LEO using 77R for banned "assault" weapons?

dblas · Nov 7, 2018

Nathaniel said:
What about magazines? Can retired Leo's buy, in state of Maryland. twenty or thirty rounds magazines.

Yes (4-305 of the Maryland Criminal Code annotated)

§ 4-305. Detachable magazines -- Prohibited
(a) Scope of section. -- This section does not apply to:
(1) a .22 caliber rifle with a tubular magazine; or
(2) a law enforcement officer or a person who retired in good standing from service with a law enforcement agency of the United States, the State, or any law enforcement agency in the State.
(b) Prohibited. -- A person may not manufacture, sell, offer for sale, purchase, receive, or transfer a detachable magazine that has a capacity of more than 10 rounds of ammunition for a firearm.

Nathaniel said:
And is there a waiting period for retired Leo's to buy a hand gun

Yes, they still have the waiting period, 77R, and 4473. They are not required to have an HQL.

(5-117.1(a)(2) of the Public Safety Code Annotated)

§ 5-117.1. Handgun qualification license required for purchase of handguns.
(a) Exclusions. -- This section does not apply to:
(1) a licensed firearms manufacturer;
(2) a law enforcement officer or person who is retired in good standing from service with a law enforcement agency of the United States, the State, or a local law enforcement agency of the State;
(3) a member or retired member of the armed forces of the United States or the National Guard; or
(4) a person purchasing, renting, or receiving an antique, curio, or relic firearm, as defined in federal law or in determinations published by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

Dingo3 · Nov 7, 2018

Yup. Two classes of citizens

swinokur · Nov 7, 2018

uh oh. wait for it........

Dingo3 · Nov 7, 2018

I know. Realized as soon as I posted.

Hawkeye · Nov 7, 2018

basscat said:
I guess some are just tired with exemptions for LEO 's with the gun laws. Makes it look like they are a class above us.

Dingo3 said:
Yup. Two classes of citizens

It's the truth, though, and it's what laws like that are intended to do.

And please, RoadDawg, before you chime in, realize that I'm not criticizing beat cops over this. I am criticizing the people who wrote the law. When laws are written with exemptions like this baked in to them, it's done for two reasons.

To get buy-in from LEO political organizations by giving a handout
To further the myth that some guns are so dangerous that "only the military and police..."

And sadly, the net effect of this IS that the gap between police and civilians is widened. Partly because the civilians are pissed off that the police can have things that they can't, and partly because it reinforces to the police the idea that somehow being cops makes them "better" than average people, and the psychological effects of that kind of reinforcement are well studied and dangerous for police. (And again, please realize that I'm not trying to lump all cops together or whatever, that's aimed at the guys who wear the "all men are created equal, and then some become police" shirts and that kind of BS.)

I'm not mad at you because you can go buy stuff I can't, I'm mad at the legislature that wrote the law that way, and I think it should be changed. I also think it's ******** that I can own some rifles that others can't just because of when I bought them. I've sold some friends on ARs lately, and trying to explain to them what they can and can't have is just painful.

ironpony · Nov 7, 2018

RoadDawg said:
Did you purchase a milpro AR prior to FSA2013?

If you did... by your own logic... you’re a better person than anyone else who lives in Maryland and did not... yet wants to own one.

If you really believe yourself to be a lesser citizen... I can’t/won’t tell you how/what to believe. But, I find the notion completely false.

I live in Maryland... I have restrictions on what I may or may not buy. There are folks living less than thirty miles from me... they can buy those things... and open carry them. Are they better than I? Am I a lesser citizen? Should I hope they lose their rights because I can’t do as they can? Should I get all sour grapes put out because of it... and act like they are somehow at fault in this when they buy/carry what they want?

Because I’m not... seeing them do as they can do gives me the hope that there is still a way for me to share in their freedoms IF WE WORK TOGETHER AND DON’T ALLOW THE SITUATION TO CAUSE A RIFT BETWEEN US.

I don’t believe anyone is better or lesser because of life’s issues. If that were true... you could simply be better than others by moving where there are less restrictions. And THAT would not make you better nor lesser than what any of us are.

Nope, no milpro ar, whatever that may be. In my original post the "Fight Club" reference was used so as not to shed too much light on the fact that some citizens still have more rights than others and therefore cause a rift(oh well). How can I be against the 2A in any form? If you have these rights still ... keep them! Rock on! Happy for Ya!

However, miscommunication has caused a rift, so be it. My parting words: Watch "Fight Club" its a pretty good movie!

RoadDawg · Nov 7, 2018

Hawkeye said:
It's the truth, though, and it's what laws like that are intended to do.

And please, RoadDawg, before you chime in, realize that I'm not criticizing beat cops over this. I am criticizing the people who wrote the law. When laws are written with exemptions like this baked in to them, it's done for two reasons.

To get buy-in from LEO political organizations by giving a handout

To further the myth that some guns are so dangerous that "only the military and police..."

And sadly, the net effect of this IS that the gap between police and civilians is widened. Partly because the civilians are pissed off that the police can have things that they can't, and partly because it reinforces to the police the idea that somehow being cops makes them "better" than average people, and the psychological effects of that kind of reinforcement are well studied and dangerous for police. (And again, please realize that I'm not trying to lump all cops together or whatever, that's aimed at the guys who wear the "all men are created equal, and then some become police" shirts and that kind of BS.)

I'm not mad at you because you can go buy stuff I can't, I'm mad at the legislature that wrote the law that way, and I think it should be changed. I also think it's ******** that I can own some rifles that others can't just because of when I bought them. I've sold some friends on ARs lately, and trying to explain to them what they can and can't have is just painful.

I understand...

But we in this community do a disservice to ourselves when we foster such ideas between us.

WE are not different classes of people. And saying that we are causes a jealousy rift for some folks... which places animosity where it need not be. It creates a “Us Vs. Them Mentality”. And the left LOVES the division between us. That... should not be. And WE should not be doing and saying things which further their agenda

ironpony said:
Nope, no milpro ar, whatever that may be. In my original post the "Fight Club" reference was used so as not to shed too much light on the fact that some citizens still have more rights than others and therefore cause a rift(oh well). How can I be against the 2A in any form? If you have these rights still ... keep them! Rock on! Happy for Ya!

However, miscommunication has caused a rift, so be it. My parting words: Watch "Fight Club" its a pretty good movie!

Milpro = Military Profile :shrug:

(non HBAR)

“oh well”? Sorry... I am not comfortable with hating on others for things which are out of their control. And labeling others as a “different class” is most certainly no compliment.

I actually heard someone bitching about the fact that LEOs are not required to get a HQL. And the requirements for training and fingerprints is unfair and LEOs should be required to go through the same process as everyone else. So... I invited that person to attend the same number of MONTHS of training... and go through the same WEEKS of background checks and fingerprinting and medical and psychological testing as the LEOs must go through just to get the job. Naturally... they declined.

Dingo3 · Nov 7, 2018

If there aren’t separate classes of people, shouldn’t LEOs be required to jump through the same hoops as everyone else for an HQL? Or at least pay the state the cost of training, background, and fingerprints? After all, everyone else paid for the LEOs training and background check through taxes

Not_an_outlaw · Nov 7, 2018

RoadDawg said:
Have you considered becoming a LEO?

I assure you... though there are some aspects of the job you may feel are attractive. There are a HOST more that you won’t find appealing.

I do not appreciate the restrictions that the MGA has chosen for the citizens of Maryland. But, I’m not inclined to be acting like it’s the fault of the folks who are not restricted as much. Police are an extremely small percentage of the Maryland population. The greater part of that population are the ones who voted into office... the very folks who made those restrictions into law. Focus your ire on THEM.

Yes, but sadly too old and too fat.

Hawkeye · Nov 7, 2018

RoadDawg said:
WE are not different classes of people.

That's very true, except that the law treats us that way, which is what I have an issue with.

I actually heard someone bitching about the fact that LEOs are not required to get a HQL

And if LEOs aren't a "special class," then why shouldn't they be required to get one?

rbird7282 · Nov 7, 2018

Dingo3 said:
If there aren’t separate classes of people, shouldn’t LEOs be required to jump through the same hoops as everyone else for an HQL? Or at least pay the state the cost of training, background, and fingerprints? After all, everyone else paid for the LEOs training and background check through taxes

They should. They don’t need an HQL but they still have a 7 day wait with a background check. Should have the same magazine restrictions too, on or off duty.
Having said the above, NONE of the lawful citizens should have a magazine restriction and NONE should have to have an HQL.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

RoadDawg · Nov 10, 2018

Dingo3 said:
If there aren’t separate classes of people, shouldn’t LEOs be required to jump through the same hoops as everyone else for an HQL? Or at least pay the state the cost of training, background, and fingerprints? After all, everyone else paid for the LEOs training and background check through taxes

Next you’ll expect the Military members with a Military ID Card to get HQLs because tax payers paid for their training and fingerprints. Maryland Law does not require them to get one either.

https://mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=137791

Since the Military and LE members of this forum... are here in support of this community... and are not in any way of the opinion that we are a different class of people than other members because of some asshat law designed to cause us all grief in our community...
Can we please dump the different class of people bs?

It does not serve ANY of us... yet it does pit us against each other in an “Us Vs. Them” division of the membership. Do we really need the angst and butthurt?

ironpony · Nov 10, 2018

deleted.

StantonCree · Nov 10, 2018

Lol I’m a LEO who has worked in exceptionally violent areas for over 10 years and was required to obtain a HQL.

I guess I’m a sub class inside the class.

#RevoltFist

Hawkeye · Nov 10, 2018

RoadDawg said:
Next you’ll expect the Military members with a Military ID Card to get HQLs

Yes, I would expect exactly that.

Can we please dump the different class of people bs?

No. Because two things:

1. Do you think that law would have had a snowball's chance in hell of passing if they hadn't cut out the exemptions for LEO and Military folks?

2. The "but police and military are different" line of logic is EXACTLY how we end up with things like G&S for carry permits and all the other crap. Laws should either treat everyone the same, or they shouldn't exist.

I am very happy that you and other LEOs and military folks are all here, but you guys should be treated no differently than anyone else when it comes to our rights.

1time · Nov 10, 2018

Hawkeye said:
Yes, I would expect exactly that.

No. Because two things:

1. Do you think that law would have had a snowball's chance in hell of passing if they hadn't cut out the exemptions for LEO and Military folks?

2. The "but police and military are different" line of logic is EXACTLY how we end up with things like G&S for carry permits and all the other crap. Laws should either treat everyone the same, or they shouldn't exist.

I am very happy that you and other LEOs and military folks are all here, but you guys should be treated no differently than anyone else when it comes to our rights.

I think the HQL thing is shitty but the morons elected morons that wanted to make training mandatory. It just so happens that our job provides the required annual training and background checks. We are not exempt because we are different class, we are exempt because we already have it because MPTC requires it. MPTC mandates how many hours a year is dedicated to home firearm safety, shooting, qualification standards, use of force guidelines and a plethora of other requirements. I spend about a week and a half a year in mandatory training every year and more in specialized training. No training= suspended and no ID card= no handguns without an HQL.

ironpony · Nov 10, 2018

Hawkeye said:
Yes, I would expect exactly that.

No. Because two things:

1. Do you think that law would have had a snowball's chance in hell of passing if they hadn't cut out the exemptions for LEO and Military folks?

2. The "but police and military are different" line of logic is EXACTLY how we end up with things like G&S for carry permits and all the other crap. Laws should either treat everyone the same, or they shouldn't exist.

I am very happy that you and other LEOs and military folks are all here, but you guys should be treated no differently than anyone else when it comes to our rights.

Good Point!

1time said:
I think the HQL thing is shitty but the morons elected morons that wanted to make training mandatory. It just so happens that our job provides the required annual training and background checks. We are not exempt because we are different class, we are exempt because we already have it because MPTC requires it. MPTC mandates how many hours a year is dedicated to home firearm safety, shooting, qualification standards, use of force guidelines and a plethora of other requirements. I spend about a week and a half a year in mandatory training every year and more in specialized training. No training= suspended and no ID card= no handguns without an HQL.

Good Point!

HQL vs LEO / .mil training, what about background checks for each? seems more and more of the shootings are crazy people who may or may not have needed check ups. Church shooter down South would not have passed a background check had the Air Force (?) transferred info to NICS.

What class would my grandmother be in? Down Carolina she can buy a pistol and carry it! Yeah, the whole class thing seems to have more to do with the politicians. Is it wise to make a law requiring background checks then exempt a person since they served in the armed forces 30 years ago?

LOL, if these people making the laws needed illegals on their side they may have exempted them ... or given them money, or drivers licenses, or food , or public schooling, or housing,

No offense meant to anyone.

RoadDawg · Nov 11, 2018

Hawkeye said:
Yes, I would expect exactly that.

No. Because two things:

1. Do you think that law would have had a snowball's chance in hell of passing if they hadn't cut out the exemptions for LEO and Military folks?

2. The "but police and military are different" line of logic is EXACTLY how we end up with things like G&S for carry permits and all the other crap. Laws should either treat everyone the same, or they shouldn't exist.

I am very happy that you and other LEOs and military folks are all here, but you guys should be treated no differently than anyone else when it comes to our rights.

I’ll remember that when I go get fingerprinted for the umpteenth time AGAIN to renew my Md. CCW.

And I’ll ALSO remember how many times I’ve seen posts from certain folks about how “Police should be held to a higher standard” ... and “receive more penalties than the average citizens”. The two faces on the two classes of people concept seems to escape the minds of some. :sad20:

they want it to benefit them both ways.

RoadDawg · Nov 11, 2018

1time said:
I think the HQL thing is shitty but the morons elected morons that wanted to make training mandatory. It just so happens that our job provides the required annual training and background checks. We are not exempt because we are different class, we are exempt because we already have it because MPTC requires it. MPTC mandates how many hours a year is dedicated to home firearm safety, shooting, qualification standards, use of force guidelines and a plethora of other requirements. I spend about a week and a half a year in mandatory training every year and more in specialized training. No training= suspended and no ID card= no handguns without an HQL.

Yepper... maybe some folks would be happy to go through months of training BEFORE being allowed to carry a hand gun... and then at least a week of classroom and a re-qualification live fire course of several hundred rounds EVERY year... so they can be a “different class of person”. :sad20:

They should be careful what they ask for.

1time · Nov 11, 2018

ironpony said:
Good Point!

Good Point!

HQL vs LEO / .mil training, what about background checks for each? seems more and more of the shootings are crazy people who may or may not have needed check ups. Church shooter down South would not have passed a background check had the Air Force (?) transferred info to NICS.

What class would my grandmother be in? Down Carolina she can buy a pistol and carry it! Yeah, the whole class thing seems to have more to do with the politicians. Is it wise to make a law requiring background checks then exempt a person since they served in the armed forces 30 years ago?

LOL, if these people making the laws needed illegals on their side they may have exempted them ... or given them money, or drivers licenses, or food , or public schooling, or housing,

No offense meant to anyone.

I don’t understand the background check for the HQL. When you do the MSP paperwork they do a background check. The prints for the HQL doesn’t do any more of a background check then the one done at the point of sale. For long guns it is just a NICS check which isn’t as in-depth as the check when MSP does it.

Police don’t get so skip the background check on normal purchases and requiring it for the HQL is just redundant.

LEO using 77R for banned "assault" weapons?

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Past President, MSI

Ultimate Member

In a State of Bliss

Ultimate Member

The Leatherstocking

Member

Nos nostraque Deo

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

The Leatherstocking

Ultimate Member

Nos nostraque Deo

Member

Watch your beer

The Leatherstocking

Ultimate Member

Member

Nos nostraque Deo

Nos nostraque Deo

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics