Confirmed: HQL Needed to Take Possession of Handgun After September 30

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!
  • Robert

    Having Fun Yet?
    May 11, 2011
    4,089
    AA County, MD
    Its good

    For our case.

    and to piss off people in time for 2014.

    Strange times require out of the box thinking ..

    we need everybody as pissed off as we have been for over a year.....

    Yep, but that's about it, and to be painfully pestimistic I really don't see it being enough to make changes where change must take place.

    I'm in a pessimistic mood today.. :o
     

    MJD438

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 28, 2012
    5,849
    Somewhere in MD
    http://www.mdsp.org/Organization/Su...ingDivision/UnderConstruction/Automation.aspx

    Project #2 – Handgun Purchase Qualification License


    This is an in-house development project by the MSP Information Technology Division. The scope of the project is to develop and configure the existing MSP software MyLicense, currently used to issue LEOSA and register K-9 and Intercept Devices. This existing software will allow applicants to apply online for the Handgun Qualification License until such time as a permanent IT solution (as described above) is awarded and implemented. The expected date of implementation for this project is October 1, 2013.


    Are they saying they will not have this system up and running until Oct. 1st?
    If it is like most other government projects, it means they will not even consider starting the modifications to the system on 01OCT2013. When it will be operational? More than likely, sometime well after 01OCT2013. De facto ban, for all but a very select, chosen few nobles defined in the law as exempt from the HQL (IANAL).
     

    Benanov

    PM Bomber
    May 15, 2013
    910
    Shrewsbury, PA
    If it is like most other government projects, it means they will not even consider starting the modifications to the system on 01OCT2013. When it will be operational? More than likely, sometime well after 01OCT2013. De facto ban, for all but a very select, chosen few nobles defined in the law as exempt from the HQL (IANAL).

    They might have the requirements written by October 31.

    I put cash down May 18 to try to avoid this, because I saw it coming. I was expecting that the backlog wouldn't grow exponentially - that it was just a demand backlog, and that it would fade once people got one or two in.

    I know better now.
     

    erwos

    The Hebrew Hammer
    MDS Supporter
    Mar 25, 2009
    13,866
    Rockville, MD
    To be honest, this news has very little apparent effect on the prospects for an injunction.

    IMHO, what's going to get us an injunction is dealers quantifying damages from not being able to sell handguns for six months (more?) because the state is completely unprepared to issue those HQLs. Those are the sort of clear, explainable damages that actually net you some consideration from a judge. Of course, this would only get us a partial injunction on the HQL bit of it, but that's something...
     

    MDFF2008

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 12, 2008
    24,735
    Interesting.

    See I would think that for someone who never bought a firearm, the HQL would amount to a total ban if it's not implemented.
     

    erwos

    The Hebrew Hammer
    MDS Supporter
    Mar 25, 2009
    13,866
    Rockville, MD
    See I would think that for someone who never bought a firearm, the HQL would amount to a total ban if it's not implemented.
    But it's only temporary, and thus far, the courts have shown an unfortunate amount of tolerance to that kind of issue when it comes to the 2A, especially when it involves background checks. Monetary damages, OTOH, are harder to ignore.
     

    MJD438

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 28, 2012
    5,849
    Somewhere in MD
    They might have the requirements written by October 31.

    I put cash down May 18 to try to avoid this, because I saw it coming. I was expecting that the backlog wouldn't grow exponentially - that it was just a demand backlog, and that it would fade once people got one or two in.

    I know better now.
    They might have the requirements written by October 31.

    I put cash down May 18 to try to avoid this, because I saw it coming. I was expecting that the backlog wouldn't grow exponentially - that it was just a demand backlog, and that it would fade once people got one or two in.

    I know better now.
    As a consultant in the IT industry, with decades of experience with projects foisted on federal departments that they do not want to implement, I can easily see MSP following the process my federal customers have:

    1. Requirement is effective 01OCT2013, start working on understanding the complete requirements package no earlier than 01SEP2013.
    2. Send bid out to existing software vendor; carp at every effort of the software vendor's response in order to delay award of contract while complaining to budget master that the vendor is being uncooperative and non-compliant, but they are the sole source provider for the software, so there is nothing that can be done to force them to be competitive. (Good for a couple of months of delay)
    3. Accept award of contract is required and sign-off.
    4. Delay assigning project personnel until the vendor threatens to void the contract. (Good for at least a couple of months of delay)
    5. Perform at least three iterations of a complete formal design process. (Since govvies tend to require at least two weeks to review any proposal, this adds at least another two months of delay)
    6. Once design is finalized, shuffle personnel constantly to avoid continuity of operations for the implementation. (This forces the implementer to constantly shift workflow to back-brief the new POC, induces at least a couple of days of delay with every shift)
    7. At all points in the equation, complain to the budget masters that they have not provided adequate funding for the project and state that the department is doing "all it can do with its limited resources", but must, by necessity, place public safety needs above resource assignments to this non-mission-critical project.


