“Long Gun Qual License Dead”

fabsroman · Mar 13, 2019

John from MD said:
No one has mentioned how the additional cost will affect those that don't have much to start with. I'm sure the demorats in the back room just throw these people under the buss since they don't care about the collateral damage it will cause.

Hey lawyers, if someone wanted to buy a gun for home protection but, after October the price goes up to where he can't and he gets killed in a home invasion, can his family sue the state? I'm sure you will say now as the state will not give them permission to sue. Maybe we should start collect stats on this kind of thing, maybe it will be workable some day.

That is correct. It is called sovereign immunity. The federal government and the state/local governments are immune to lawsuits unless there is a statute giving permission to file suit. Be happy that our overlords have actually put such a statute on the books in Maryland. Thing is, it is somewhat limited in scope.

Some info on the Maryland Tort Claims Act:

https://www.peoples-law.org/suing-s...or-local-government-maryland-tort-claims-acts

fabsroman · Mar 13, 2019

savageShooter said:
Yeah no charge for a Maryland drug dealer/crime committing license and no one illegal drug sale a month and no wait time for the crime committed! Good old s***hole state MD. Glad I'm on my way out of this state next year. I'm one of lucky ones!

See, I am all for making drug sales legal. People want to get high. Fine with me. Flip side is that there will be little, to no help from the state for their dependency, etc. They want to do that crap, then it is on them. Personal responsibility and all that stuff.

jc1240 · Mar 13, 2019

Sorry if this is a repeat (too many pages to catch up). Maybe (I'm about to use the very bad C-word) the best compromise is to get the feds to open NICS to private sales.

Shuts up the local lefties. Shuts up the national lefties. And accept not one more infringement.

Allen65 · Mar 13, 2019

fabsroman said:
See, I am all for making drug sales legal. People want to get high. Fine with me. Flip side is that there will be little, to no help from the state for their dependency, etc. They want to do that crap, then it is on them. Personal responsibility and all that stuff.

I'll be magnanimous and say the first dose of NARCAN can be gratis. Subsequent doses are cash-only, especially if the patient is one of those ingrates who assaults the EMTs for interrupting his/her high.

PJDiesel · Mar 13, 2019

Allen65 said:
Ill be magnanimous and say the first dose of NARCAN can be gratis. Subsequent doses are cash-only, especially if the patient is one of those ingrates who assaults the EMTs for interrupting his/her high.

Exactly.

The issue here is we've got people on ALL sides clamoring to assist saving the lives of those who knowingly and repeatedly inject poison into their bodies.

This is a KNOWN deadly substance they are dealing with. They know people who have died, they have internet access on their phones.

Yet, WE pay, over and over again.

I know people who were excited when a Pastor at their church had been trained in the use of Narcan. What a joke..... instead of playing God and bringing people back to life, maybe church going folks should let God sort out the people from society who do far more harm than good?

fabsroman · Mar 13, 2019

jc1240 said:
Sorry if this is a repeat (too many pages to catch up). Maybe (I'm about to use the very bad C-word) the best compromise is to get the feds to open NICS to private sales.

Shuts up the local lefties. Shuts up the national lefties. And accept not one more infringement.

I posted this way above, so you probably missed it as people have been saying it is illegal to use NICS for private sales. Turns out, it is voluntary for the seller to go to a FFL and have a NICS check done on a potential buyer. It is just that most buyers probably do not want to pay for this service so it is not done.

Now, if Maryland were to pass a law stating that all private sales must have a NICS check done, then this problem would pretty much be resolved.

Here is the guide form the ATF:

https://www.atf.gov/file/110076/download

I truly believe that everybody that is not in prison and that is not mentally deranged, should be able to buy a gun. Maybe, just maybe, if NICS were to concentrate on mentally disturbed people, we could prevent most of the mass shootings out there. As far as convicted felons having guns, I am alright with that once they are released from prison. First off, we know damn well that they are going to get a firearm. Second off, we released them and they go back to the neighborhoods that they know, which I would not want to visit without a firearm on my possession. Guessing most of us would not want to visit these areas unarmed where a lot of convicted felons live. They entire NICS system seems like a waste of time when it comes to keeping guns out of convicted felons hands. Then, a convicted felon goes to prison once more just because they were trying to defend themselves. Lastly, way too many non-violent crimes that make a person a convicted felon.

swinokur · Mar 13, 2019

An FFL conducting a NICS check on a private sale would still be voluntary, even if it is legal. If the FFL did not sell the firearm, there is no incentive to conduct the check.

What then?

fabsroman · Mar 13, 2019

swinokur said:
An FFL conducting a NICS check on a private sale would still be voluntary, evening it is legal. If the FFL did not sell the firearm, there is no incentive to conduct the check.

What then?

Yes, an FFL conducting a NICS check on a "private sale" would still be voluntary under federal law. However, if Maryland passes a law that requires a NICS check on the sale of every long gun, then it would become mandatory under Maryland law.

The incentive to the FFL will be the transfer fee that he/she earns by doing the NICS check.

Pretty hard for the pro 2A side to say we want to keep guns out of the hands of convicted felons (I disagree here) and the mentally disturbed, but we are not for universal background checks and we are alright with convicted felons and mentally deranged people being able to procure firearms through private sales.

So, if the 2A side really wants to be against universal background checks, it has to say, "We fear the creation of a registry and the eventual confiscation of all firearms under a tyrannical regime. What can you do to ensure us that it will NEVER happen again?"

MigraineMan · Mar 13, 2019

Let me do a NICS background check directly, for any reason. I want to check volunteers for my community theater group. I want to check the volunteers for my son's Boy Scout Troop. I want to check the parents of my daughter's middle-school sports team.

If someone is a "prohibited person," that fact is a matter of public record (having obtained that status through due-process.) Why am I restricted from accessing this information? Common Sense dictates that I (we) should have access to public records, yes?

swinokur · Mar 13, 2019

The issue is IIRC that the Federal GCA prohibits a NICS check on a firearm not sold or transferred through the FFL. So how does an FFL who has a Federal license comply with both Federal law and MD law when they conflict? Taking a gun in via a transfer would seem a way to do that but what if BATFE disagrees?

NV passed a similar law and the NV AG said it was unenforceable because of the Federal statute

fabsroman · Mar 13, 2019

swinokur said:
The issue is IIRC that the Federal GCA prohibits a NICS check on a firearm not sold or transferred through the FFL. So how does an FFL who has a Federal license comply with both Federal law and MD law when they conflict? Taking a gun in via a transfer would seem a way to do that but what if BATFE disagrees?

I thought I already addressed that with the ATF guide I posted last night about the ability for voluntary NICS checks to be conducted by an FFL. I will post it again for you.

FFL Procedures for Facilitating Private Sales with a NICS check included:

https://www.atf.gov/file/110076/download

Yes, the process would look almost exactly as if the FFL was selling the gun. Hence, the transfer fee that would be charged by the FFL for the service.

Yes, this makes some of this a little bit more cumbersome. There would be a transfer fee charged by the FFL, which is an added cost. No more buying firearms at a yard sale off a folding table or buying them in a duck blind from a hunting buddy. All firearms sales in Maryland would have to go through an FFL so a NICS check could be performed. For me, a NICS check is a lot less cumbersome than a LGQL and/or a Form 77R. Then again, I don't usually buy used firearms via private sales. Only been tempted once on a really awesome price on a Benelli SBE, but I passed the deal on to my buddy who did not have a Benelli yet. Entire reason he wanted one was because I let him use mine after I limited out and he showed up at the blind. Anyway, I digress.

The NICS check on a private sale is legal, albeit voluntary.

MigraineMan · Mar 13, 2019

swinokur said:
The issue is IIRC that the Federal GCA prohibits a NICS check on a firearm not sold or transferred through the FFL.

Yup. Mike Doherty 'splained that to Senator Zirkin during the 25 Feb. testimony. The Federal law prohibits a lot of what they're proposing.

fabsroman · Mar 13, 2019

MigraineMan said:
Let me do a NICS background check directly, for any reason. I want to check volunteers for my community theater group. I want to check the volunteers for my son's Boy Scout Troop. I want to check the parents of my daughter's middle-school sports team.

If someone is a "prohibited person," that fact is a matter of public record (having obtained that status through due-process.) Why am I restricted from accessing this information? Common Sense dictates that I (we) should have access to public records, yes?

I think I would be completely fine with that.

How is it that a private investigator can do a background check on people? Maybe all this information is actually available to us. Maybe you could have an applicant sign something allowing for the release of confidential records from DHMH and you can request any mental health records that way. I think we all know we can look most people up via Maryland case search, but that does not cover crimes committed in the other 49 states.

You should think about sending something to Pelosi and others requesting that this be something that people can go ahead and use to ensure their neighbors aren't convicted violent criminals or mentally disturbed.

fabsroman · Mar 13, 2019

MigraineMan said:
Yup. Mike Doherty 'splained that to Senator Zirkin during the 25 Feb. testimony. The Federal law prohibits a lot of what they're proposing.

And that might be why the LGQL is going bye bye. However, that still does not address whether a NICS check can be done on a private sale.

mrbob1000 · Mar 13, 2019

fabsroman said:
And that might be why the LGQL is going bye bye. However, that still does not address whether a NICS check can be done on a private sale.

It also doesn't answer the question of how they're going to get every state to fully participate in NICS when Maryland itself doesn't.

fabsroman · Mar 13, 2019

mrbob1000 said:
It also doesn't answer the question of how they're going to get every state to fully participate in NICS when Maryland itself doesn't.

That is NOT the issue. If it makes them feel safer that every firearm sold in Maryland goes through a NICS check, so be it. It is up to them to fix the problems with NICS. Just saying that NICS is full of holes and most states do not report mental health problems, is NOT a reason why this would not work. Most states do report criminal activity and what if this were to stop one deranged lunatic from purchasing a firearm because a state he previously lived in actually did report his mental issues to NICS?

mac1_131 · Mar 13, 2019

swinokur said:
An FFL conducting a NICS check on a private sale would still be voluntary, even if it is legal. If the FFL did not sell the firearm, there is no incentive to conduct the check.

What then?

Since Maryland requires "voluntary" registration to purchase a regulated firearm, why couldn't they require "voluntary" nics check for a FTF sale of a long gun? (Similar to what VSP is doing now at gun shows)?

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

fabsroman · Mar 13, 2019

mac1_131 said:
Since Maryland requires "voluntary" registration to purchase a regulated firearm, why couldn't they require "voluntary" nics check for a FTF sale of a long gun? (Similar to what VSP is doing now at gun shows)?

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

They very well could. Nothing in federal law that says a "voluntary" NICS check is illegal.

The entire HQL and proposed LGQL is just too much in my eyes. I am fine with the NICS check, but as I already mentioned, I have gone through a NICS check for every firearm I have ever bought.

swinokur · Mar 13, 2019

Ok thanks Fabs. My next question is since MD licenses FFL’s, can the MD statute, if passed, compel an FFL to run a NICS check when two private people come in and request it. If he refuses can MSP pop his MD license ?

That doesn’t sound voluntary to me. This is why I asked if BATFE would get involved since it sounds like the FFL is being compelled by state law to do something the Federal statute says is “voluntary”

I am just a curious non lawyer

swinokur · Mar 13, 2019

What is the fiscal impact on NICS if MD adopts this proposed law?

“Long Gun Qual License Dead”

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Banned

Ultimate Member

In a State of Bliss

Ultimate Member

Defenestration Specialist

In a State of Bliss

Ultimate Member

Defenestration Specialist

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Member

Ultimate Member

MSI Executive Member

Ultimate Member

In a State of Bliss

In a State of Bliss

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics