MSP: FIREARM PURCHASE APPLICANTS WITH APPLICATIONS PENDING ON OCT 1 WON'T NEED HQL

danb said:

It's far worse than that: they spent it on paperwork. Not one murder or violent crime prevented or solved. They lost money on the lawsuit, and they likely will spend a lot more losing more lawsuits.

Click to expand...

And just think, if the FFL's were allowed to run these checks like they do in every other state...

Parrot said:

I called Freestate yesterday and they said they would.

Click to expand...

You'll have about 5 handguns to choose from.
They were cleaned out as of Sunday.

Randy will have the delivery trucks incoming for you so keep looking.

danb said:

It's far worse than that: they spent it on paperwork. Not one murder or violent crime prevented or solved. They lost TAXPAYER money on the lawsuit, and they likely will spend a lot more losing more lawsuits WHICH MEANS ANOTHERR TAX INCREASE FOR US.

Click to expand...

FIFY

AntiGun said:

You'll have about 5 handguns to choose from.
They were cleaned out as of Sunday.

Randy will have the delivery trucks incoming for you so keep looking.

Click to expand...

Already got my new SIG and only waited 8 days!

https://www.mdsp.org/News/PressRele...tail/mid/1088/xmid/21998/xmfid/4/Default.aspx

quoted from the link above.
"The Maryland State Police (MSP) will not enforce the requirements of the new law with respect to applicants whose applications are pending as of October 1."

The MSP still say it is a violation of MD law to receive a handgun without an HQL(or exception) after Oct, 1.

The FFL holder has agreed to follow all laws, State and Federal. Violating MD law could cause the FFL to loose the license. How many dealers are willing to find out?

Several States have legalized POT, the Feds still say it is a violation of Federal law to have it, but they will not enforce. Everyone with a clearance has been told it will cause you to loose your clearance if you go to a state that allows it and you get caught.

This is some fishy shit but a friend of mines wants to get her a gun. So I got to find her a gun shop still willing to donthe 8th day release.

Parrot said:

Already got my new SIG and only waited 8 days!

Click to expand...

It really shows you how bad Maryland has become when this excites us.

What happens if a County Officer has an encounter and discovers an unlawful transfer occurred after 10/1 and the State's Attorney for that county decides to prosecute? Does the MSP memo exonerate the accused? Just because one arm of the "law" decides not to enforce a law, how does that affect other law enforcement?

I think that the MDSP has caused bigger issues than they may have considered.

The giglio/henthorn implications of their actions is epic.

Just in from Nancy Jacobs:

Dear Pro Gun Advocate:

The Maryland State Police announced late yesterday that anyone who purchased a handgun before October 1 will not be required to have a Handgun Qualification License (HQL) in order to pick up their purchase after October 1 when the gun law goes into effect. You may read their press release.

During the discussions in committee on SB 281 prior to its' passage we were assured that anyone who purchased a handgun before October 1 would not be required to get a HQL as long as they bought it before October 1. Only people purchasing handguns after October 1 would be required to obtain the HQL.

This summer the Attorney General's office issued an opinion that those people who did not have their paperwork back from the MD State Police (MSP) by October 1 would now have to get their HQL before they could pick up their firearm purchase.

We all are well aware of the furry this created resulting in another rush to purchase more firearms, and it has created an even larger backup for the MSP to process. In their panic mode to process the background checks so people could have their fire arms before October 1, the MSP made mistakes and compromised private information including social security numbers of people purchasing firearms.

I feel certain THAT ALL OF THIS WAS done on the Governor's orders. In his pursuit of getting this legislation passed, he DID NOT PROVIDE the FINANCIAL resources that would be needed for additional, qualified staff THAT the MSP would need to process the applications, EVEN AFTER MSP REQUESTED THEM.

I think the MSP is showing through this press release that it had a different opinion than that of the AG's office all along, and has now deferred back to not only what was discussed in committee but the original intent of grandfathering in prior purchases and ownership of any firearm before 10-1-13 .

I've received numerous emails from law abiding citizens who are in shock that the MSP would now tell them that it is OK for them to break the law the Governor fought so hard to put in place. I feel that the MSP has stepped up to the plate by recognizing the original intent of the law. Why?

PERHAPS:
They finally decided to quit following the Governor's orders and do what they all along thought was the right thing.
The governor was finally made to realize he went totally overboard and has no chance of winning the democrat primary for President especially if his gun bill is over turned (we could have told him he didn't stand a chance anyway).
After Monday's hearing on the gun regulations they realized they don't have a leg to stand on when they get taken to court. It was obvious they didn't have the right answers to our questionsLOL and that the law would be very vulnerable in a court challenge.
This could be one of those "all of the above" answers, but in actuality I think the MSP didn't want to be a part of this charade from the beginning but felt they had no choice.

We all know the "higher ups" at the MSP must follow the Governor's orders when it comes to supporting his legislative agenda in Annapolis. Most of the fine men and women in law enforcement I know thought SB 281 was worthless, and would do nothing to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

I am of the opinion that those in power used horrendous tragedies in an effort to advance political careers.....it wasn't about keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. If that had been the case they wouldn't have voted down our "tough on crime" amendments to the bill.

I think the Anti-Gun puppets of the Governor('S ADMINISTRATION) have finally come to realization they have gone too far. They can't defend what they have done in SB 281, and the reality has sunk in that they won't have a leg to stand on when SB 281 is taken to court. It was obvious at the gun regulation hearing in Annapolis on Monday that they knew they were in trouble, and now they are being forced to back pedal.

Now the governor is attempting to make the MSP take the fall for his egotistical hunger for political power!

I for one will not sit idly by and allow that to happen. The Governor is there taking credit when the cameras are rolling at bill hearings, but is suddenly missing in action forcing others to take the blame for his missteps.

Real leadership is about taking responsibility for your actions - especially when you are wrong!

Sincerely,

Senator Nancy C. Jacobs

JettaRed said:

How many tax dollars does it take to pay for 24,000 hours of overtime? Were they paid straight time, time-and-a-half, double-time for weekends and holidays? Just wondering where that money could have better been spent (or not spent).

The mid-range of a trooper salary is ~$58k. That equates to $27.88 per hour. Depending on how overtime is paid (assume time-and-a-half), the 24,000 overtime hours cost Maryland tax payers at least $1,003,846!!!

Good use of public funds.

Click to expand...

This cost is then amplified by the DECREASE in effectiveness of the 77r reviews processed each month.

I've posed the ? To Sen Brinkley if any one has matched the number of overtime hours and its cost to the number of PROCESSED applications each month. Spending more money and getting LESS done should retain lay call into question the degree to which the MSP Brass is fit for their job.

I'll follow up again with his leg aide again this morning as I've several other things in flight with the Senator.



---
Shamr0ck

ShallNotInfringe said:

Just in from Nancy Jacobs:

Dear Pro Gun Advocate:


...

I feel that the MSP has stepped up to the plate by recognizing the original intent of the law. Why?

...

Senator Nancy C. Jacobs

Click to expand...

I have to disagree with her. If the intent of the law were as she says, then the General Assembly would have used language similar to the written exception that was made for receiving banned assault long guns (ALGs) after Oct 1.

Their making the written exception for ALGs, shows that the law did not intend to allow receiving a handgun after Oct 1 with a HQL or other written exception.

ShallNotInfringe said:

Just in from Nancy Jacobs:

... The Governor is there taking credit when the cameras are rolling at bill hearings, but is suddenly missing in action forcing others to take the blame for his missteps.

Real leadership is about taking responsibility for your actions - especially when you are wrong!

Click to expand...

^^^THIS^^^

pilotguy299 said:

I have to disagree with her. If the intent of the law were as she says, then the General Assembly would have used language similar to the written exception that was made for receiving banned assault long guns (ALGs) after Oct 1.

Their making the written exception for ALGs, shows that the law did not intend to allow receiving a handgun after Oct 1 with a HQL or other written exception.

Click to expand...

Just reporting the message.

Completely agree. If that was the intent, they would have written an exception.

So now we are further divided. The administration saying it's ok to break the law, Pro 2A people are praising the decision for the police to dismiss the law...

Can't wait to see the next installment of "How Maryland Turns". What a rollercoaster. As long as you're strapped in the car that is, not on the rails.

I think Senator Nancy C. Jacobs sums this mess up perfectly.

MDSP Licensing web page still reads:

https://www.mdsp.org/Organization/S...ion/Firearms/HandgunQualificationLicense.aspx

"Unless otherwise exempt, as of October 1, 2013, a person must possess a valid Handgun Qualification License before they may purchase, rent, or receive a handgun. Details on exemptions may be found below. You do not need a Handgun Qualification License to own a gun you already have. The Handgun Qualification License is only needed for purchasing, transferring, or renting a regulated firearm after October 1, 2013."

If you were to look at this from a non-subjective point of view, without any knowledge of the "discussions" and went solely by the text of the law, would anyone come to the conclusion that it was legal to receive a handgun post Oct 1 without having a HQL or one of the exceptions listed in the written law?

This is an example of where "assumed intent" is not in line with what was written and turned in to law.

While Sen Jacobs letter was a little lengthy, I think her primary point is still the driving factor.

Someone within the administration finally saw the light after Monday's hearings and realized 2 things:

1) the law as written and as out into COMAR is going to be a nightmare for them to defend in court. There is real potential that the entire law could be struck given there is no severability clause

2) Gun owners as a committee are not backing down. They were surprised during the session by how many of us showed up but thought it would die down quickly and be forgotten. Monday was a wake up call to them that not only are we still energized, but we understand the law more intimately than the people who wrote it.

The key factor: MOM has been VERY quiet in all of this since the entire 77r fiasco.

pilotguy299 said:

If you were to look at this from a non-subjective point of view, without any knowledge of the "discussions" and went solely by the text of the law, would anyone come to the conclusion that it was legal to receive a handgun post Oct 1 without having a HQL or one of the exceptions listed in the written law?

This is an example of where "assumed intent" is not in line with what was written and turned in to law.

Click to expand...

Yes, especially after seeing the notification on the official MSP website when they went to apply.

Parrot said:

Yes, especially after seeing the notification on the official MSP website when they went to apply.

Click to expand...

Advisory notices do not have the force of law.

Look, I am not saying that people will actually be convicted. Especially in light of the MDSPs Advisory notice.

What I am saying is that we should expect the MDSP to follow the written law, even if we disagree with it.