federal law trumps state law. Plain and simple!

  • Jeff

    The 2nd Amendment wasn’t just so you could have guns to defend yourself but to be able to rise up against an out of hand government. Its there so we can defend all the other rights within our constitution. The states do have the right to pass laws and regulate themselves within reason. The constitution is the overall set of rules and guide line they must work within.

  • http://bullpasturechronicles.blogspot.com/ BullPasture

    Wrong again MotoMan. The FIRST amendment states “CONGRESS shall make no law…” The SECOND amendment contains no such restriction. Clearly the framers were capable of limiting the Second protections to the Congress if that was their intent.

    • motoman172

      Seriously? So in your reading of the constitution Congress is only held to first amendment? Wow

      Might I suggest you consider by what purpose the constitution was written?

      From what form of government did we win out freedom from?

      What purpose sir do states have constitutions? Why are they all not bound by just the one?

      More importantly sir but for what purpose is there a second amendment if not to secure liberty from the potential of a tyrannical general government.

      If incorporation is your doctrine that imposes the 2nd Amendment on the states then I hope you understand that those same incorporations apply to ALL federal mandates to include homosexual marriages, amnesty for illegal aliens, confiscation of wealth and redistribution.

      The same principal you apply would be different if either the courts had ruled opposite or if applied to something you do not agree with.

      • http://bullpasturechronicles.blogspot.com/ BullPasture

        Motoman you need a remedial reading course. No where did I state or imply that Congress is only held to the first amendment. I simply pointed out that the argument that the 2nd amendment only applies to congress is idiotic because, while there is is no language tjhat can remotely be construed as limiting the 2nd amendment to congress, the first amendment does contain language that can be so construed. You did lurch, rather spasmodically, into the truth that a core purpose of the second amendment is to secure the ability of the people t rebel against a tyrannical government.

      • 49metal

        You and I know you are right, but good luck selling anyone else on the plain truth. The “incorporation” of substantive rights is a kind of substantive due process and substantive due process is utterly bogus. If you want caselaw, there is Barron v. Baltimore, 32 U.S. 243 (1833) (unanimous) and even after the 14th Amendment was ratified, United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1876)(unanimous).
        Then there is the sad pathetic reality of American politics, popular sentiment, and “jurisprudence.” Americans are so full of fluffy fairy tale notions about the Bill of Rights they can’t think clearly or even begin to. That goes for virtually all the nation’s judges too–and straight to the top. On the USSC there might be, what, two Justices who will pay lip service to the plain fact that substantive incorporation is unconstitutional nonsense. But these same Justices will stand by the lie of SDP in practice. They just capitulate and “make the best” of the hopeless situation. The conspiracy of lies and ignorance in America is utterly invincible. You can’t reason with people. They are too stupid. My advice: Give up.

        • Laddyboy

          Never will I surrender my FREEDOM!

    • Laddyboy

      WRONG. the last line in the 2nd amendment states, ” shall not be infringed”. This means all gun regulations and laws that limit a law abiding Person is NULL AND VOID, If you use the Constitution.

      • http://bullpasturechronicles.blogspot.com/ BullPasture

        In what universe do you think what I said is in opposition to your point?

        • Laddyboy

          I reread your comment. I admit I am wrong. Your comment addresses the basic reason for the 2nd Amendment.

  • http://bullpasturechronicles.blogspot.com/ BullPasture

    Do your own research as to why Maryland’s framers incorporated the Federal Constitution. The fact is that they did and therefore the argument that the Maryland constitution doesn’t have a right to bear arms clause is simply wrong.

  • Laddyboy

    The Constitution only conferms that The People of America have the RIGHTS which are listed. These RIGHTS cannot be limited by any laws which go against the Constitution. MOST gun regulations and “laws” are anti-Constitutional and are thus NULL AND VOID, AS IF THEY N E V E R exhisted.