By: Friedrich Seiltgen

Copyright © 2021

In 2013, the People’s Republic of Maryland decided to ban those so-called “Assault Weapons” via the “Firearms Safety Act of 2013.”

The liberals tend to stick a word like “safety” or “child” in their gun bans, as it makes it easier to fool people, because how can anyone be against safety? The 2013 law banned the possession, sale, offering of sale, transfer, purchase, receipt, or transportation into the state of a so called “Assault Weapon.”

In Maryland, basically every firearm is an “assault weapon,” as the law includes pistols, sporting rifles, and, of course, the dreaded AR-15!  For all you RINOs out there who think it’s OK to ban the AR-15 because they’re going to leave your hunting rifles alone, take notice! They’re coming after everything!

There was also a 10-round magazine limit in the bill. Not to worry though, because the state was magnanimous with their soft tyranny, grandfathering in firearms possessed before October 1, 2013. As you would expect, several groups and individuals challenged the law and sued the state.

In a recent piece by the National Interest, it appears after nine long years, the case may finally be heading to the Supreme Court. The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, along with the Second Amendment Foundation, have petitioned the Supreme Court for a review on their challenge to the ban. The lawyers for the plaintiffs in Bianchi v. Frosh submitted a 39-page brief to the court with the question:


“Whether the Constitution allows the government to prohibit law-abiding, responsible citizens from protecting themselves, their families, , and their homes with a type of ‘arms that are in common use for lawful purposes?”

Include in the brief is:

“Maryland’s ban thus singled out for special disfavor not a recognized type of firearm, but certain features included on some firearms. That makes Maryland’s law particularly irrational, since most of the features it bans actually serve to make the firearms on which they are included safer.  A folding stock, for example, merely makes long guns easier to carry and more maneuverable in tight home spaces and facilitates safe home storage.”

The brief goes on to state the benefits of flash suppressors and barrel length, concluding, “None of these features make a firearm somehow more dangerous or powerful.”

The plaintiffs also noted the landmark 2008 case of District of Columbia v. Heller, which affirmed the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. Second Amendment Foundation Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb stated, “We are pursuing this case because it is long past time for the Supreme Court to put an end to the legal gymnastics that have been used to uphold what amounts to an unconstitutional prohibition of semi-automatic firearms.”

The Supreme Court is currently reviewing the case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen which could (should) declare New York state’s restriction on carrying a concealed weapon in public places unconstitutional. This case should be ruled on by mid-2022.

That’s all for now folks! Please keep sending in your questions, tips, and article ideas. And as always – “Let’s be careful out there.”

Friedrich Seiltgen is a retired Master Police Officer with 20 years of service with the Orlando Police Department. He conducts training in Lone Wolf Terrorism, Firearms, First Aid, Active Shooter Response, and Law Enforcement Vehicle Operations in Florida. His writing has appeared in RECOIL, The Counter Terrorist Magazine, American Thinker, Homeland Security Today, and The Journal of Counterterrorism & Homeland Security International. Contact him at [email protected].