Maryland's legislature passed SB 334, banning the sale of Glocks and all pistols with cruciform trigger bars. The bill targets the internal mechanism that enables illegal auto-sear "switch" conversion — and bans the most popular handgun in America in the process.
SB 334 creates a new category of prohibited firearm: the "machine gun convertible pistol." It bans the manufacture, sale, purchase, receipt, and transfer of any semiautomatic pistol with a cruciform trigger bar that can be converted to fully automatic fire by installing an illegal auto-sear device (commonly called a "Glock switch") to the rear of the slide.
This is not the Maryland Handgun Roster. SB 334 creates an entirely new criminal prohibition in the Criminal Law Article (sections 4-301, 4-302, 4-305.2, and 4-306). Even guns already approved on the roster become illegal to sell if they meet the new definition.
The bill defines a "cruciform trigger bar" as a component that serves as a link between the trigger and the firing pin, with its sear incorporated into a cross-shaped surface. This is the design feature that makes "Glock switch" installation possible. Every Glock ever made uses this mechanism.
Glock redesigned its pistols (the "V Series") to resist switch installation by adding a blocking tab. SB 334 specifically anticipated this: the bill states a gun is still prohibited even if it has a "piece of material" designed to block switch attachment, as long as that material can be removed with a common household tool. The V Series is banned.
| Manufacturer | Models | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Glock (Gen 1-5) | All models (G17, G19, G26, G43, G45, etc.) | Banned |
| Glock V Series | All V Series models (still uses cruciform trigger bar) | Banned |
| PSA Dagger | Glock-pattern clone with compatible trigger bar | Banned |
| Shadow Systems | MR920, DR920, CR920, XR920 (Glock-pattern trigger) | Banned |
| Polymer80 | Glock-pattern builds | Banned |
| Hammer-fired pistols | Beretta 92, CZ 75, Sig P226, 1911-pattern | Not affected |
| S&W M&P, SIG P320, Springfield XD | Striker-fired but may not use cruciform trigger bar | TBD — MSP list |
SB 334 requires the Maryland Department of State Police to adopt regulations and publish a list of specifically prohibited pistol models before the sales ban takes effect January 1, 2027. The exact scope beyond Glock-pattern guns will be determined administratively — no further legislation required.
Glock holds approximately 65% of the U.S. law enforcement market and roughly 35% of the civilian handgun market. Over 20 million Glock pistols have been sold worldwide. Under Heller (2008), arms "in common use for lawful purposes" are constitutionally protected.
| Action | After Jan 1, 2027 |
|---|---|
| Keep your existing Glock | Legal — no confiscation |
| Buy a new Glock from a dealer | Prohibited |
| Buy a used Glock via private sale | Prohibited |
| Transfer to immediate family member | Legal |
| Inherit a Glock | Legal |
| Buy out of state and bring back to MD | Prohibited (covers "receiving") |
| Have a dealer repair/service your Glock | Legal |
| Sell your Glock to a non-family MD resident | Prohibited |
| Sell your Glock to an out-of-state buyer via FFL | Legal |
With no legal transfer mechanism outside of family and inheritance, the used Glock market in Maryland is eliminated. Ownership is grandfathered but transferability is not.
Police and military can purchase and carry the same guns that become criminal contraband for civilians. The people enforcing the law are exempt from it.
| Violation | Charge | Penalty |
|---|---|---|
| Sale, purchase, receipt, or transfer | Misdemeanor | Up to 3 years + $5,000 fine |
| Possession during felony or crime of violence | Enhanced | Up to 10 years (20 for second offense) |
Maryland Shall Issue president Mark Pennak has stated the organization "fully intends" to challenge SB 334 in court if Governor Moore signs it. No lawsuit has been filed yet because the bill has not been signed.
The California parallel: California passed an identical law (AB 1127) in October 2025, effective July 1, 2026. It is already being challenged in Jaymes v. Bonta, filed October 13, 2025, by the SAF, NRA, and Firearms Policy Coalition. That case is the leading federal court test of whether states can ban entire firearm platforms based on internal design characteristics.
Under NYSRPA v. Bruen (2022), firearms regulations must be consistent with America's historical tradition of firearm regulation. There is no founding-era or historical tradition of banning ordinary arms because a criminal could theoretically modify them with illegal devices. Under Heller (2008), handguns are the "quintessential self-defense weapon" and arms in common use cannot be categorically banned.
Democrats hold a veto-proof supermajority in both chambers of the Maryland General Assembly (Senate 34-13, House 102-39). Even if Moore vetoed the bill, the legislature has the votes to override.
| State | Bill | Status | Effective |
|---|---|---|---|
| California | AB 1127 | Signed (Oct 2025) | July 1, 2026 |
| Maryland | SB 334 | Awaiting Governor | Jan 1, 2027 |
| Illinois | Pending | In progress | TBD |
| New York | Pending | In progress | TBD |
Maryland is the second state to pass this type of legislation. The cruciform trigger bar definition targets the most popular handgun platform in America and creates a template for other states. If Jaymes v. Bonta fails in California, this framework spreads nationwide.
Commentary and opinion. Not legal advice. © 2026 Bearing Freedom