    Interesting.

    See I would think that for someone who never bought a firearm, the HQL would amount to a total ban if it's not implemented.
    For those of us that have never bought a handgun, this is a total ban. Personally, I do not have the funds available at the moment to purchase one from any of the known 8-day FFL, and won't have the funds until after 01OCT. Even though I am exempt from the training requirements for multiple reasons, I am not exempt from the HQL requirement and have, as posted above, a very personal belief that this is designed by TPTB to take at least a year to ramp up the HQL process until the first one is issued.

    If one is not a member of nobility in this f-ing "Free" state, one can kiss new purchases of handguns goodbye after 22SEP2013.
     

    Mr H

    Banana'd
    Interesting.

    See I would think that for someone who never bought a firearm, the HQL would amount to a total ban if it's not implemented.

    The bold, being the key to this.

    By the law, it HAS to be implemented... but how/when the state goes about it becomes the issue. There are no regulations in place, and we can be pretty certain there won't be in time for this to run.

    Now that we know buyers HAVE to have it, and that it's not likely to be ready to roll in time (in reality, MSP has until the end of August to implement the HQL process for a 10/1 issue), this IMO is a clear (or at least potential) intent to prevent transfers from taking place. This seems to me to be a case of the state interrupting legal retail transactions, in addition to the obvious 2A implications.
     

    iH8DemLibz

    When All Else Fails.
    Apr 1, 2013
    25,396
    Libtardistan
    Many of us were sounding the clarion call months ago on this.

    And being told we were a bunch of naysayers....

    For example, here's a sample post from May 18th...

    My garden is doing very well. The yellow squash and red potatos were quite tastey. On my second planting of red potatos and yellow squash and will harvest them prior to getting my new XD9.

    This is an inside joke from Mid-May.

    Thankful to be Retired Military, but it's still a 4 month wait to pick-up the firearms.

    If the same folks will be doing Background Checks and HQL Applications, who knows how long the wait will be after 10-1.

    Any predictions???
     

    L0gic

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 2, 2013
    2,953
    Exactly the point! So for each day they don't have an application/process available to be filled out, 30 days in advance, they should push back the date that a HQL is required.

    There was a proposal during the previous session where 281 was born, to amend it with a requirement that all applications must (shall) be completed with in 30 days of submission or it defaults to approved. Kind of like MSP Shall issue a disapproval in 7 days...

    I think it was Delegate Mike who was speaking on it, that if we are so open and ready to require this come October 1, then we should have no problem putting a 30 day requirement on the paperwork. It got shot down right after the request to push the implementation date to 4/1/14. So we don't want to push it back because we are ready and we don't want to put a time limit on ourselves because we may not be ready...Riiiight.

    My garden is doing very well. The squash and red potatos were quite tastey. On my second planting of red potatos and yellow squash and will harvest them prior to getting my new XD9.

    This is an inside joke from Mid-May.

    The odd thing is, my squash has come in too. No Twinkies though......
     

    fabsroman

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 14, 2009
    35,852
    Winfield/Taylorsville in Carroll
    There was a proposal during the previous session where 281 was born, to amend it with a requirement that all applications must (shall) be completed with in 30 days of submission or it defaults to approved. Kind of like MSP Shall issue a disapproval in 7 days...

    I think it was Delegate Mike who was speaking on it, that if we are so open and ready to require this come October 1, then we should have no problem putting a 30 day requirement on the paperwork. It got shot down right after the request to push the implementation date to 4/1/14. So we don't want to push it back because we are ready and we don't want to put a time limit on ourselves because we may not be ready...Riiiight.



    The odd thing is, my squash has come in too. No Twinkies though......

    30 days is still the requirement. This is from Chapter 427:

    (H) (1) WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER RECEIVING A PROPERLY COMPLETED APPLICATION, THE SECRETARY SHALL ISSUE TO THE APPLICANT:

    (1) (I) A HANDGUN QUALIFICATION LICENSE IF THE APPLICANT IS APPROVED; OR

    (2) (II) A WRITTEN DENIAL OF THE APPLICATION THAT CONTAINS:

    (I) 1. THE REASON THE APPLICATION WAS DENIED; AND
    (II) 2. A STATEMENT OF THE APPLICANT’S APPEAL RIGHTS UNDER SUBSECTION (J) (L) OF THIS SECTION.
     

    L0gic

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 2, 2013
    2,953
    Ah. Thank you for the correction. Well, we will see how well that goes since they can't even meet 7 days.

    30 days is still the requirement. This is from Chapter 427:

    (H) (1) WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER RECEIVING A PROPERLY COMPLETED APPLICATION, THE SECRETARY SHALL ISSUE TO THE APPLICANT:

    (1) (I) A HANDGUN QUALIFICATION LICENSE IF THE APPLICANT IS APPROVED; OR

    (2) (II) A WRITTEN DENIAL OF THE APPLICATION THAT CONTAINS:

    (I) 1. THE REASON THE APPLICATION WAS DENIED; AND
    (II) 2. A STATEMENT OF THE APPLICANT’S APPEAL RIGHTS UNDER SUBSECTION (J) (L) OF THIS SECTION.
     

    erwos

    The Hebrew Hammer
    MDS Supporter
    Mar 25, 2009
    13,866
    Rockville, MD
    Thanks for posting this. This information will be very important to quite a few people I know that multiple items in purgatory with stuborn FFL's.
    I suspect that this opinion will encourage some of those "waiting" FFLs to do 8th day release. It's one thing to hold on to a gun for a few months; it's another to hold on to them indefinitely.
     

    fightinbluhen51

    "Quack Pot Call Honker"
    Oct 31, 2008
    8,974
    My garden is doing very well. The yellow squash and red potatos were quite tastey. On my second planting of red potatos and yellow squash and will harvest them prior to getting my new XD9.

    This is an inside joke from Mid-May.

    Thankful to be Retired Military, but it's still a 4 month wait to pick-up the firearms.

    If the same folks will be doing Background Checks and HQL Applications, who knows how long the wait will be after 10-1.

    Any predictions???

    Not begrudging you (and thanks for your service) but titles of nobility are expressly prohibited by the US Constitution. I have seen some new law theories using this to attack 2A restrictions to these class of people (retired mil, LEO, fed LEO, ect).

    I hope that whoever is on the lawsuit (NRA, w/ amici from MSI/ACG, Dave Hardy, John Lott, SAF, ect), will point this caste system out to the courts. What is good for the goose, should be good for the gander as well.
     

    Mr H

    Banana'd
    Counting backwards...

    10/1 less 30 days... 9/1, there would need to be a HQP app process in place
    10/1 less 45 days... 8/16... AFAIK, this is the deadline for regulations to be adopted

    As of this moment, we are 7 days from needing Regulations, and I've heard of nothing about a public input period or anything else related to this.

    IMO, 10/1 will hit with no possibility of anyone being able to take possession of their legally purchased handguns...
     

    iH8DemLibz

    When All Else Fails.
    Apr 1, 2013
    25,396
    Libtardistan
    The odd thing is, my squash has come in too. No Twinkies though......[/QUOTE]




    Where did you find Twinkie seeds???

    Lowe's and Home Depot were out of them.
     

    spclopr8tr

    Whatchalookinat?
    Apr 20, 2013
    1,793
    TN
    Not begrudging you (and thanks for your service) but titles of nobility are expressly prohibited by the US Constitution. I have seen some new law theories using this to attack 2A restrictions to these class of people (retired mil, LEO, fed LEO, ect).

    I hope that whoever is on the lawsuit (NRA, w/ amici from MSI/ACG, Dave Hardy, John Lott, SAF, ect), will point this caste system out to the courts. What is good for the goose, should be good for the gander as well.

    Not to worry. The MSP has already made an arbitrary decision to remove the active duty and retired military/national guard exemption requiring the HQL. Despite SB281 being quite specific in this regard, I guess the MSP decided they can just rewrite those parts of the law they don't agree with and remove one of the class distinctions.

    http://www.mdsp.org/Organization/Su...ion/Firearms/HandgunQualificationLicense.aspx
    See the "Exceptions to possession of the HQL License" description.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,933
    Messages
    7,259,533
    Members
    33,350
    Latest member
    Rotorboater

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom