You think this news is bad, wait until it takes 6 month to get our "HQL".
Yup. I hope someone files a lawsuit and seeks an injunction over SP281. They could effectively put some dealers out of business... which is probably part of their plan.
You think this news is bad, wait until it takes 6 month to get our "HQL".
I was curious about that as well, but since I deal with FFL's which release on time I am no longer worried about it. I sent an email to MSP regarding necessity of the HQL for applications dating pre-October 1st. This is obviously not a definitive answer so take it with a grain of salt.
If I start the transfer process on a handgun (The paperwork is filed on August 01 of 2013 for example) and I am not able to take possession until November due to the backlog, will I be required to have a new handgun 'license' before taking the item home, or am I good to go without?
It's my understanding that you will be good.
WTF does this have to do with the price of tea in China?
Please bear in mind that we shouldn't forget the people who will be suffering because of this legislation, all of us should remain worried. Just because we were fortunate enough to have an FFL releasing on time or have previously purchased doesn't mean we can rest easy.
You are, frivolously, comparing a private party negotiation (salary increases) with a state providing enhanced consideration in rights-infringement based upon "service". That, sir, is ******** of the highest order. The two issues have NOTHING to do with each other.I can't believe you even asked that.
You are, frivolously, comparing a private party negotiation (salary increases) with a state providing enhanced consideration in rights-infringement based upon "service". That, sir, is ******** of the highest order. The two issues have NOTHING to do with each other.
Purchase Order only applies to the soon-to-be banned "assault long guns". Covered in other threads here.Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Sb281 said if you had a bill of sale prior to oct 1 then you could take possession without a hql? Did that language get struck from final version?
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
WTF does this have to do with the price of tea in China?
I agree, I did not serve, and I thank all of you that do or did very much. You get many benefits from retiring from the military that I don't have and you deserve them. However, it should not make you more privileged in the civilian world when it comes to requirements to own or posess a firearm.WTF does this have to do with the price of tea in China?
Ok, so then who in the hell do we listen too or believe?You quoted this from the MSP web site, not SB281, right? If so, you are just perpetuating bad info from MSP.
From SB281 (the HQL section):
5–117.1
(A) THIS SECTION DOES NOT APPLY TO:
(1) A LICENSED FIREARMS MANUFACTURER;
(2) A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER OR PERSON WHO IS RETIRED IN GOOD STANDING FROM SERVICE WITH A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY OF THE UNITED STATES, THE STATE, OR A LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY OF THE STATE;
(3) A MEMBER OR RETIRED MEMBER OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES OR, OR THE NATIONAL GUARD OR
(4) A PERSON PURCHASING, RENTING, OR RECEIVING AN ANTIQUE, CURIO, OR RELIC FIREARM, AS DEFINED IN FEDERAL LAW OR IN DETERMINATIONS PUBLISHED BY THE BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS AND EXPLOSIVES.
not sure if I agree that these groups are being given "titles of nobility". I think the case will be argued that these groups of people have already received firearm training that exceeds the requirement of SB281/HQL (what ever they decide that requirement will be)... for example. in the service I was fingerprinted, I took firearms safety courses with range time, regular requalification, and had a background check, etc. basically I did way more than the HQL (as outlined in the bill) requires. just my two cents...the big picture is that we shouldn't even have to arguing about this type of sh!t because we have the second amendment in the constitution....but I do like your train of thought of using their own BS against them....
The "titles of nobility" argument is rock solid on a constitutional basis from the standpoint of being able to demonstrate that natural and civil rights are not reserved for people with such titles. Obviously, such titles could be used and granted as a partisan tool. The underlying principle of "titles of nobility" is little different than the practice of and reasons for deeming people as 3/5ths human. In either case, the purpose is to create serfs/slaves with few or no rights.
Time to chime in.
You "Titles of Nobility" / "Armchair Constitutionalists" need to get over it and yourselves.
Only 1 - 1-1/2 percent of the population serve actively in the Military. It's a tough road serving long enough to RETIRE with bennies. I personally worked 70 hours a week or more and when I put to sea it was much, much more. As in no time off other than sleep.
So. No titles. Just BENNIES.
Again, get over it.
or
Serve and see what it's like.
or
Go play Wannabe and polish your commercial AR-15.
or
Simply shut-up about it.
WTF does this have to do with the price of tea in China?
Actually, it applies to copycat guns, too. I almost freaked out there for a second.Purchase Order only applies to the soon-to-be banned "assault long guns". Covered in other threads here.
Thanks for the clarification; my apologies for my response causing confusion.Actually, it applies to copycat guns, too. I almost freaked out there for a second.
Actually, it applies to copycat guns, too. I almost freaked out there for a second.
Thanks for the clarification; my apologies for my response causing confusion.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
We still need to think about others. Not just ourselves. Good post.
Just got the call from Bass Pro.
Hot Damn.
And I don't have to claim "Nobility" / "Retired" status either.