ok i have an HQL why do i have to fill out all the paper work?

rico903 said:

Agree 100%. But MSP in their infinite wisdom thinks they do a better back ground check than NICS. Maybe Hogan will help us, but I'm not counting on it.

Click to expand...

MSP doe not 'think' at all - they follow law enacted by the MGA

Gov Elect Hogan does not have the power/authority to change MD law

daggo66 said:

Look in the mirror. I am seriously disappointed by the lack of overall support from this community for the Pro 2A candidates in districts 31A and 32. "We" dropped the ball.

Click to expand...

While the results were not what "we" wanted, the outcome was far closer than the PTB wanted.

This was hardly a mandate by any stretch, and is an opportunity, IMO, to keep building the base.

We may have technically lost, but in reality, I think they're more scared than ever... and "we" need to capitalize where we can.

rico903 said:

Agree 100%. But MSP in their infinite wisdom thinks they do a better back ground check than NICS. Maybe Hogan will help us, but I'm not counting on it.

Click to expand...

Not everything is in NICS. Maryland has gone above and beyond the federal statutes for reasons a person may be prohibited from owning a firearm. (Not that I personally agree with all of the prohibiting factors) But, they are Maryland law and the Department of State Police must ensure they do everything in their power to ensure a prohibited person does not receive a regulated firearm.

Let me give you just one example; An habitual drunkard can not lawfully possess a firearm. A person convicted of their third alcohol related offense, one of these convictions occurring within the last year, may not receive, purchase or possess a regulated firearm. This prohibiting offense is not and can not be reported to NICS. But, the Department of State Police has an obligation to check all available databases.

Imagine the Department says, "I think that law is rather useless and doesn't makes sense. I'm not going to check that database for that record." The purchaser is approved for a firearm using NICS only. Six months later, in a drunken rage, he/she kills someone with that same firearm. An audit reveals the State Police never checked the MVA history. The family sues the State Police because Maryland law says he may not possess a firearm. But you simply chose not to run a query through that database and instead only relied on the information that is entered into NICS. Can you see the liability concerns there?

It's not that the State Police think they can do a better background check than NICS. Is that not everything is reported to NICS. There are many additional checks that are being made. Regardless of their personal feelings on what laws should and should not be made to cause a person to be prohibited, they are charged with the responsibility of ensuring the person is NOT prohibited.

Maryland and federal firearms laws are complicated. Much more complicated than they need to be. I can imagine the frustrations of many for the continual invasions upon your individual rights. I agree with many of those arguments.

But the background checks are not completed as you envision or desire. But, that's not the fault of the State Police.

If you go back to the 100 day wait when guns were being released with no background check at all....then I'd have to agree with you. At least let the dealers do the NICS check, and when you get caught up, then check the remainder of the databases that NICS misses. But that is a whole other topic.

rico903 said:

Agree 100%. But MSP in their infinite wisdom thinks they do a better back ground check than NICS. Maybe Hogan will help us, but I'm not counting on it.

Click to expand...

They might think that because this state is not compliant on reporting what it needs to to NICS. That might be in Hogan's executive authority to make that happen. With a more complete NICS reporting from MD, there is less of an argument from MSP to keep spending tax money on their proprietary background check setup.

Mr H said:

We may have technically lost, but in reality, I think they're more scared than ever... and "we" need to capitalize where we can.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Any smart politician will see these close races as an indicator that they need to change their tune. As far as our interest group; hold fast! We are gaining momentum and will gain strength if we keep working on building our ranks and stay relevant and vocal in Annapolis.

nedsurf said:

They might think that because this state is not compliant on reporting what it needs to to NICS. That might be in Hogan's executive authority to make that happen. With a more complete NICS reporting from MD, there is less of an argument from MSP to keep spending tax money on their proprietary background check setup.



Agreed. Any smart politician will see these close races as an indicator that they need to change their tune. As far as our interest group; hold fast! We are gaining momentum and will gain strength if we keep working on building our ranks and stay relevant and vocal in Annapolis.

Click to expand...

Maryland is now compliant with NICS. But, even at 100% compliance, there will always be offenses that prohibit a person from possessing a firearm in Maryland that needs to be checked separately.

Example; If a juvenile is found delinquent (essentially the same as a guilty verdict) of a violent crime, then that person may not possess a firearm until he reaches 30 years of age. Juvenile records will never be in NICS. (NICS does not allow for the records to be transmitted) This may very well be the top reason for denials of a handgun purchase in Maryland.

Here is what needs to be addressed...... All this is vetted with the HQL. These databases are already checked. Why do they need to be checked again? Because Maryland law specifies they must be checked again. This is a duplication of efforts. There is no reason for a 7 day wait with an HQL either...except Maryland law says you must wait.

Federal law provides an exemption for a NICS check. Those states that have a licensing requirement for purchasing, such as Maryland's HQL, may apply for an exemption from the NICS check. In other words, if Maryland wanted to seek approval, and make a few changes to the law, you could walk into a store and buy a handgun without any additional wait or background check. Your HQL would be all you need. The recent court ruling in California that struck down the 10 day wait for those with a purchasing licenses or who already own a firearm, was based on this same premise.

Jack - how would the state apply for an exemption? Would this be at the Governor's direction, AG or could it come from MSP?

Stoveman said:

Jack - how would the state apply for an exemption? Would this be at the Governor's direction, AG or could it come from MSP?

Click to expand...

http://www.atf.gov/files/publications/download/p/atf-p-5300-4.pdf
Page 194

The state would first need to review the requirements with the ATF. The State Police would have to decide they want to meet the exemption and apply. Historically, that final decision would be made by the Office of the Governor. Changes to current legislation would likely need to be made that provides for this exemption.

We actually pondered the possibilities of a system like this long before FSA 2013. The Licensing Division can become so automated that the number of personnel could be cut to a third, the employees could be all civilians, and the state can save millions of dollars in funding. And firearm owners can enjoy some relief of financial obligations of the background check, making up for the expense of the fingerprints and the HQL over time.

Save money, save man power, become more efficient and stop slowing down the process of buying a gun for law abiding citizens. It takes work. But it can be done rather easily.

Why? Because the purpose of any further gun control legislation is to make gun ownership as onerous as possible. Barring outright confiscation it's the best anti's can hope for.

Any crap having to do with "safety" is just that, crap.

Jack McCauley said:

http://www.atf.gov/files/publications/download/p/atf-p-5300-4.pdf
Page 194

The state would first need to review the requirements with the ATF. The State Police would have to decide they want to meet the exemption and apply. Historically, that final decision would be made by the Office of the Governor. Changes to current legislation would likely need to be made that provides for this exemption.

We actually pondered the possibilities of a system like this long before FSA 2013. The Licensing Division can become so automated that the number of personnel could be cut to a third, the employees could be all civilians, and the state can save millions of dollars in funding. And firearm owners can enjoy some relief of financial obligations of the background check, making up for the expense of the fingerprints and the HQL over time.

Save money, save man power, become more efficient and stop slowing down the process of buying a gun for law abiding citizens. It takes work. But it can be done rather easily.

Click to expand...

Makes way too much sense so I'm sure it will never happen.

Thanks for the speedy reply.

DaemonAssassin said:

I'll be honest. I don't believe that Hogan has a chance in hell to fix this state. I also have very little faith in him doing anything for firearms owners in this state. The best we could hope for is to have the tax situation get better for us. I hold very little hope of seeing G&S being relaxed during his administration. The only way MD will ever see the common man see the ability to CCW, is if National Right to Carry passes, and out of state residents with a CCW decide to visit MD.

Hogan has a difficult road ahead, but it isn't going to be easy, since the Democratic machine in MD will not allow him to do anything we need him to do. He is tied up by a very specific design. The MD Democratic machine is only giving us the illusion of being able to make the changes we want and need, by allowing a Republican to be elected in MD. The only way that we can return this state to an even keel is to get all incumbents out of the statehouse. In addition to that we also need to set term limits and put the Democratic machine in it's coffin and bury it, but electing people that will adhere to the MDC and COTUS. Until then, I'm afraid we are just pissing in the wind.

I am going to fight till the day I leave, and I will keep fighting after I leave. I want this crap to stop and I want my son to be able to grow up in a world that is better than the one I am in right now.

Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. Getting rid of Mike and Mike would be a big start. Would love to see term limits but not sure how it would play out. If someone knows they can't get reelected they have no incentive to do what their constituents want. Double edged sword.

rico903 said:

Couldn't agree more. Getting rid of Mike and Mike would be a big start. Would love to see term limits but not sure how it would play out. If someone knows they can't get reelected they have no incentive to do what their constituents want. Double edged sword.

Click to expand...

It wouldn't be a big start, its the ONLY move in our book. 90% of the MGA dances to what ever the Speaker and President call.


Busch's spot is the most vulnerable, if I remember the totals correctly all 5 candidates in his district got between 20,000 and 30,000 votes

Who is John Galt?

Mark75H said:

It wouldn't be a big start, its the ONLY move in our book. 90% of the MGA dances to what ever the Speaker and President call.


Busch's spot is the most vulnerable, if I remember the totals correctly all 5 candidates in his district got between 20,000 and 30,000 votes

Click to expand...

Busch actually came in SECOND in that district, believe it or not. Just another indicator that the election was anything but a mandate.

Jack McCauley said:

. . . The State Police would have to decide they want to meet the exemption and apply. Historically, that final decision would be made by the Office of the Governor. Changes to current legislation would likely need to be made that provides for this exemption.

We actually pondered the possibilities of a system like this long before FSA 2013. The Licensing Division can become so automated that the number of personnel could be cut to a third, the employees could be all civilians, and the state can save millions of dollars in funding. And firearm owners can enjoy some relief of financial obligations of the background check, making up for the expense of the fingerprints and the HQL over time.

Save money, save man power, become more efficient and stop slowing down the process of buying a gun for law abiding citizens. It takes work. But it can be done rather easily.

Click to expand...

Sounds like a man with knowledge and a plan . . . Thanks Jack.

Jack McCauley said:

... Regardless of their personal feelings on what laws should and should not be made to cause a person to be prohibited, they are charged with the responsibility of ensuring the person is NOT prohibited.

...

Click to expand...

Jack - I read your posts. On the whole, they beg one to ask: How long will it take for the government to legislate that we're all prohibited?

It is a slippery slope from "shall not be infringed", once you start setting and modifying the definition of who is prohibited. This principal is not limited to just second amendment protections.

I believe we would be better served without all of the prohibitions. Perhaps that is just me.

Since we all know that will never happen I prefer to have logical discussions on actions that we CAN take. Clearly I understand your point though.

Laws are rarely repealed. They are frequently passed and/or added to. Officers dutifully enforce the laws.

The HQL is the hook to make all of this happen. If it takes 10 years, 20 years, or more, we're still on the way to the following. I'm thinking much of this could come in the form of one or two laws in the wrong political climate.

1. Law passed which converts the HQL into a genuine FOID that is required to possess, purchase, and otherwise discharge a firearm
2. Law passed that all firearm transactions must be registered under the FOID of the individual receiving the firearm if an individual.
3. Law passed granting state the right to revoke FOID at any time for cause as defined by law.
4. Law passed requiring FOID to be renewed annually and will be valid pending completed background check.
5. Law passed requiring all firearms owned prior to receiving HQL or FOID be registered under the FOID of the owner.
6. Law passed granting State right to dutifully confiscate firearms from individuals not possessing a valid FOID given due process.
7. Law passed stating FOID only allows individual to possess and/or purchase only certain firearms as defined by law, with firearms purchased before date X grandfathered in.
8. Law passed to limit the number of FOID that it issues per year as defined by law to ensure all new FOID holders receive proper training due to limited facilities.
9. FOID holders with firearms as listed in this law must relinquish ownership to the state police by this date.

It goes on and on. We've seen much of the above in heavy gun control states already. The HQL has got to go.

Please don't ever mistake my stance on HQL. I believe it is an unconstitutional restriction on the rights of gunowners. The HQL does nothing to prevent violence. The HQL is cost prohibitive. The HQL causes certain classes of citizens to be unable to afford firearms.

And, the HQL is a placeholder for more legislation to come. I say it's good to have folks continue to fill out their 77Rs. It might just keep them irritated enough to show up in Annapolis when it counts.

squirrels said:

The main purpose of the HQL is to make the procedure to buy a handgun more onerous. That's all it's there for. To reduce the number of guns sold in MD (and thus reduce the size of the firearms owners community) by making it such a PITA that most people will just say, "never mind", and roll out.

You got one because you'll be damned if you let the bastards win. Think of it this way...every time an HQL is issued, the progressive plot to impossibly burden MDers' 2A rights has failed.

Click to expand...

You are absolutely right. The Socialist/Progressive end game is the total confiscation of firearms, thereby making the state, country safe. This is the mindset in their twisted little pea-brains.