Who Doesn't Have Their HQL

BeoBill · Nov 24, 2015

A1Uniform said:
Nice to see so many O'Malley supporters here still carrying the flag for him by refusing to get a HQL.

Democrats/Anti-Gunners in MD for the win!!

OK, you pay for my training, fingerprinting, redundant background check, and wasted time for the ensuing denial because I don't carry cash and I'm not dead or crippled.

DC-W · Nov 24, 2015

If you have a carry permit from any state, you have nothing stopping you from getting the HQL, save for time and money.

Keep and bear are equal things.

Blaster229 · Nov 24, 2015

I don't.

Catmj · Nov 24, 2015

I got mine 18 months ago. I felt as many on here do, but I like buying handguns and just went and did it. Pretty easy to do (especially online) if you're a Vet or have a Hunting License. I've been fingerprinted for the Utah Carry Permit and access to government facilities, so that was no big deal to me. I do think the whole thing is a joke though. It's good for 10 freaken years! THAT makes no sense to me, but neither does having to go through the same exact background check as the License every time I buy a gun in MD.

swinokur · Nov 24, 2015

As has been repeated here ad nauseum, it isn't about making sense or reducing crime.

It's about infringement through discouragement

plain and simple

bbrown · Nov 24, 2015

I waited for 2 years after 10/01/2013 to get my HQL but finally realized that, at my age, I could be pushing up daisies before the lawsuit succeeds. There are non-C&R handguns I want to own and shoot before I'm gone.

Overboost44 · Nov 24, 2015

I don't. I have what I NEED, but not what I want.

...holding

Schipperke · Nov 24, 2015

swinokur said:
As has been repeated here ad nauseum, it isn't about making sense or reducing crime.

It's about infringement through discouragement

plain and simple

I was at a gun shop where one employed there was an advocate of the HQL

rob-cubed · Nov 24, 2015

Thankfully I have the luxury of not NEEDING a handgun because I already own one. It's everyone else I feel sorry for.

That said, one day I will bit the HQL bullet. This state sucks but a single-stack Glock and another CZ is really tempting.

EL1227 · Nov 24, 2015

swinokur said:
As has been repeated here ad nauseum, it isn't about making sense or reducing crime.

It's about infringement through discouragement

plain and simple

And backdoor registration ... of ALL of your firearms. :innocent0

Required to have the HQL, but exempt from the training component-

1. Someone who completed a firearms safety training course approved by the Secretary of the Department of Maryland State Police.

2. Has completed a course of instruction in the competency and safety of firearms as prescribed under Natural Resources Article, §10-301.1, Annotated Code of Maryland.

3. Is currently a qualified handgun instructor.

4. Is an honorably discharged member of the armed forces of the United States or National Guard.

5. Is an employee of an armored car company who has a handgun permit issued by MSP.

6. Lawfully owns a regulated firearm. If you already own a handgun or assault weapon prior to October 1, 2013, you do not have to complete the training to apply for the Handgun Qualification License.

I've been tempted a few times, like when I had a case of the 'jones' over a Jerry Muceluk Signature S&W Performance Center 929. but my better judgment finally kicked in after I understood what O'Malley's HQL was all about.

O’Malley would require background checks for all gun sales and would end all unregulated internet sales. He would also strengthen the background check process.

The plan requires all gun buyers to receive a “fingerprint-based license and complete safety training with a waiting period, in addition to passing a background check.” O’Malley’s campaign said he implemented a similar program in Maryland.

Since you have to show proof of a prior ownership to be exempt from training, it's better to be safe than sorry, especially if the SHTF.

janklow · Nov 25, 2015

EL1227 said:
And backdoor registration ... of ALL of your firearms.

which we already basically had in MD prior to the HQL, which they essentially noted when they passed the law.

i don't think anyone's okay with that, but if you bought a regulated firearm in 2012, it's not like the state doesn't have you on a list.

John from MD · Nov 25, 2015

janklow said:
which we already basically had in MD prior to the HQL, which they essentially noted when they passed the law.

i don't think anyone's okay with that, but if you bought a regulated firearm in 2012, it's not like the state doesn't have you on a list.

Unless you came into the state with firearms that were not regulated in your previous state.
:innocent0

John

EL1227 · Nov 25, 2015

janklow said:
which we already basically had in MD prior to the HQL, which they essentially noted when they passed the law.

i don't think anyone's okay with that, but if you bought a regulated firearm in 2012, it's not like the state doesn't have you on a list.

And considering that MSP collected spent shell casings for 10 years and NEVER solved a gun-related crime using them, I doubt very seriously that their regulated firearm purchase record keeping prior to Oct 1, 2013 was any better. The additional database checks that MD required above and beyond NICS were just that, checks. However ...

FSA2013 established a state dealer record keeping requirement. Prior to, it was a federal requirement that only ATF inspected.

requires license firearms dealers to keep record of all receipts, sales, and other dispositions of firearms affected in connection with the dealer’s business. Records maintained under federal law may be used to satisfy the requirements of the bill, provided that DSP is granted access to those records. DSP must inspect the inventory and records of a licensed dealer at least once every 2 years, and may inspect the inventory and records at any time during normal business hours of the licensed dealer’s business

janklow · Nov 26, 2015

John from MD said:
Unless you came into the state with firearms that were not regulated in your previous state.

true, but this is more of a "did the HQL institute backdoor registration we didn't already have" statement

EL1227 said:
And considering that MSP collected spent shell casings for 10 years and NEVER solved a gun-related crime using them, I doubt very seriously that their regulated firearm purchase record keeping prior to Oct 1, 2013 was any better.

well, the shell casing law seemed to be terribly ineffective for reasons beyond terrible record keeping.

my point is simply that the state essentially admitted we HAD registration during the FSA2013 debate. if you want to not get an HQL because it's worse now, that's fine.

Jack Ryan · Nov 26, 2015

Nope...never!

Rockfish · Dec 1, 2015

I am finally going through with it this week because I want to diversify my handguns a bit. I only currently have one firearm suitable for home defense and when it recently needed a repair to the front sight which I will have to send it to berreta for, I realized that I could be left without the ability to safely defend myself if something happens to that one pistol.

Doug S · Dec 1, 2015

bbrown said:
I waited for 2 years after 10/01/2013 to get my HQL but finally realized that, at my age, I could be pushing up daisies before the lawsuit succeeds. There are non-C&R handguns I want to own and shoot before I'm gone.

This. Finally did mine today.

Raineman · Dec 7, 2015

I'm so torn.

Was, and have been completely against it from day one.

Now have my entire office asking ME what they need to do to protect themselves.

Want to help them, but want to stand my ground as well. I have convinced them to protect themselves and they want to, now I have to take the next step to guide them along.

This pos law is morally a mind fu&$.

Like I said...I am completely torn about what to do...and it'd be easy for me 'cause I'm exempt from training.

The agony.

rob-cubed · Dec 7, 2015

Raineman said:
I'm so torn.

Was, and have been completely against it from day one.

Now have my entire office asking ME what they need to do to protect themselves.

Want to help them, but want to stand my ground as well. I have convinced them to protect themselves and they want to, now I have to take the next step to guide them along.

This pos law is morally a mind fu&$.

Like I said...I am completely torn about what to do...and it'd be easy for me 'cause I'm exempt from training.

The agony.

Encourage them to go through the HQL process. It's a sour pill to swallow, but completing it does two things: creates new 2A advocates and teaches those same people how ridiculous "gun control" is. When it becomes cheaper and easier to buy a gun on the black market...

Or teach them how to shoot a shotgun... :innocent0

DC-W · Dec 7, 2015

If they want handguns, help them through the process.

You have an opportunity to educate others in need. They'll get a lot more than a handgun if they go through the HQL process -- they're potential allies.

The HQL was designed to limit handgun ownership.

Who Doesn't Have Their HQL

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Crank in the Third Row

Ultimate Member

God loves you, I don't.

Member

In a State of Bliss

Ultimate Member

6th gear

Ultimate Member

In need of moderation

R.I.P.

Active Member

American Patriot

R.I.P.

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Trufflehunter

On the 3rd box

In need of moderation

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics