Who Doesn't Have Their HQL

[AnonymousShooter]

I don't have one yet, i'm debating on going down that road. We all know we shouldn't have too. But effectively that means buying no firearms until the law is repealed which in this POS state may not happen.

 

[FoxFirearms]

Fox Firearms: everytime our side participates in "compromise" we send a signal that we are available to compromise the next time, and the next, and the next.

35 years ago Maryland had Open Carry and now every firearm sighting is Swat Lockdown. (Remember Georgetown Prep?). We are back-pedaling and there is no dishonor is saying no more.

The Left is going to lie, cheat and vote what they want anyway. Why "compromise" when that action fuzzes the ACTUAL reality that they are ignoring the Constitution and stepping on our individual freedoms? Having the Left worrying that they are going too far may be the only practical check on them.

Enough with "realistic compromise".

Stand for something and draw that line in the sand.

Thank you for your advise. At least you read and understood that most of my comments were about trying to compromise, not that I was agreeing with the other side.

I do stand for something...freedom in gun ownership. Unfortunately I think there has to be continued compromise because we are loosing the battle. The "old ways" of doing things aren't working. We need to get into the 21st century on how we get more people on our side. Gun owners having children and making them gun owners isn't enough. We need to seriously educate the younger generations...not necessarily to the point where they are gun owners, but to the point where they understand that bans on firearms is not a good thing, nor is it the solution for crime. When gun bans are imposed, crime rises - it's historically true...the numbers don't lie. But nobody gets up and says those things to a non-gun crowd. What we need is a public firearms debate with one of our prominent politicians - like our gov. At least people will get ALL the facts and be able to decide for themselves.

Right now, the only way I see to get our word out is through something drastically violent...that's the only thing that makes the mass media headlines, but I'm not necessarily for that path. If you're not the president or someone with a TON of money, the media pays virtually no attention to you.

I guess I keep reading that we will probably successfully repeal SB281 because it's an election year, but O'Malley will probably veto it. What's the point of repealing something if it's going to get vetoed? Why waste the time and money on that. Use the funds to support candidates who are on our side, get them elected, then repeal SB281.

I have half a mind to just sue MD myself, in Fed court, for violation of my 2nd amendment rights. This way I can keep all the political "sides" out of it, and just focus on the 2nd amendment itself.

 

[FoxFirearms]

So now you are signing off because you feel you have been misunderstood?

No, we heard you loud and clear. You just live in the Land of Columbia where Choosing Civility is your battle cry. You live in the present and apparently don't have any regard for history in MD. Your strategy is a lose-lose proposition and I suppose it is no fun to hear that.

I live in Beltsville...not Columbia. This is why I quit talking about it...TOO MANY ASSUMPTIONS !!!!!!!!!!!

 

[2AHokie]

Don't have one. Won't get one unless we get shall issue in the next few years. Any longer than that and this POS state will be be in my rearview and I will once again live in America.

 

[thomfantomas]

Don't have one. Won't get one unless we get shall issue in the next few years. Any longer than that and this POS state will be be in my rearview and I will once again live in America.

yea same here...wtf do they need our finger prints for????? I won't feed in unless that make maryland a shall issue state

 

[Blaster229]

I don't.

 

[BradMacc82]

I don't.

You exempted bastard.

 

[B1web]

So far I have opted for the 2nd amendment.

at least I would have had it not been for the boat accident thing....

 

[rdc]

I don't. Problem is there are still non C&R handguns that I want. I don't think I should have to get one but I might have to eventually.

 

[Oldcarjunkie]

Not me, but I don't have any firearms, nor do I plan to buy any pistols either.

 

[Ranchero50]

After 2013 I'm so broke I can't afford ammo, much less a license to buy more handguns...

 

[GUNSnROTORS]

Not me, but I don't have any firearms, nor do I plan to buy any pistols either.

Same here!

 

[tourrider]

Haven't had time. Going to knock that out in next couple of weeks. Figure I better before the terms change in new legislation.


10 years puts me past retirement, and out of MD.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[trailman]

I would respectfully suggest sir that there is another and far more incidious longer term purpose to the new law:

The new law is designed to facilitate a gradually increasing tacit acceptance within the populace at large of an orchestrated shift away from the guaranteed individual rights and freedoms enumerated in the U.S. Constitution.

The reason why? The Constitution as written is a document that many who govern purport to defend and embrace, but in fact despise. In their world view, the document of our founders that is the U.S. Constitution is the only obstacle that stands between their desire for governmental pre-eminance over individually enumerated individual rights.

With each new HQL applicant, these people march one step closer toward an ultimately desired and unspoken "new normal" reality of tacit (if initially grudgingly extended) acceptance of infringement by the governed. The end game here is that there will come in time a generation.....that questions nothing and knows and understands nothing else.

To each man his choice and his conscience. But I respectfully suggest that you contemplete your decisions and your choices very carefully my friends.

Don't underestimate these people. They're a damned formidible enemy.

Well said. I/we all saw this coming. Our household set priorities, made plans and executed purchases of what we saw as required firearms that would be unavailable after the ban. We aren't the type that are the need another gun buyer. To us they are more like tools.. So No HQL here, never will except maybe in the case of a family emergency even then maybe not. I've been flamed for my comments before but this is just another way to boil a frog. My local FFL? He's gonna get my bolt gun business for the foreseeable future

 

[frdfandc]

I don't have mine yet. Signing up for my Utah CCW first.

 

[ShallNotInfringe]

I agree that not everyone can afford to buy twice as many firearms as planned, but refusing to buy any more is going to accomplish exactly what the politicians want.

I don't think requiring registration is infringing on my 2nd am right. Telling me I can't own certain firearms is. Making it so you can only purchase 3/4 certain firearms per year is "meeting in the middle." You mentioned CA. Imagine if MD tried to just do a complete firearms ban...no more purchasing firearms in MD - NONE. I would have never passed, and it would have hindered any chance for future regulation, so they are doing things a little at a time. If we (gun owners) can meet them (the liberals) in the middle, and get something together that doesn't prohibit any particular firearm, but includes registration and background checks, we could make it so we don't have to worry about future, more strict, gun control. There aren't enough of us out there to vote the liberal dems out of office and take control of the house and Senate (in MD), so lets work with them. The days of "MY WAY" are over. They have the power and votes. There are more ways than one to skin a cat, so instead of sticking to the "old ways" we should try something different...a compromise of some sort.

You have got to be kidding about the need to "compromise", right? Do we need to drag out the cake story again????

Use of the "majority rules" theory on gun control is outrageous, and seems to be the only case where it works in today's society. This country was founded on the rights of the individual, not 51% agreeing to take away the rights of the other 49%. Just because a bunch of bobble headed politicians agree to decimate the rights of people, does not make it right.

Everyone has a line. Next year, you will be talking about the fewer crumbs you are willing to give up...

 

[AKbythebay]

Don't have one, not getting one

Made my final Maryland purchase back in September. I am fully stocked and plan to make no additional purchaces of regulated firearms while living in Maryland.

I'm one of the lucky ones who bought everything they wanted years before this nonsense went into effect. In fact I'm looking to sell a few firearms, no buy more

 

[tkd4life]

At the end of the day I'm going to buy real estate in another state before I get an HQL. Its a much better investment. I'm thinking it will be years before we see the BS law just passed defended/defeated in the courts. And with the political climate in the court system, I've got no hope at all. I mean we just had a judge rule that the bill of rights are "fundamental but not absolute". We are on the downward spiral gents.

 

[Bart_man]

Military ID and a FUOMalley bumper sticker

 

[Rack&Roll]

TKD4life:

that Gent you saluted in post 178 is a feisty, but attractive skirt-wearing, gun-toting goddess...just for the record