Convince me to get an HQL

From a politician's perspective:

Few HQL holders = feeble gun community.

Many HQL holders = vigorous gun community.

Do the math and decide which message you wish to send.

kenpo333 said:

Don't like it but I will tell you this and I know this is going to upset some people but after teaching thousands of HQL and wear and carry applications I do believe that we are safer because of this laws. . The knowledge of lots of people who taking these classes is horrible. NO muzzel discipline, no handling skills. Having people get a wear and carry permit and walk among us without training is crazy.

Click to expand...

As an MDSP certified instructor myself, I couldn't agree more.

lazarus said:

Personally I'd rather they mandate instruction in school.

Click to expand...

I've suggested the same for years, but, on reflection...now that we've got hood rats, illegals, Mo-mos and paranoid schizophrenics all living amongst us (and with favoured class status!) with Bolshies managing the show, do we really wanna teach them to shoot better?

So the two people who have certificates to teach the mandatory coarse think its a good idea. Nope, no conflict of interest here...

Rab1515 said:

So the two people who have certificates to teach the mandatory coarse think its a good idea. Nope, no conflict of interest here...

Click to expand...

No, you're missing the point. These guys aren't getting rich off of these classes. But to deny yourself the ability to purchase ANYTHING because of a state mandate is self-defeating.

The more HQLs there are out there, the more it tells the state that there is a vigorous firearm ownership community.

The one thing that I can see happening is that will use the HQL numbers to try to convince the citizens that "see, there's not that many people who want to own firearms". Now we know that the HQL is only used for handguns, but when it comes out in discussion, they will be more than happy to point out the low percentage of gun owners via the HQL numbers. That's how this state is. They will use our own numbers against us.

j_h_smith said:

The more HQLs there are out there, the more it tells the state that there is a vigorous firearm ownership community.

The one thing that I can see happening is that will use the HQL numbers to try to convince the citizens that "see, there's not that many people who want to own firearms". Now we know that the HQL is only used for handguns, but when it comes out in discussion, they will be more than happy to point out the low percentage of gun owners via the HQL numbers. That's how this state is. They will use our own numbers against us.

Click to expand...

I beg to differ regarding how the HQL data will be interpreted. I believe as the gun purchase numbers increase, handguns, Annapolis progressives will get more creative enacting barriers to curb handgun purchases.

dad4 said:

I beg to differ regarding how the HQL data will be interpreted. I believe as the gun purchase numbers increase, handguns, Annapolis progressives will get more creative enacting barriers to curb handgun purchases.

Click to expand...

You are welcome to your own opinion. With Maryland, it's a crap shoot (pun intended) to try and figure out how or what they will do. With a majority in the sate house, the Dems don't care if the Governor is a Republican or not. They will get what they want.

Lots of HQL = Lots of submissive, complient who care more about self gratification than their Rights . ie can be ignored, since they'll race to comply with anything.

Lots of HQL = Opps, obvious failure of HQL V1.0 , has to be corrected by HQL2.0 .

We will shoot this puppy if you don't get an Hql.

fred333 said:

I've suggested the same for years, but, on reflection...now that we've got hood rats, illegals, Mo-mos and paranoid schizophrenics all living amongst us (and with favoured class status!) with Bolshies managing the show, do we really wanna teach them to shoot better?

Click to expand...

Yes. I'd rather everyone actually know and understand firearm safety as well as be more comfortable and knowledgeable of firearms.

The problems you've mentioned have been around in all countries since forever. Change change around a few words for different ones and done.

lee2 said:

We will shoot this puppy if you don't get an Hql.

Click to expand...

Sucks to be the pup.

Some of us just won't do it, end of discussion.

lee2 said:

We will shoot this puppy if you don't get an Hql.

Click to expand...

Now you went and did it....the Animal Rights people will be after us next!

Originally, I had no intention of getting an HQL, just C&Rs on my 03 FFL. But then became an early adopter. Why? I decided I wasn't letting this damn state destroy a lifelong passion and hobby. By mid-Oct of 2013 I had made this decision. Then I discovered a reason not to procrastinate about it when I saw the low prices immediately after 10/01/2013 on many used guns because it was difficult to sell them when so few had an HQL. I actually bought 6 handguns in the 3 -4 months following receiving my HQL (Nov 2013) for a significant discount over what they would have sold for before 10/01/13 craziness began. At least in my case, I was exempt from the training.

I have to say, I kind'a agree with the 2 instructors above, and, unlike them, I DON'T make money off firearms training. Yes, there is the issue of infringement by such a requirement, but I have personally witnessed some assinine things done by those who just don't know better. I am a Hunter's Safety Instructor and an NRA certified Riflery Instructor and Range Safety Officer. As such, I have had the opportunity to instruct many....both young people and adults. Also, because I am known by so many to be familiar with firearms, I am also asked a lot of questions and have taken to time to take quite a few new shooters to the range for their first shooting experience or even their first for many years. While I am not certified as a pistol instructor, I certainly do know the drill. I always first give instruction to newbies and watch them with the unloaded firearm before watching them take their first shots. It is AMAZING how many will pick a firearm up, rifle or handgun, and immediately do something that is an unsafe practice which I then have to strongly and immediately correct and then go back over most of what I previously instructed. I have seen everything from a muzzle sweep or near sweep ('cause I mostly catch them before they actually do the sweep)of an unsafe area. Many will also pickup a firearm with their finger right in the trigger guard. I watched people who struggle with racking a slide want to point it sideways or even at themselves while at their shooting station or perhaps tilt a revolver way high when trying to cock it for single action fire. (All good reason to watch 'em handle an unloaded firearm at first) And I am not talking about people who don't take the whole thing seriously. Someone who didn't take it seriously wouldn't be invited to accompany me to begin with or I would wrap up the whole shooting session before a shot is even fired. Some (many actually) are actually outright frightened or nervous just knowing they are going to shoot a firearm. All many have ever known is what they hear about in our biased media or what they see in movies. They just have never been around them the way I was growing up, never had training before, and simply have no clue....so everything they are being taught is new to them. And, it is all something they have to remember rather than something that is almost second nature.

FWIW, I am an ardent Constitutionalist and believe the 2nd Amendment should not be infringed in any way including HQL training requirements. Nevertheless, I do believe the training may actually be beneficial for people who have marginal previous experience with firearms. I like the idea some have suggested that our young people should be give some basic firearms training early in school...as unlikely as that may be today. It doesn't have to even be actual shooting...although there is value in that as well. At one time there were a number of schools that did just that.

For the OP's situation, assuming he has bills of sale for the "tainted" guns, and all of the replacements were puchased in VA, there shouldn't be a repeat of his first experience, right? As far as MSP knows, he doesn't have any handguns, so if they think he's still prohibited, there is still nothing for him to surrender.

It may be worth talking to a lawyer about expungement, but if he's going to be stuck in MD, he might as well try to make the best of it.

Now...it may be prudent to NOT try to use information from one of the "tainted" or VA guns as training exemption...

As to the HQL boycotters in general...I've had a rant floating around in my head for quite a while. Some of them seem to take a "holier than though" demeanor, especially towards HQL holders. I've kept quiet, but this seems like a good opportunity to get it out. Now that it is the law of the land, I have yet to hear any compelling reason not to get an HQL (hey, just look at the thread tittle). The unconvincing arguments I've heard have been:

--"It's an infringement on my rights, and I'll have no part of it." Welcome to MD! 2A infringement is our unofficial state sport. The HQL battle is long lost, but I'm not going to give up on the 2A war. Didn't somebody smart say something to the effect of, "a right not exercised is a right surrendered?" Well, if you aren't jumping through the HQL hoop to exercise your right, you really aren't exercising it, are you? I'm not going to surrender that right if I don't have to.


--"I refuse to pay a fee to exercise a right." I don't know when the $10 bribe to MSP started, but I've been paying that fee to exercise my right for as long as I've been of age. I guess you haven't been buying handguns in a long time, eh? Now, I think that fee is redundant after the HQL, but let's not be applying logic to The Feestate. Again...not exercised=surrendered


--"I refuse to get fingerprinted like a common criminal." Well, don't. Get fingerprinted like a teacher, janitor (anybody that works for schools), machine gun owner, clearance holder, LEO, bank teller, etc. I got my prints done at the Sheriff's office, and wasn't treated like a criminal at all. They didn't cuff me or grind my face into the pavement or anything. In fact, they were pretty darn friendly and supportive. Or maybe you feel you need to hide your fingerprints from the government? If so, I humbly suggest that if the government is that really that nefariously interested in your prints, they've probably gotten them already.


--"That's just what FoshOMalley wants, I'll not give them the satisfaction." I believe they want you to not buy any guns. I do not believe that your choice not to buy handguns is making them feel beaten or foolish in any way. Our sour grapes make for their sweet wine. I think I've purchased more handguns post HQL than in the 14 years I was of age before it. If the ratio hasn't gone that way yet, it will by the end of this year. I guess I am playing right into their hands, eh?


--"I'll just use my C&R." This does nothing to support the firearms manufacturing industry. Hey, you're only about 20 years away from buying a Glock! It's gonna be a long wait if you want one of those new Colt revolvers though. Also, if you additionally boycott the HQL on the grounds that it is a license to exercise a right, I'd like to highlight the "L" in FFL03. It may be cheaper, but it's still a license.


--"80% all the way!" Keep building, don't get me wrong. This supports some parts of the industry, I guess...but what's going to happen when the big manufactures go out of business because no one buys complete guns? More importantly, I think this is very precarious ground. Hopefully I'm wrong, but I'm thinking that after a couple of highly publicized shootings by prohibited persons who built their own guns, this is going to be seen as a loophole to be closed up tight and fast.


--"What will you do when they propose it for long guns?" I figure I'll run the same play as 2013: 1) get thoroughly ignored by Annapolis in person, on paper, and email. 2)buy as many guns as I can before it goes into effect. 3)realized that I cannot afford to move out of state. 4) get my LQL. What are you going to do, not buy any guns?

Do I like the HQL? Absolutely not. I would love to see it go away tomorrow, but I'm not holding my breath for that. I just don't see how boycotting it helps our cause in anyway. It hurts the firearms industry and our own collections, and helps FroshOmalley keep new guns out of MD.

Art3 said:

For the OP's situation, assuming he has bills of sale for the "tainted" guns, and all of the replacements were puchased in VA, there shouldn't be a repeat of his first experience, right? As far as MSP knows, he doesn't have any handguns, so if they think he's still prohibited, there is still nothing for him to surrender.

It may be worth talking to a lawyer about expungement, but if he's going to be stuck in MD, he might as well try to make the best of it.

Now...it may be prudent to NOT try to use information from one of the "tainted" or VA guns as training exemption...

Click to expand...

If you buy handguns in VA, then move to Maryland, they need to be "voluntarily" registered within 90 days after establishing residency.

danb said:

If you buy handguns in VA, then move to Maryland, they need to be "voluntarily" registered within 90 days after establishing residency.

Click to expand...

That was part of fsa2013, right? He moved here in 2012...so should be ok?

Art3 said:

That was part of fsa2013, right? He moved here in 2012...so should be ok?

Click to expand...

Offhand, I cannot recall what the rules were in 2012. Were unregistered guns grandfathered in 2013? In any case, I'd bet 2 paychecks that applicants that were previously disapproved get the extra special 5 finger proctology exam with no lube, no extra charge. Wont matter whose mistake, they will review it. If it were me, I would prepare for the possibility that they will find out one way or the other.

Personally, I moved states to get away from the HQL requirement. Saved me over 7k in taxes and when I got my CC permit I decided to buy a new handgun the Glock 19 seems like a great idea until I started actually carrying it. So I went out found one a like the Beretta Nano. Filed out 1 page of paperwork, paid and 20 min later I walked out with my new handgun in it new holster loaded the way it should be.

kenpo333 said:

Don't like it but I will tell you this and I know this is going to upset some people but after teaching thousands of HQL and wear and carry applications I do believe that we are safer because of this laws. . The knowledge of lots of people who taking these classes is horrible. NO muzzel discipline, no handling skills.

Click to expand...

I am guessing most people who were like me and don't know how to handle a firearm will be like me look around and find a basic course to learn how to do that. No one wants to shot themselves and if they are arrogant enough to not want to take a class they are likely also the same people who will take the course and ignore everything that was taught and go back to doing stupid things. The fact that Cont Carry states have pretty much the same rates as those with excessive requirement prove the training has little to no effect on the stupid people.

If the MSP really wanted to help people they would do what they do in my area and offer a free course once a month given by the local police or offer tax incentives for a free/cheap basic safety course for the people who would actually take and follow said course.