Is my thinking wrong?

dmable44 · Jan 12, 2019

Now having a 40 minute commute to work I have a lot of time to ponder and my curiosity runs wild.

I’m from PA, never had anything like the HQL. No license/course to own any firearm. I grew up with them and was taught proper safety, storage and transport all my life. I’m all for someone that doesn’t know any better or is new to firearms going and taking a course. I think that’s a great idea.

Now, it’s my constitutional right to own and keep firearms. I don’t want to go down the argumentative rabbit hole of why, but it’s my constitutional right.

With that being said, MD has the HQL which according to MSP (and my understanding of their website) is required to buy/sell/transfer firearms. Being a constitutional right to have firearms, I think it’s wrong for the state to make money off of a constitutional right we have by paying for the courses, fingerprints, etc.

Having owned firearms coming into MD, I am not required to get my HQL. As the MSP website also says that anything owned prior to coming in is fine. So now all I’m doing is 80%s, no buying, selling, or transferring, so no need to HQL.

So here’s my thinking wrapped up:

I have a constitutional right to buy, own and keep firearms, therefore I believe it is wrong and unconstitutional for the state to make money off of my right. If it was free, I would have no problem with it.

Is my thinking wrong? Right? Yes and no? Out in left field?

Pale Ryder · Jan 12, 2019

I think you're pretty much right, and the HQL only pertains to handguns. I had handguns before the law took effect, so have not gotten the license. I'm former military and I know there are some exceptions, just not sure of details. Maybe someday I'll have to get the license, maybe I'll just move to free America.

whistlersmother · Jan 12, 2019

Even if it were free, I'd have a problem with it. No one needs a license or qualification to exercise 1A or to be protected with the 4A, 5A, 6A, so why should the 2A be so burdened?

dmable44 · Jan 12, 2019

whistlersmother said:
Even if it were free, I'd have a problem with it. No one needs a license or qualification to exercise 1A or to be protected with the 4A, 5A, 6A, so why should the 2A be so burdened?

Well that’s what my next thought was, after I pondered on my first thought for a few days

dmable44 · Jan 12, 2019

Pale Ryder said:
I think you're pretty much right, and the HQL only pertains to handguns. I had handguns before the law took effect, so have not gotten the license. I'm former military and I know there are some exceptions, just not sure of details. Maybe someday I'll have to get the license, maybe I'll just move to free America.

My understanding it was for any firearms that I wanted to buy, sell or transfer? So I could walk into a shop and buy a shotgun or a Winchester 94 and be good to go? What about AR lowers?

DanGuy48 · Jan 12, 2019

dmable44 said:
My understanding it was for any firearms that I wanted to buy, sell or transfer? So I could walk into a shop and buy a shotgun or a Winchester 94 and be good to go? What about AR lowers?

Just like its name says, “Handgun Qualification License”.

BUT......

“The Handgun Qualification License is only needed for purchasing, transferring, or renting a regulated firearm after October 1, 2013.
Please go to http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2013RS/chapters_noln/Ch_427_sb0281E.pdf in order to view the full text of the Law”

https://www.msrpa.org/pdf/document11_92.pdf

Best thing is to pick your firearm of interest and talk with a knowledgeable FFL holder about what you want to do with it.

dmable44 · Jan 12, 2019

It’s for “regulated” firearms, but to buy a complete rifle it’s my understanding you still need an HQL to do so. Since you could build a lower into a pistol, I get the “handgun” part of the HQL which is required for lowers.

Back when I moved down, I initially wanted to figure out the laws and what I did have to do and didn’t have to do. I talked to different shops, posted on here and went on the MSP website and it was like pulling teeth to get a straight answer. Took me two weeks to finally figure out all I had to register was my Glock 19 and if I wanted to purchase, sell or transfer any firearm I’d need my HQL. That’s according to the MSP website which said one thing on one page and then something different on another. Very aggravating. So it’s handguns and regulated firearms, that’s it? Or is it something completely different on another thread on here haha

IX-3 · Jan 12, 2019

dmable44 said:
My understanding it was for any firearms that I wanted to buy, sell or transfer? So I could walk into a shop and buy a shotgun or a Winchester 94 and be good to go? What about AR lowers?

As long as the shotgun or rifle is not banned by the state you can walk into any FFL, pay, and come home with it that day no HQL required.

AR-15 lowers are considered regulated and require an HQL and 7 day waiting period.

whistlersmother · Jan 12, 2019

Lowers need 77R, but if sold as "other" do not need HQL.

Rifles and shotguns are all cash-n-carry after the dealer does NICS check.

Handguns newer than 50 years require HQL.

Handguns older than 50 years do not require HQL because they are C&R which are exempt from HQL by law.

All handguns and lowers transferred as handguns must go through 77R and 7 day wait.

You want logic? You'll find none in MD firearm law.

I bought a collectible handgun from another member. It is over 50 years old. I had to have it transferred via 77R and 7 day wait, but did not need HQL.

randomuser · Jan 12, 2019

Your thinking is spot on.
I'm prior military and do or dont already have rifles and pistols.
What I'll admit I dont have is an hql.
Won't get one.
I refuse.
Its an unjust tax.
Its another list that the government gets to put you on.
Its not that I dont have the money to give the state, its that I refuse on principal.
Its just another way for them to take your money.
I pay plenty in taxes as it is through my business it makes me sick. Not sick to pay for legit stuff. So much however is not legit.
Sick when I see how its spent. Go watch some Trey Gowdy congressional oversight videos on YouTube and you will see why the national debt is so bad.
I'd vote Gowdy for president any day of the week.

Threeband · Jan 12, 2019

It's not the money. It's the entire infringement. Even if it were free it would be an unconstititional infringement. Even if they paid ME to get the HQL, it would STILL be a tyrannical infringement.

Tell me again why it's bad, in principal, to require prospective voters to pass a simple literacy test, or civics test, or currant events test?

dmable44 · Jan 12, 2019

whistlersmother said:
Lowers need 77R, but if sold as "other" do not need HQL.

Rifles and shotguns are all cash-n-carry after the dealer does NICS check.

Handguns newer than 50 years require HQL.

Handguns older than 50 years do not require HQL because they are C&R which are exempt from HQL by law.

All handguns and lowers transferred as handguns must go through 77R and 7 day wait.

You want logic? You'll find none in MD firearm law.

I bought a collectible handgun from another member. It is over 50 years old. I had to have it transferred via 77R and 7 day wait, but did not need HQL.

So how do you get the dealer or shop to sell a lower as “other” because every shop I’ve talked to they made it seem like they require HQL for everything AR. I understand they don’t want to risk breaking the law and getting shutdown but if they are on our side of this why wouldn’t they be telling people about this kind of stuff and sell lowers as “other”?

Threeband said:
It's not the money. It's the entire infringement. Even if it were free it would be an unconstititional infringement. Even if they paid ME to get the HQL, it would STILL be a tyrannical infringement.

Tell me again why it's bad, in principal, to require prospective voters to pass a simple literacy test, or civics test, or currant events test?

This. I totally agree with this. While I said I’d be okay if it were free, you are absolutely right in it still being an infringement. I guess if it were free, I wouldn’t be AS aggravated.

randomuser · Jan 12, 2019

I spoke of it being a tax and stated its not about the money as it was a refusal on principal. The principal is the fact that it is not needed. It is just as you say an infringement. I will not participate. It's wrong on so many levels.
Again, this is a place where because we do not have solidarity we end up losing.

I hate to say that I have been seeing more solidarity in France than I feel we would see in the United States when it comes to people supporting the people. Look at the approval ratings from the people for what is happening. I'm curious to see how that all ends up. At the end of the day, it shows that the government there is clearly not a representative of the people and does not work for the people.
https://www.npr.org/2018/12/03/6728...-yellow-vest-protesters-and-what-do-they-want

Not saying we need riots, but we need more of a voice to affect any actual change. Pro 2a does not seem to have a voice (not one that I hear as loud as teh dems and I'm always listening_)
The emails that people are sending to politicians are a prime example. You send a well worded email giving your thoughts to the politicians against gun control and they thank you for your support.
Keep sending those emails. We need to have more of an impact on the changes coming from the anti 2a politicians.

Pale Ryder · Jan 12, 2019

randomuser said:
Your thinking is spot on.
I'm prior military and do or dont already have rifles and pistols.
What I'll admit I dont have is an hql.
Won't get one.
I refuse.
Its an unjust tax.
Its another list that the government gets to put you on.
Its not that I dont have the money to give the state, its that I refuse on principal.
Its just another way for them to take your money.
I pay plenty in taxes as it is through my business it makes me sick. Not sick to pay for legit stuff. So much however is not legit.
Sick when I see how its spent. Go watch some Trey Gowdy congressional oversight videos on YouTube and you will see why the national debt is so bad.
I'd vote Gowdy for president any day of the week.

I agree. Congress would still find a way to hobble him though.

PowPow · Jan 13, 2019

randomuser said:
I spoke of it being a tax and stated its not about the money as it was a refusal on principal. The principal is the fact that it is not needed. It is just as you say an infringement. I will not participate. It's wrong on so many levels.
Again, this is a place where because we do not have solidarity we end up losing.

I hate to say that I have been seeing more solidarity in France than I feel we would see in the United States when it comes to people supporting the people. Look at the approval ratings from the people for what is happening. I'm curious to see how that all ends up. At the end of the day, it shows that the government there is clearly not a representative of the people and does not work for the people.
https://www.npr.org/2018/12/03/6728...-yellow-vest-protesters-and-what-do-they-want

Not saying we need riots, but we need more of a voice to affect any actual change. Pro 2a does not seem to have a voice (not one that I hear as loud as teh dems and I'm always listening_)
The emails that people are sending to politicians are a prime example. You send a well worded email giving your thoughts to the politicians against gun control and they thank you for your support.
Keep sending those emails. We need to have more of an impact on the changes coming from the anti 2a politicians.

You are only seeing what the media wants you to see in France. The dirty little secret (if you find and read their full list of demands) of the yellow vests is that they want MORE socialist policies. It was not just about the fuel tax. So, in a sense, what you happened into was a comparison of the socialist left in France and the rising socialist movement within the United States.

The question is, will patriots in the United States be able to form enough solidarity to halt the already well-organized left which is supported by the media and the ultra rich?

Nay_sayer · Jan 13, 2019

randomuser said:
I spoke of it being a tax and stated its not about the money as it was a refusal on principal. The principal is the fact that it is not needed. It is just as you say an infringement. I will not participate. It's wrong on so many levels.

It is wrong on many levels but it’s not about the money. They put a bunch of hoops in place TO STOP PEOPLE FROM BUYING NEW FIREARMS. You now aren’t buying handguns. There are now less firearms in the state than there would be without the HQL. Fight the HQL (and all of the other infringements) tooth and nail but don’t fall for their BS. Go get one and buy all the firearms you can (at least those that the crown have deemed acceptable for us peasants) just to spite them and their back-door attempts at gun control.

dmable44 · Jan 13, 2019

Nay_sayer said:
It is wrong on many levels but it’s not about the money. They put a bunch of hoops in place TO STOP PEOPLE FROM BUYING NEW FIREARMS. You now aren’t buying handguns. There are now less firearms in the state than there would be without the HQL. Fight the HQL (and all of the other infringements) tooth and nail but don’t fall for their BS. Go get one and buy all the firearms you can (at least those that the crown have deemed acceptable for us peasants) just to spite them and their back-door attempts at gun control.

