LEO using 77R for banned "assault" weapons?

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!
  • RoadDawg

    Nos nostraque Deo
    Dec 6, 2010
    94,181
    Your comment "Leo's go through much more than you to do the very same thing" is not quite accurate. Did you pay $50 for fingerprints and $50 to get the right to buy a handgun? Didnt think so.

    Paying off a debt or obligation through an agreement to a period of time in service... or by paying cash... is still paying. So... yes it IS still paying. Because failure to complete the time in service... means that the debt must still be paid in cash.

    Did you attend many months of training, work the job to pay off that training (or pay in cash), and attend required requalification each year to get your HQL? No? So you did not do as much as a Maryland Certified LEO was required to do. My statement stands.
     

    RoadDawg

    Nos nostraque Deo
    Dec 6, 2010
    94,181
    False

    Years in a tac unit

    A year in robbery

    3 years narcotics

    Patrol here/there

    Had to get HQL. I carried a bigger gun to get my HQL than the gun i wanted to buy


    Live in MD, not a MD cop......considered the same as you bud. I’m okay with how they consider me and just as outraged at the “tax”

    I am disgusted that this law exists. It causes far too many problems and solves none.

    The fact that you do not get the exemption as a LEO... proves my point. The exemption is not merely a carve out for LEOs or Military, or other groups. The exemption is based upon the requirements of the law as the MGA saw fit to write it.

    • All persons must qualify to purchase a firearm in the state of Maryland.
    • Qualification to purchase is through a Maryland approved certification process.
    • Persons who already hold certification, which is recognized by the State as sufficient to the requirements of the law, are already qualified and therefore are exempt from needing additional certification through the HQL process.
    • There is a list of persons who are covered by Maryland State recognized certification.
    • That list of persons is not limited solely to “LEOs and Military Members”. There are others who are exempt, either totally, or in part, from needing to acquire additional certification in the process.

    The HQL Law is an abomination. It violates the 2A and it is prejudiced against those who do not have the ready funds to go through the process.

    But those using it as a wedge to divide all persons affected into various groups and call the groups “different classes of people”... are just as wrong as those who perpetrated this abomination in the first place. Because... so long as any members harbor ill feelings for and argue against others within the community... we will never be able to fight together against those who want us under their control.



    Peace
     

    RoadDawg

    Nos nostraque Deo
    Dec 6, 2010
    94,181
    You might want to consider the other half of the HQL and that is the background check. There are those of us who have various high level clearances. Having those clearances require interviews with family, friends, and coworkers. It may require a polygraph. I believe they also look into your medical records, but I'm not sure about this. It requires a detailed history of where you have lived. It sometimes goes into the details of where you're traveled. Sometimes they need to verify the birthplaces of your parents if born outside the CONUS. Also, if one of your immediate family members has problems with drug addiction or trouble with the law, your clearance can be denied.

    So, you can say that those with a high level security clearances go though much more of a background check than LEOs. Yet, they require another background check, for which they pay.

    Just some notes to consider.

    IF those clearances can be added to the list of certifications accepted by the State of Maryland in lieu of requirements under the law. I see no reason why they should not provide the same exemption as the certifications already accepted.

    Something for a member of the MGA to look into... while various groups attempt to get the law removed from the books.
     

    RoadDawg

    Nos nostraque Deo
    Dec 6, 2010
    94,181
    Forgot to add the financial investigation and random urinalysis tests as well. And, not related to security, they can control what you invest in and limit your participation in various businesses.

    On a side note, a coworker thought she overheard me discussing a foreclosure of my residence. She called security and I had to explain that I was not going into foreclosure and that the conversation interpretation was wrong. This was after I did some research to determine what I was required to report. That was "anything they ask for" or you could lose your clearance.

    When I was under investigation as an applicant... and during my employment... I was held to the same scrutiny.
     

    RoadDawg

    Nos nostraque Deo
    Dec 6, 2010
    94,181
    The results of your background check are not accessible by the state. The background check for Maryland LEO’s are have to meet MPTC standards and the state has access. It’s not a matter of which background is better, just which is accessible.

    ^^^ this^^^

    With one caveat...
    That being “accessible or accepted”?
    I am not certain that Maryland has full access to Military records. But, AIUI, an honorable discharge document (DD214), or current active ID, is “accepted”.
     

