Can pass 4473 but not MDSP 77

[Name Taken]

That's kind of a dick move by the FFL if you have confirmation from MSP that its the under 30 thing. I'd imagine they charged you a hefty "restocking fee" too?

Plenty of shops have a "no criminal" no matter what policy.

It's not hard to go through life without being arrested let alone convicted.

Their shop their rules.

 

[94hokie]

Riddle me this..

Mdsp form 77 require hql?

Not for a receiver because it's not a handgun

 

[AssMan]

Riddle me this..

Mdsp form 77 require hql?

Not for a receiver IIRC.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[lx1x]

Not for a receiver because it's not a handgun

Thanks..

 

[-Z/28-]

Riddle me this..

Mdsp form 77 require hql?

Not for a receiver because it's not a handgun

Also HQL isn't required for C&R handguns, but 77r still applies.

 

[Biff_N]

I contacted the MDSP and spoke with the trooper in charge and verified what the charge was. The FFL is not willing to hold the firearm and informed me that I am now unable to purchase anything through them because of this.

Tell us who the a-hole FFL is so we can decide not to purchase from them too.

 

[fidelity]

I contacted the MDSP and spoke with the trooper in charge and verified what the charge was. The FFL is not willing to hold the firearm and informed me that I am now unable to purchase anything through them because of this.

It was more than 18 years ago, the incident happened when I was very young and had truly forgotten about it honestly. Live and learn.

Given that you followed up with MDSP pretty quickly, it sounds like you're straightforward/honest individual. Given that the incident happened when you were 12 years old or less, I do hope all goes well for you in purchasing state regulated firearms when you turn 30 next month. Guessing that your MDS alias is an amalgamation of your first and last names plus birth year.

 

[NiCe85]

Tell us who the a-hole FFL is so we can decide not to purchase from them too.

The purpose of this thread was not to bash on the FFL, but to inquire on wether or not I could have any legal ramifications from this. Had there been no issues with my 77 I would have been happily picking up my lower and other items in a few days and been completely happy with the service provided. It's when you deal with this corner cases where you discover things like this. I would have been happy to wait for it till I turn the proper age in which my juvi records no longer reflect my current character, but again it's up to the FFL in whether they want to hold it that and their right to refuse business.

On a side note, is there any lawyers that anyone would recommend in regards to this issue. As the ones I've spoken too can only weigh in if I have charges pending against me.

 

[DaemonAssassin]

The purpose of this thread was not to bash on the FFL, but to inquire on wether or not I could have any legal ramifications from this. Had there been no issues with my 77 I would have been happily picking up my lower and other items in a few days and been completely happy with the service provided. It's when you deal with this corner cases where you discover things like this. I would have been happy to wait for it till I turn the proper age in which my juvi records no longer reflect my current character, but again it's up to the FFL in whether they want to hold it that and their right to refuse business.

On a side note, is there any lawyers that anyone would recommend in regards to this issue. As the ones I've spoken too can only weigh in if I have charges pending against me.

Check the IP section, Charlie Foxtrot is part of the legal team that is an IP. I know people that have gone through them for NFA stuff and they are good people.

EDIT: As for the FFL, there is something that you should know. We as a community will shun an FFL if they severely mistreat a member on here. Out them and be done with it. The FFL's that are part of the IP section are some of the best shops in MD. Give them your business, help support the forum, and help with the 2A fight in MD, all at the same time.

As for those who have been shunned for multiple reasons; getting the Fox out, being UNcommon -ly douchy, we don't like Select Fire guns, they weren't really offering a Continental breakfast, H&M is worse than s&m, and the list goes on... They violated forum rules and/or also mistreated members.

 

[fidelity]

In addition to what DA suggested, some good recs in this thread (incl recs from other attorneys) ...

https://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=168053

 

[Name Taken]

We are going to shun a shop for not wanting to do work with someone who might have committed perjury on one of their forms and has possibly implicated them in any criminal investigation that might take place?

Really?

The form and question is pretty clear....I can't say I'd want to do business as a FFL with someone who just potentially put my business and one of my employee's in a position to loss several days of work in court.

I could see if he came back DELAYED and they were being a tool about it...he's PROHIBITED at the time of the purchase for crying out loud.

Let us tar and feather whatever shop didn't want to do business with a prohibited person. I'll kill the chickens you get the tar.

Does the shop even know WHY you were denied? Does MSP tell them? If not the stance that some took in this thread is even more asinine.

 

[robmints]

As for those who have been shunned for multiple reasons; getting the Fox out, being UNcommon -ly douchy, we don't like Select Fire guns, they weren't really offering a Continental breakfast, H&M is worse than s&m, and the list goes on... They violated forum rules and/or also mistreated members.

And to expand on this thought. I drive way out of my way to deal with those that released in 8 days to those that could reasonably prove that they would not be not disapproved. Lou45 and some of the other IPs (not all) followed the law, their conscience, and the wants of their customers and really stood up for those who got caught short by 281.

There were other shops that didn't release under any circumstances, even though the msp was backed up for months. They just held the property with no effort towards due diligence or doing what was allowed by law. I used to go to one of them at least once a month, now I just drive by.

I know there was a forgive and forget theme on here as time went by. But it really showed who cared and would support you and who wouldn't.

 

[outrider58]

We are going to shun a shop for not wanting to do work with someone who might have committed perjury on one of their forms and has possibly implicated them in any criminal investigation that might take place?

Really?

The form and question is pretty clear....I can't say I'd want to do business as a FFL with someone who just potentially put my business and one of my employee's in a position to loss several days of work in court.

I could see if he came back DELAYED and they were being a tool about it...he's PROHIBITED at the time of the purchase for crying out loud.

Let us tar and feather whatever shop didn't want to do business with a prohibited person. I'll kill the chickens you get the tar.

Does the shop even know WHY you were denied? Does MSP tell them? If not the stance that some took in this thread is even more asinine.

Hey! I once put a bag into check at Dulles Int. as I was flying to Alaska and forgot to mention that there was a .44 mag in my bag( just as I watched it go down the conveyor belt). I had it all legal as far as things went...I just momentarily spaced out and through the excitement, forgot. Had a little pow-wow with the local authorities, a secondary search of my baggage, and all was good to go. Almost missed my flight. After that, I never question how a celeb, or anyone else can forget that they were trying to board an airliner with a firearm in their carry-on. Sh!t happens.

As far as the FFL in question goes, policy is policy. I didn't see where the OP is barking about the deal, He admits that it was his screw-up for forgetting.

 

[bobthefisher]

I personally would still like to know the FFL. If it's their shop policy then they would stand by their resolve on the matter, and to some point justifiably. However, mistakes do happen and you should work with customers if they're not being belligerent.

There will be no hate phone calls, we just want to know. The attitude from the FFL seems a bit harsh and I would respectfully choose a different FFL. Those are my personal feelings and nothing more.

I know MD has made FFL holders live in a somewhat hostile work environment, and I think we can all agree that the FFL has that right, but it's these complex instances that show true customer relation character.

 

[robmints]

We are going to shun a shop for not wanting to do work with someone who might have committed perjury on one of their forms and has possibly implicated them in any criminal investigation that might take place?

Really?

The form and question is pretty clear....I can't say I'd want to do business as a FFL with someone who just potentially put my business and one of my employee's in a position to loss several days of work in court.

I could see if he came back DELAYED and they were being a tool about it...he's PROHIBITED at the time of the purchase for crying out loud.

Let us tar and feather whatever shop didn't want to do business with a prohibited person. I'll kill the chickens you get the tar.

Does the shop even know WHY you were denied? Does MSP tell them? If not the stance that some took in this thread is even more asinine.

That is not an accurate description of what has happened.

He was disapproved. The shop did not sell to him.

Soon he will be not disapproved. The shop still will not sell to him.

If future sales to a person disapproved in the past is a law or regulation, that is one thing. If it is a company policy, that is another.

 

[Not_an_outlaw]

We are going to shun a shop for not wanting to do work with someone who might have committed perjury on one of their forms and has possibly implicated them in any criminal investigation that might take place?

Really?

The form and question is pretty clear....I can't say I'd want to do business as a FFL with someone who just potentially put my business and one of my employee's in a position to loss several days of work in court.

I could see if he came back DELAYED and they were being a tool about it...he's PROHIBITED at the time of the purchase for crying out loud.

Let us tar and feather whatever shop didn't want to do business with a prohibited person. I'll kill the chickens you get the tar.

Does the shop even know WHY you were denied? Does MSP tell them? If not the stance that some took in this thread is even more asinine.

I would like to decide for myself.

 

[Brent]

Popcorn munchin

 

[NateIU10]

In a lot of instances, you're right. However, there are limited instances where a person is prohibited by MD Law from owning a REGULATED firearm but at the same time, NOT prohibited from owning a NON regulated firearm. I've been through this with several customers and MSP several times.

I'm far too tired and sick to look up both sections of the code, so I will stipulate that there may be limited circumstances where a person is prohibited from possession of a regulated firearm and not a rifle/shotgun.

However, if you can't possess/receive a regulated firearm, you are prohibited from possessing all ammunition:

§ 5-133.1. Restrictions on possession of ammunition.
(a)
"Ammunition" defined.
--
In this section, "ammunition" means a cartridge, shell, or any other
device containing explosive or incendiary material designed and intended for use in a firearm.

(b)In general.
--
A person may not possess ammunition if the person is prohibited from possessing a regulated firearm under § 5-133 (b) or (c) of this subtitle.

(c)Penalty.
--
A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction is subject to imprisonment not exceeding 1 year or a fine not exceeding $ 1000 or both.

OP, do you fall into any of the following categories? MD is terrible at reporting to NICS, and people will get NICS approvals for years sometimes then get a knock on the door.

Article - Public Safety
[Previous][Next]
§5–205.
(a) This subtitle does not apply to a rifle or shotgun that is an antique firearm as defined in § 4–201 of the Criminal Law Article.
(b) A person may not possess a rifle or shotgun if the person:
(1) has been convicted of a disqualifying crime as defined in § 5–101 of this title;
(2) has been convicted of a violation classified as a crime under common law and received a term of imprisonment of more than 2 years;
(3) is a fugitive from justice;
(4) is a habitual drunkard as defined in § 5–101 of this title;
(5) is addicted to a controlled dangerous substance or is a habitual user as defined in § 5–101 of this title;
(6) suffers from a mental disorder as defined in § 10–101(f)(2) of the Health – General Article and has a history of violent behavior against the person or another;
(7) has been found incompetent to stand trial under § 3–106 of the Criminal Procedure Article;
(8) has been found not criminally responsible under § 3–110 of the Criminal Procedure Article;
(9) has been voluntarily admitted for more than 30 consecutive days to a facility as defined in § 10–101 of the Health – General Article;
(10) has been involuntarily committed to a facility as defined in § 10–101 of the Health – General Article;
(11) is under the protection of a guardian appointed by a court under § 13–201(c) or § 13–705 of the Estates and Trusts Article, except for cases in which the appointment of a guardian is solely a result of a physical disability;
(12) except as provided in subsection (c) of this section, is a respondent against whom:
(i) a current non ex parte civil protective order has been entered under § 4–506 of the Family Law Article; or
(ii) an order for protection, as defined in § 4–508.1 of the Family Law Article, has been issued by a court of another state or a Native American tribe and is in effect; or
(13) if under the age of 30 years at the time of possession, has been adjudicated delinquent by a juvenile court for an act that would be a disqualifying crime if committed by an adult.

 

[-Z/28-]

Reading what Nate has posted, NiCe85, you may want to have a relative or friend hold onto that VZ2008 and your ammo for the next month. I was of the impression that the law he quoted only applied to regulated firearms, but it appears to cover all rifles.

 

[Biggfoot44]

It certainly sucks to be the OP ( and extend hopes that he slides by on any charges ). But I don't see where the FFL is severely mistreating him. The OP might well be a good guy momentarily cought up with brain fade, but from a dealer's viewpoint it is not unreasonable to be seen as walking and quacking.