You are right, lost my train of thought.
I'd attach a document showing arrest powers.
FSA2013 HQL exemptions "re interpreted?
- Thread starter Doobie
- Start date
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!
Member Benefits:
You are right, lost my train of thought.
I'd attach a document showing arrest powers.
redeemed.man
Ultimate Member
Not sure there is anything "you" can do. You have your hql so you don't have standing for a lawsuit in this situation would be my guess. Your local delegates and state senators can request a formal opinion from the AG. Might be a good place to start.
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Not for me per se, but for the rest of the Federal COs who are MD residents and are planning to purchase a handgun. What can be done?
The document is a Google search away...Title 18, United States Code 3050.
MSP KNOWS this since it is what allows us to be covered under LEOSA. Billy also quoted it to the handgun licensing division when he made contact about the issue.
When it came to be that Federal COs were covered under LEOSA, I was told that local police(not sure if MSP was also involved) tried to or did arrest a Federal CO for carrying a concealed weapon because they either didn't know LEOSA covered them or just refused to believe it.
redeemed.man
Ultimate Member
Contact the governor, local delegates, and state senators in your area about this abuse of power by MSP. They don't have the authority to rewrite the law and they have no formal opinion from the AG to stand behind their actions. They don't get to decide what a federal LEO is, that is for the federal government to do and they have already decided you are.
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Thanks brother. I'm on it. I'm going to get as many of my co workers involved as I can.
redeemed.man
Ultimate Member
At least in your part of the state you have some conservative delegates and senators who may be willing to help. Not so much over here in the Baltimore Washington Corridor.
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
We will see what Western Maryland's reps do. I'll definitely keep MDS updated.
Ask your representative to insist the AG issue an opinion. Then we'll see how big MSP's balls are.
redeemed.man
Ultimate Member
I will. I find it interesting that now we're not HQL exempt since we work for the BOP, but we are training exempt because we are classified as LEOs. Talk about speaking out of both sides of ones mouth.
"A person may not purchase, rent, or receive a handgun after October 1, 2013 unless they possess a valid Handgun Qualification License (HQL) issued by the Maryland State Police or qualify for exemption status.
Exceptions to possession of the HQL License
A Licensed Firearms Manufacturer.
Active law enforcement officer or a person retired in good standing from a law enforcement agency of the United States (Federal Law Enforcement), the State, or a local law enforcement agency of the State.
Active or retired member of the United States Armed Forces or National Guard and possesses a valid military identification card.
A person purchasing, renting or receiving an antique, curio or relic as defined in federal law.
Maryland licensed firearms dealers. (Sole Proprietors)"
Directly from MSP handgun licensing division website.
Do you see where or how the BOP is excluded? I don't. How can they interpret it to mean that we are excluded? We are classified as LEO and covered under LEOSA as such regardless of their OPINION...period.
esqappellate
President, MSI
- Feb 12, 2012
- 7,408
See attached LEOSA decision regarding corrections officers from the DC Circuit. Persuasive force in the 4th Circuit.
basscat
Ultimate Member
- Jul 23, 2012
- 1,398
Nope, not even that. He's not even in licensing div anymore.
redeemed.man
Ultimate Member
If this is the DC corrections officer opinion it is not the same as the federal Bureau of Prisons. DC corrections officers were never classified as law enforcement by the federal government. IMHO it should not be influential when it involves a completely different local not federal agency. IANAL
That being said the DC corrections officers won anyway didn't they?
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/06/03/dc-must-let-ex-prison-guards-pack-heat-federal-court-rules.html
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
redeemed.man
Ultimate Member
As of when? I received an email from him in May. His email signature read security guard licensing.
basscat
Ultimate Member
- Jul 23, 2012
- 1,398
End of this month
redeemed.man
Ultimate Member
So he is moving beginning in September? Where to?
This esqappallate. Not being rude or a smarty pants.
esqappellate
President, MSI
- Feb 12, 2012
- 7,408
Agreed, it is not controlling. The point is that MD MSP needs to look to federal law to see if the federal CO has arrest powers, just as the D.C. Circuit looked to federal law in deciding the LEOSA question in Duberry. The MSP is on very thin ice if they try to define the HQL exemption for LEOs differently than the way LEOs are defined for purposes of LEOSA.
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
-
3rd Circuit Case - Range v Atty General Non-Violent Misdemeanor as a Prohibitor (2 Viewers)- Latest: Inigoes
-
MDS Team Building. Intro to Pistol AND Rifle with Ninja. July 27&28 Clear Run, NC. (2 Viewers)
- Latest: 4g64loser
-