    Hawkeye

    The Leatherstocking
    Jan 29, 2009
    3,971
    Guys, I want to remind everyone that despite repeated attempts to tell us just how much training cops have to get to do their jobs, this isn't about training. It's also not about how qualified someone is, or anything else like that. It's about the fact that laws like this create different classes of people, some of whom have to have a license to exercise their rights, and some who don't.

    Also, despite the repeated statements of how posts like mine are somehow harmful to police and to the relationship between police and non-police, it's not about having trouble with cops. It's about trouble with the fact that these laws divide us up and make some people license their rights while others don't have to. That's wrong. I certainly don't have an issue with police officers in general, and I don't believe that the things that I've said are damaging to the police. They certainly aren't meant to be.

    No one should be required to have a license in order to exercise a constitutional right. But if a stupid law says that some do, everyone should have to. This is exactly like saying "citizens will now require a license in order to vote, which requires fingerprinting, a background check, and a $100 fee. Elected politicians, by dint of the jobs they hold, however, are exempt."

    The trouble here... is your insistence that you are somehow made to suffer more to get to exercise your right to buy a firearm than the LEO is... YOU ARE WRONG. LEOs go through much more than you to do the very same thing.

    It's not about that. Like I've said repeatedly, and you've ignored repeatedly, it's not about training. It's not about how tough your job is, or how long you had to do it to pay back your training, or anything like that. It's about the fact that some people are required to have a license to exercise a right and others aren't.

    And since you can not exhibit simple respect and courtesy in your insisting that what I post is "harping"... Talk to your self. :tdown:

    I'm sorry, but I don't see how I've been anything other than courteous to you in this thread. I'm not the one, for the record, who started referring to someone else's posts as "asinine" or "********."

    License = Certificate
    Certificate = License

    Not in this sense. The legal sense of something that requires licensure is different from issuing a certificate that says you completed some training.
     

    RoadDawg

    Nos nostraque Deo
    Dec 6, 2010
    94,181
    Despite saying repeated that the issue is “which certification that the Maryland law accepts or does not accept in lieu of the HQL requirements”. Some are STILL stuck on the “training” issue.

    Meh.
     

    RoadDawg

    Nos nostraque Deo
    Dec 6, 2010
    94,181
    Well I have a pretty good idea how RD is going to get to 56K posts :)

    Meh... If folks don't want answers to their questions and challenges. They should stop asking. :shrug:

    As for the comment about a 56K post count... What does ANYONE win for it?

    Maybe Mr. H will be able to tell us.
     

    basscat

    Ultimate Member
    Jul 23, 2012
    1,390
    RD, I know you disagree with the HQL in general, as we all do, but just a simple yes or no question to you. Do you have any issue with the LEO,military exemption?
     

    RoadDawg

    Nos nostraque Deo
    Dec 6, 2010
    94,181
    RD, I know you disagree with the HQL in general, as we all do, but just a simple yes or no question to you. Do you have any issue with the LEO,military exemption?

    I'm sorry but... That question is NOT a "simple YES or NO question".

    IF it were ONLY LEO and Military... Yes... I might...

    However, unlike what some folks would have us believe... it is NOT. The exemption is NOT for ALL LEO and Military members/retirees. It is ONLY for those who ALREADY meet the minimum required certifications written into the HQL Law by the MGA.

    LEOs from other jurisdictions and members of other than US Military... do not get the exemption.

    And on top of that MANY others do qualify and do get complete or partial exemptions from various requirements of the HQL Law. I have yet to see any irritated posts calling any of them out because they are a "different class". So far the complaints have focused on the LEOs.

    My disagreement is and has been with the notion of "separate classes of persons". It is a ridiculous premise.

    FACT: Due to this ridiculous HQL Law... NO person is allowed to purchase a firearm in the State of Maryland UNLESS they meet the basic requirements of the Law WITH Certifications which are described in that Law, as meeting the requirements of that law. That's right... NO person can purchase firearms here without the required certification.

    - Those who already have the certifications which are accepted/recognized by the State of Maryland... are not required to repeat the process to get those certifications a second time before being legally allowed to purchase a firearm in the State of Maryland.

    - Those who do NOT already have the certifications which are determined within the HQL as necessary to satisfy the minimum State requirements... must obtain those certifications before they can purchase a firearm in the State of Maryland.

    All of this bickering and infighting because folks errantly believe that Police and Military are getting some kind of an unfair break... is simply feeding the ego of the very idiots who wrote the law and got it enacted.
     

    basscat

    Ultimate Member
    Jul 23, 2012
    1,390
    Lets try to put the training aside, again. Would you be ok with having LEO's and military having to PAY for fingerprints and PAY the application fee?
     

    RoadDawg

    Nos nostraque Deo
    Dec 6, 2010
    94,181
    Lets try to put the training aside, again. Would you be ok with having LEO's and military having to PAY for fingerprints and PAY the application fee?

    Yes... let’s put the training aside ... PLEASE!!!

    In fact... I already did put the training aside. Go back and read my last post. The one you just responded to.

    That’s right... I focused on “certification accepted and recognized by the State as sufficient for compliance with the HQL law”. You won’t even find the word “training” anywhere in that post.

    Those who have it already are not required to go back and get it over again. Nor should they be. It is redundant, wasteful, and serves no good purpose.
     

    basscat

    Ultimate Member
    Jul 23, 2012
    1,390
    If you don't want to answer the question then just say so. It's fine. Just trying to find out what LEO 's think of regular citizens having to pay for printing and app fees and exempt people don't.
     

    StantonCree

    Watch your beer
    Jan 23, 2011
    23,932
    If you don't want to answer the question then just say so. It's fine. Just trying to find out what LEO 's think of regular citizens having to pay for printing and app fees and exempt people don't.

    LEO here


    Hate the whole thing, entire process. It’s got nothing to do with safety and is a gun owner/recreational tax. It’s done nothing to further safety of MD residents.

    Take Baltimore out of the equation and I’d love to see Homicide stats for the rest of the state since it’s passing.

    DC Homicide is up almost 50% so be prepared for the STATS citing CCW has helped increase homicide which clearly is a skewed BS cause and effect argument
     

    RoadDawg

    Nos nostraque Deo
    Dec 6, 2010
    94,181
    If you don't want to answer the question then just say so. It's fine. Just trying to find out what LEO 's think of regular citizens having to pay for printing and app fees and exempt people don't.

    My answer is there... you may not like the answer. But it is most certainly there.

    To break it down for you so maybe you’ll accept it...

    • NO person should be required to pay ANY amount of money to ANY government agency... to be allowed to exercise a COTUS right.

    • I paid for mine. As did ever other LEO who attended the Academy when I did. We worked off the debt.

    • LEOs and Military Members are no more privileged or a different class than any other US Citizen. And claims to the contrary are ridiculous.
     

    Hawkeye

    The Leatherstocking
    Jan 29, 2009
    3,971
    • LEOs and Military Members are no more privileged or a different class than any other US Citizen. And claims to the contrary are ridiculous.

    Then they should also have to get a license to exercise their rights, right?
     

    1time

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 26, 2009
    2,258
    Baltimore, Md
    Then they should also have to get a license to exercise their rights, right?



    Yup, you are right. I will start calling my reps and see if they can make it so police need the HQL and in the name of all being equal, see if they can pass an amendment requiring 56 hrs a year of training to maintain it. That’s what the police require and they can’t shoot, right. Maybe add actual live fire with a real qual course instead of the current watered down version of live fire.

    Maybe I can get them to pass a bill to requirement to use pesticide or fertilizer. After all, I need to be licensed, so should you.

    You want to divide gun owners, so be it. The way to get around bad laws is to have it apply to less people, not more people but many aren’t smart enough to see it.
     

    ironpony

    Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 8, 2013
    7,189
    Davidsonville
    Then they should also have to get a license to exercise their rights, right?



    But Hawk, if that were in the original Bill it would have had a very slim chance of becoming a Law. This is sarcasm in some form and Yes I have an hql. Got it through Groupon though :)
     

    basscat

    Ultimate Member
    Jul 23, 2012
    1,390
    My answer is there... you may not like the answer. But it is most certainly there.

    To break it down for you so maybe you’ll accept it...

    • NO person should be required to pay ANY amount of money to ANY government agency... to be allowed to exercise a COTUS right.

    • I paid for mine. As did ever other LEO who attended the Academy when I did. We worked off the debt.

    • LEOs and Military Members are no more privileged or a different class than any other US Citizen. And claims to the contrary are ridiculous.


    You didn't really pay for it and you really didnt work off your dept. While you were "working off" your debt you were collecting a salary. The only time it would be a dept is if you quit within a 2 or 3 year time frame of graduating the academy. While you were in the academy getting training you were collecting a salary also. I think it a stretch to say you paid for it.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,916
    Messages
    7,258,566
    Members
    33,348
    Latest member
    Eric_Hehl

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom