HQL Training Exemption - AR Receivers

NateIU10 · Oct 8, 2015

As most of you know, we are in a fight with MSP regarding the sale of certain types of firearm receivers, which they claim have to go on a MSP 77R, but do not need an HQL. While I am dealing with that, I have run across an interesting by-product of the MSP's failed logic, and confirmed that MSP will allow lawful ownership of an AR-type receiver (or that of an AK, M1A, etc) to serve as an HQL training exemption. So, you don't need an HQL to buy an AR lower, but once you pick up the lower, you are now exempt from the HQL training.

As part of the Firearms Safety Act of 2013, a person must possess a valid handgun qualification license before they may purchase, rent, or receive a handgun. MD PUBLIC SAFETY § 5-117.1(c)(1). This is a general requirement subject to certain exceptions. If you, or your transaction, do not fall within an exception, a transferee must possess an HQL.

The Maryland State Police shall issue a handgun qualification license to a person who:

(1) is at least 21 years old; (2) is a resident of the State; (3) except as provided in subsection (e) of this section, has demonstrated satisfactory completion, within 3 years prior to the submission of the application, of a firearms safety training course approved by the Secretary that includes:
(i) a minimum of 4 hours of instruction by a qualified handgun instructor;
(ii) classroom instruction on: 1. State firearm law; 2. home firearm safety; and 3. handgun mechanisms and operation; and
(iii) a firearms orientation component that demonstrates the person’s
safe operation and handling of a firearm; and
(4) based on an investigation, is not prohibited by federal or State law from purchasing or possessing a handgun.

MD PUBLIC SAFETY § 5-117.1(e), in listing exceptions to the training requirements, provides that:

An applicant for a handgun qualification license is not required to complete a firearms safety training course under subsection (d) of this section if the applicant: (6) lawfully owns a regulated firearm.

MSP's Corporal Edwards has confirmed that, "The purchase of a lower receiver enumerated in statute or their copies would satisfy the waiver of the training requirement under PS 5-117.1 e6."

So, until we get them to change their interpretation, there is some benefit to a completely asinine MSP interpretation.

DC-W · Oct 8, 2015

Law of unintended consequences?

hodgepodge · Oct 8, 2015

Excellent.

My wife is deciding that she wants her own handgun. It would be her first.
So I can transfer a lower to her and she would be exempt from the training requirement.

Except she thinks a training class is a good idea. I'll have to explain the infringement part to her.

swinokur · Oct 8, 2015

so you don't need an HQL to buy it, but when you do have it, you are then considered the owner of a regulated firearm which you didn't need the HQL for to purchase in the first place according to MSP?

felony stupid.

NateIU10 · Oct 8, 2015

swinokur said:
so you don't need an HQL to buy it, but when you do have it, you are then considered the owner of a regulated firearm which you didn't need the HQL for to purchase in the first place according to MSP?

felony stupid.

Troof. It's an unintended consequence, but they have to accept that if they're claiming it needs to go on a 77R.

mvee · Oct 8, 2015

This post touches on something I have been wondering about. So is it your understanding that the MDSP is allowing the purchase of new m14 receivers? I suppose they could never be built into banned configurations. Very interesting...

NateIU10 · Oct 8, 2015

mvee said:
This post touches on something I have been wondering about. So is it your understanding that the MDSP is allowing the purchase of new m14 receivers? I suppose they could never be built into banned configurations. Very interesting...

Sure, why not.

They should be cash and carry, that's what we're fighting with MSP about now.

ken792 · Oct 8, 2015

mvee said:
This post touches on something I have been wondering about. So is it your understanding that the MDSP is allowing the purchase of new m14 receivers? I suppose they could never be built into banned configurations. Very interesting...

You could build an M14 pistol or SBR.

Brooklyn · Oct 8, 2015

DC-W said:
Law of unintended consequences?

The law of keep hiting them so they can't think.. many here knew at the time thst this might be possible and thankfully did not discuss the matter in public..

This is a sleeper win.

Brooklyn · Oct 8, 2015

swinokur said:
so you don't need an HQL to buy it, but when you do have it, you are then considered the owner of a regulated firearm which you didn't need the HQL for to purchase in the first place according to MSP?

felony stupid.

This was our doing.. it was one of our amendments that used regulated weapon not handgun.. they did not catch it..

This is a win.

Brooklyn · Oct 8, 2015

hodgepodge said:
Excellent.

My wife is deciding that she wants her own handgun. It would be her first.
So I can transfer a lower to her and she would be exempt from the training requirement.

Except she thinks a training class is a good idea. I'll have to explain the infringement part to her.

Just take training anyway.. but now its your Choice and you will not be limited to hql approved training...

clandestine · Oct 8, 2015

Nate,

Would a C&R Handgun purchased post 10/2013 on a 77r also satisfy the same requirement?

swinokur · Oct 8, 2015

I would think it would as the HQL statute simply says "owns a regulated firearm". No requirement or mention of a purchase date.

My .02.

BigT5g · Oct 8, 2015

Fascinating! Thanks for the post.

rsj1231 · Oct 8, 2015

This is hilarious. :lol2:

Keep up the good work, Nate. :thumbsup:

stringer bell · Oct 8, 2015

lol. They really are not good at their jobs.

NateIU10 · Oct 8, 2015

clandestine said:
Nate,

Would a C&R Handgun purchased post 10/2013 on a 77r also satisfy the same requirement?

Yes sir. I talked about that on here a while back with a few people. I know of at least 6 people that used that to get the HQL.

Jaybeez · Oct 8, 2015

clandestine · Oct 8, 2015

NateIU10 said:
Yes sir. I talked about that on here a while back with a few people. I know of at least 6 people that used that to get the HQL.

Thanks Nate.

fidelity · Oct 8, 2015

swinokur said:
so you don't need an HQL to buy it, but when you do have it, you are then considered the owner of a regulated firearm which you didn't need the HQL for to purchase in the first place according to MSP?

felony stupid.

Lol. Nicely put.

Nate, thanks for moving the football downfield. I guess that the lower training exemption for an HQL will go away if/when the state police allow AR-15 receiver sales via the same mechanism as AR-10 lower sales.

HQL Training Exemption - AR Receivers

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Senior Member (Gold)

In a State of Bliss

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

I stand with John Locke.

I stand with John Locke.

I stand with John Locke.

AR-15 Savant

In a State of Bliss

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

AR-15 Savant

piled higher and deeper

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics