MSP: FIREARM PURCHASE APPLICANTS WITH APPLICATIONS PENDING ON OCT 1 WON'T NEED HQL

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • iH8DemLibz

    When All Else Fails.
    Apr 1, 2013
    25,396
    Libtardistan
    All I will say is congratulations to those of you who need an HQL.

    This will take a lot of the sting away, but it should not change how we approach the upcoming elections.

    They still need to go.

    GO DINO.
     

    pilotguy299

    Ultimate Member
    Sep 26, 2010
    1,809
    FredNeck County, MD
    Freestate Said You Do NOT need An HQL After 30 Sept If You Purchased Prior!

    The law says otherwise. Unlike assault long guns, the law does not provide a similar provision for handguns.

    The State Police have advised people to break the law as written. They then mislead people by saying this was a widely known exception,even though there is an AAG memo saying it can't be done.

    Do as you want, but the State Police do not have the legal authority to change the written law.
     

    TxAggie

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 25, 2012
    4,734
    Anne Arundel County, MD
    All of these actions and press releases over the past few weeks points to several common themes:

    The state is in total disarray. The AG and MSP are obviously not coordinating on such a critical issue. I personally think it is because they are being directed by the administration by people that really don't understand the legal implications either.

    A few people in MSP and / or AG office realize that they are not in as strong a position as they thought they were in March. National events have caused them to understand that gun control is not as popular as they thought.

    It is possible (but I'm not sure I believe it myself) that MOM is now trying to derail the law in light of these changes. He may just be realizing he can't win on a national stage with A gun control stance.....Nah, he hates guns, he wants this to go through and work.

    I do think that MSP is seeing the writing on the wall and they will lose a LOT in a court battle.
     

    MJD438

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 28, 2012
    5,849
    Somewhere in MD
    The law says otherwise. Unlike assault long guns, the law does not provide a similar provision for handguns.

    The State Police have advised people to break the law as written. They then mislead people by saying this was a widely known exception,even though there is an AAG memo saying it can't be done.

    Do as you want, but the State Police do not have the legal authority to change the written law.

    They also testified yesterday that the HQL is required and purchasers that are not exempted will not be able to pick up without it.

    This choice to govern by fiat worries me. MSP states that they will not enforce the law which is a violation of the roles of the Executive Branch. It also does not mean that the AG can't decide to go after purchasers anyway (two separate Executive departments).
     

    zenMonkey

    Active Member
    Patriot Picket
    Mar 30, 2013
    302
    The fluster cluck continues...

    More proof that they have no idea what is going on, but at least they are showing that they are scared.
     

    Robert

    Having Fun Yet?
    May 11, 2011
    4,089
    AA County, MD
    The law says otherwise. Unlike assault long guns, the law does not provide a similar provision for handguns.

    The State Police have advised people to break the law as written. They then mislead people by saying this was a widely known exception,even though there is an AAG memo saying it can't be done.

    Do as you want, but the State Police do not have the legal authority to change the written law.

    Not to sound obtuse but they've been doing it for quite some time, and we saw much of that yesterday. Where does the legislation say that handgun purchased before 10-1 require an HQL?

    And the rifle section pertains to a ban, not an HQL.
     

    EHS1976

    Active Member
    Mar 28, 2013
    194
    USA
    The law says otherwise. Unlike assault long guns, the law does not provide a similar provision for handguns.

    The State Police have advised people to break the law as written. They then mislead people by saying this was a widely known exception,even though there is an AAG memo saying it can't be done.

    Do as you want, but the State Police do not have the legal authority to change the written law.

    They are part of the "Fourth Branch" of government. Look up the article written by Jonathan Turley about the Fourth Branch.
     

    pilotguy299

    Ultimate Member
    Sep 26, 2010
    1,809
    FredNeck County, MD
    Not to sound obtuse but they've been doing it for quite some time, and we saw much of that yesterday. Where does the legislation say that handgun purchased before 10-1 require an HQL?

    And the rifle section pertains to a ban, not an HQL.

    It doesn't say purchased before October 1. It says a HQL is required to transfer.

    I believe that it is in 5-117.1
     

    pilotguy299

    Ultimate Member
    Sep 26, 2010
    1,809
    FredNeck County, MD
    Not to sound obtuse but they've been doing it for quite some time, and we saw much of that yesterday. Where does the legislation say that handgun purchased before 10-1 require an HQL?

    And the rifle section pertains to a ban, not an HQL.

    The rifle section pertains to being able to receive a banned rifle, if an application or purchase order was made before Oct 1. There is no similar language for handguns:

    http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2013RS/bills/sb/sb0281e.pdf
     

    TxAggie

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 25, 2012
    4,734
    Anne Arundel County, MD
    I Just Called Them And As Long As You Have A Purchase Order You Can Pick Up AFTER 30 Sept With NO HQL. Call Them Yourself Bud.

    Yes This Is For A Handgun.

    You called who, the AG or MSP?

    There are valid points on here about whether the MSP has the authority to make this change. Tomorrow I'm expecting a retraction from MSP or clarification from the AG.

    The point to all this is they are scrambling like mad to reduce the damages that are sure to come their way.
     

    Jim12

    Let Freedom Ring
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 30, 2013
    33,861
    This came from O'Malley. He is trying to cover bases but his ass is still hung out.

    'nuff said.

    Isn't MSP is an Executive Department? If correct, the buck stops with the Executive.
     

    Publius

    Active Member
    Mar 18, 2013
    491
    Ellicott City
    It also does not mean that the AG can't decide to go after purchasers anyway (two separate Executive departments).

    Yep. Also, what if county police pulls you over when you are bringing your new handgun back home post Oct 1st, without an HQL? Are all police agencies in the state on board with not enforcing SB281?

    What is 100% clear is that we have become de facto a banana republic, which shouldn't surprise anyone as we import more and more Third World laws.
     

    Robert

    Having Fun Yet?
    May 11, 2011
    4,089
    AA County, MD
    It doesn't say purchased before October 1. It says a HQL is required to transfer.

    I believe that it is in 5-117.1

    Right, it doesn't

    The rifle section pertains to being able to receive a banned rifle, if an application or purchase order was made before Oct 1. There is no similar language for handguns:

    http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2013RS/bills/sb/sb0281e.pdf

    I think you may be confusing the 2. They are unrelated IMHO.

    It was oringinaly thought that we would not need the HQL if purcahsed before 10-1. When 'they' said otherwise everyone was in an uproar. So esentially this is how everyone not in MOM's pocket interpreted the legislation.

    We just did a full circle.
     

    Deep Creek Rock

    .._. .._ _._. _._ .._
    Yep. Also, what if county police pulls you over when you are bringing your new handgun back home post Oct 1st, without an HQL? Are all police agencies in the state on board with not enforcing SB281?

    What is 100% clear is that we have become de facto a banana republic, which shouldn't surprise anyone as we import more and more Third World laws.

    Your pink copy of the 77R with the date of the application should help you there.
     

    Patrick

    MSI Executive Member
    Apr 26, 2009
    7,725
    Calvert County
    You called who, the AG or MSP?

    There are valid points on here about whether the MSP has the authority to make this change. Tomorrow I'm expecting a retraction from MSP or clarification from the AG.

    The point to all this is they are scrambling like mad to reduce the damages that are sure to come their way.
    Your concern is absolutely spot on.

    The MSP does not act on these issues unless directed specifically by the Gov's office. Gansler and he don't always get along, so I suspect some fireworks behind scenes. That said, the AG might have driven this.

    Go look at yesterday's hearing. This is not happening in a vacuum. They effed up and are trying to get out of jail, but nothing short of holding the entire licensing statute will work.

    This is desperation. It is not enough.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,922
    Messages
    7,259,142
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom