MSP Redefining the English Language

3rdRcn · Sep 10, 2015

So, someone I know, who has a current wear and carry permit for Maryland, submits for a subsequent permit so that they can work as an armed guard part time. They still have and will be keeping their original permit for their full time job, the restrictions don't allow them to work for the security company though.

The application gets returned saying they need the 8 hour class for a renewal. They call the MSP and speak with a first sergeant who informs them that a renewal and subsequent license are the same thing. The person then asks the 1st Sgt why the application has a check box for each one if they are both the same. He then asks where in COMAR it says that both are defined as the same word or where it says that a subsequent license requires the 8 hour class.

Basically the 1st Sgt. is rewriting the english language and adding an additional requirement to the law that is not there. Anyone care to help with a letter to them so that others aren't being made to jump through hoops that aren't in COMAR? Shoot me a PM if you don't want it to be public info.

miles71 · Sep 10, 2015

So let me get this right, the MSP wants this person to go through the 8 hour renewal course to get an additional permit to work security before their original permit expires?

Big old NOPE. I was in the same situation, no additional training just got another permit that had a different restriction on the back for security work.

Renewal is to renew not for additional permits. The security Company should be able to help in this situation.

montoya32 · Sep 10, 2015

This person needs to ask for a modification of their current permit, not a new one. This is not a renewal or additional permit. I am certain a modification would make it through the HPRB, but time would be the issue. Tell the permit holder to ask to speak to a superior. This person has already passed a check and holds a permit, they just need it modified to reflect their new/additional use. Request for mod with support documentation should be all that is needed.

Better yet, ask for all restrictions to be removed and when they refuse, have the HPRB address it. Again, time would be the issue.

3rdRcn · Sep 11, 2015

That would be the common sense thing for them to do Tim but they say you must submit for a subsequent. The 1st Sgt was the highest they could get to and he is the one who seems to be confused as to what the definition of subsequent vs renewal is. He stuck to his guns saying they were the same thing and invited a letter so that he could research it and address the situation.

I may sit down and attempt a letter to try and get those that would rewrite the law without authority to do so on record. I'm wondering if one of our state representatives seeing it in writing could smack them on their hands and make them stop doing this again.

Tony, you are correct. It was handled because this person was also a QHIC, which they didn't even bother to check on. It is still the policy they are going to stick to though and that needs to change.

Schipperke · Sep 11, 2015

This conditional license scheme has to stop. I do not like it.

miles71 · Sep 11, 2015

If they are a QHI the MSP Sgt. Is even more confused, QHI don't need to take the training.

TD

ironpony · Sep 11, 2015

So there is a good chance the position will be filled by the time this can be addressed. Can the MSP just do what they want like this? Oh, wait ... they do.

Good Luck OP and friend, I would maybe bring up the fact of needing it to accept a current/pending job offer.

3rdRcn · Sep 12, 2015

ironpony said:
Good Luck OP and friend, I would maybe bring up the fact of needing it to accept a current/pending job offer.

This person is a QHI as well, which they didn't even bother to check on but that is secondary to the fact that the 1st sgt seems to think that a renewal and subsequent license are both the same, even though they are different boxes that are checked on the application and even though they both have different meanings in the english language.

That was one of the questions that I thought as well, how can they possibly redefine the license and hold someones ability to make a living up because they want to rewrite the law. People like this should be fired from their jobs for incompetence or willful violation of law imho.

Mark75H · Sep 12, 2015

3rdRcn said:
This person is a QHI as well, which they didn't even bother to check on but that is secondary to the fact that the 1st sgt seems to think that a renewal and subsequent license are both the same, even though they are different boxes that are checked on the application and even though they both have different meanings in the english language.

That was one of the questions that I thought as well, how can they possibly redefine the license and hold someones ability to make a living up because they want to rewrite the law. People like this should be fired from their jobs for incompetence or willful violation of law imho.

Professional bureaucrat.

Someone with that much talent has their job locked in for life. It advanced Brezhnev all the way to the top despite having no other talent or skill.

MSP Redefining the English Language

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

3rdRcn

RIP

miles71

Ultimate Member

montoya32

Ultimate Member

3rdRcn

RIP

Schipperke

Ultimate Member

miles71

Ultimate Member

ironpony

Member

3rdRcn

RIP

Mark75H

MD Wear&Carry Instructor

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Latest threads

Forum statistics

Share this page