This is what I’m trying to do with 80%s, but if I can do that with new firearms I will. As long as I can buy a lower as “other” I will. But like I said, gun shops seem to require HQL for everything at least in my experience.

Moon · Jan 13, 2019

dmable44 said:
Now having a 40 minute commute to work I have a lot of time to ponder and my curiosity runs wild.

I’m from PA, never had anything like the HQL. No license/course to own any firearm. I grew up with them and was taught proper safety, storage and transport all my life. I’m all for someone that doesn’t know any better or is new to firearms going and taking a course. I think that’s a great idea.

Now, it’s my constitutional right to own and keep firearms. I don’t want to go down the argumentative rabbit hole of why, but it’s my constitutional right.

With that being said, MD has the HQL which according to MSP (and my understanding of their website) is required to buy/sell/transfer firearms. Being a constitutional right to have firearms, I think it’s wrong for the state to make money off of a constitutional right we have by paying for the courses, fingerprints, etc.

Having owned firearms coming into MD, I am not required to get my HQL. As the MSP website also says that anything owned prior to coming in is fine. So now all I’m doing is 80%s, no buying, selling, or transferring, so no need to HQL.

So here’s my thinking wrapped up:

I have a constitutional right to buy, own and keep firearms, therefore I believe it is wrong and unconstitutional for the state to make money off of my right. If it was free, I would have no problem with it.

Is my thinking wrong? Right? Yes and no? Out in left field?

Your thinking is wrong.

Biggfoot44 · Jan 13, 2019

Whistlers Mother in post #9 comes closest to sumation .

A lower , that is not a rifle or handgun ( among other things , if no upper/ bbl , can not be defined as either a rifle or handgun ) is transfered as " Other " . Such an AR reciever , either stripped, or complete excluding upper , must do a 77R and 7 day wait , but HQL Not required .

When you fill out the 77R online, click Exempt , and a drop box will appear with multiple reasons to potentially check off . Of note are : Reciever Only , and Curio & Relic which we will discuss below .

Handguns designated by Federal Gov't as C&R require the 77R and 7day wait, but Not HQL . C&R includes everything 50yrs plus, and also specific guns/ variants so listed by ATF .

Dating back to 2013 , there has been debate in the Gun Rights Community over this . One side holds that the whole thing is inherently an unconscionable prior restraint upon a Fundamental Right , and thereby refused to get one . The other side is that racing out to comply somehow * Sticks it to the Man * . I have been outspoken on this , but at this point in time don't frequently try to change people's minds .

The real victims are people born after 1992 . Certain numbers will be overcome with desire for the latest combat tupperware . Dealers have a vested interest in encouraging HQL compliance .

Yes, " somebody " ought to do somthing about this . Sombody is . Maryland Shall Issue ( MSI) has an active Federal Lawsuit challenging the HQL . Donate generously to the MSI Legal Fund , which goes 100% to paying the lawyers for the several litigations protecting and regaining our Rights .

Someone more computer savy please post the donation link in this thread .

Nay_sayer · Jan 13, 2019

dmable44 said:
This is what I’m trying to do with 80%s, but if I can do that with new firearms I will. As long as I can buy a lower as “other” I will. But like I said, gun shops seem to require HQL for everything at least in my experience.

I don’t know who sells lowers as “other” so I’m afraid I’m not much help there.

I went through the soul-searching phase when the HQL was implemented. I refused to get an HQL in the beginning. 80% is great (and should be done just because whether you have an HQL or not) but usually costs far more in added expense than the HQL fees. It also further limits what you can purchase. Do both and show the MGA that you will not be denied your rights even when they try to hide the denial in BS red tape.

Is my thinking wrong?

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Peace through strength

Active Member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Active Member

Peace through strength

Ultimate Member

The M1 Does My Talking

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Where's the beef?

...

Active Member

M-O-O-N, that spells...

Ultimate Member

...

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics