R&R to House of Delegates: "We Will Not Comply!"

[danb]

Why, when the nutty 9th stomps on Trump, it applies to the whole country?

I get no Maryland, as they/we have our own BS law, but why just one guy?

I didn't read the opinion.

The national injunction is abused, especially by the 9th. I dont buy into the "two wrongs make a right" theory of the law.

 

[fabsroman]

Just a question

Who or where are these vast majority of people wanting UBC’s?

I don’t know anyone who wants them, but I don’t associate with leftists, I find the stench emanating from them to vile for my taste

See, that is the thing. You probably associate only with far right leaning people in the country. Sadly, there are some big cities in Maryland that have high population counts that are mostly liberal. They are fine with UBC. Heck, I am fine with UBC. I can take it or leave it. I am not clamoring for it, but if they pass it, meh.

I know people that are in the moderate camp that are fine with UBC. One if a really good friend of mine and he moved to Wisconsin last year and does not miss Maryland a bit. He leans to the right like me. He was also alright with UBC before I was alright with it.

If I thought NICS could lead to a national registry and eventual confiscation, I would not be alright with it. Granted, I understand the worry. We are just one more step away from NICS becoming a registry by them passing just one more law. Thing is, we already have a registry here in Maryland via the Form 77R. If it went all NICS across the board and we could say goodbye to the Form 77R, I would feel a lot better about things.

 

[fabsroman]

At least the PP and MSRPA are in the fight instead of sniping from behind a keyboard.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Some people get killed in the fight by friendly fire, even when intentions are good. Pat Tillman was killed by friendly fire while fighting in Afghanistan.

Sometimes, all you need is one sniper with the right target. Meanwhile, the tanks and planes just cannot get there because well, they are just too obvious and too easy to shoot down.

Hopefully, my analogies are working. I don't need to be on the bricks with you screaming, yelling, and holding up signs. I just need to be more connected with the actual decision makers to make more of a difference than you do.

What makes you think that you get through to the actual decision makers more than I do while sitting behind a desk? Is there any evidence to prove that walking the bricks is more effective than political capital, making phone calls, sending e-mails, etc.?

 

[danb]

People only vote for UBCs because they dont think it will apply to them. You know that "misdemeanor" conviction from the 90s which you did not get expunged? disqualifying. oops. Well, at least you can get it expunged, but some people are not so lucky and their troubled yute follows them around. People do not realize how many crimes there are that are disqualifying, until it applies to them.

At some point the Supreme Court may curtail permanent loss of gun rights, Martha Stewart still has hope, but there is no telling when or if that day might come.

 

[BeoBill]

Some people get killed in the fight by friendly fire, even when intentions are good. Pat Tillman was killed by friendly fire while fighting in Afghanistan.

Sometimes, all you need is one sniper with the right target. Meanwhile, the tanks and planes just cannot get there because well, they are just too obvious and too easy to shoot down.

Hopefully, my analogies are working. I don't need to be on the bricks with you screaming, yelling, and holding up signs. I just need to be more connected with the actual decision makers to make more of a difference than you do.

What makes you think that you get through to the actual decision makers more than I do while sitting behind a desk? Is there any evidence to prove that walking the bricks is more effective than political capital, making phone calls, sending e-mails, etc.?

Digital warriors do their part in the fight too. As do pavement pounders and glad handers. No one can say that any one is more important than the others. An elephant is eaten bite by bite.

 

[Blacksmith101]

See, that is the thing. You probably associate only with far right leaning people in the country. Sadly, there are some big cities in Maryland that have high population counts that are mostly liberal. They are fine with UBC. Heck, I am fine with UBC. I can take it or leave it. I am not clamoring for it, but if they pass it, meh.

I know people that are in the moderate camp that are fine with UBC. One if a really good friend of mine and he moved to Wisconsin last year and does not miss Maryland a bit. He leans to the right like me. He was also alright with UBC before I was alright with it.

If I thought NICS could lead to a national registry and eventual confiscation, I would not be alright with it. Granted, I understand the worry. We are just one more step away from NICS becoming a registry by them passing just one more law. Thing is, we already have a registry here in Maryland via the Form 77R. If it went all NICS across the board and we could say goodbye to the Form 77R, I would feel a lot better about things.

You said the majority of people support UBC do you have any facts to back up that statement?
Of course you realize that poles by left leaning organizations as reported in the MSM are suspect so I feel sure you will only share information from unbiased sources.

 

[joppaj]

We're up to two suspensions now. Let's be very clear. Reporting someone just because you disagree with them is getting annoying. People insulting other people because they disagree IS a violation of our Rules. We've given out enough warnings...

 

[fabsroman]

People only vote for UBCs because they dont think it will apply to them. You know that "misdemeanor" conviction from the 90s which you did not get expunged? disqualifying. oops. Well, at least you can get it expunged, but some people are not so lucky and their troubled yute follows them around. People do not realize how many crimes there are that are disqualifying, until it applies to them.

At some point the Supreme Court may curtail permanent loss of gun rights, Martha Stewart still has hope, but there is no telling when or if that day might come.

Well, maybe if they find out NICS applies to them too and they have no way to work around it illegally, then they might put forth more effort to change the laws. How does it make any sense to have a NICS check for new gun purchases, but not for a FTF purchase. With the FTF possibility, it is simple to get around NICS. So, either scrap NICS or NICS for everybody. Then, change the disqualifying crimes. I don't even like the fact that criminals are banned from their 2nd Amendment Right. They should get it back upon release from prison. I could live with violent felons needing to do a little bit more to get their 2nd Amendment Right back, but that is about it. Mental records reporting should be shored up. That is my ideal world. A firearm for every free person, except those that are mentally ill.

 

[fabsroman]

You said the majority of people support UBC do you have any facts to back up that statement?
Of course you realize that poles by left leaning organizations as reported in the MSM are suspect so I feel sure you will only share information from unbiased sources.

This recent Gallup poll shows 92% of those polled favor requiring background checks for all gun sales. You have to scroll about 1/4 of the way down and it is the 2nd of a group of statements.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx

https://www.politifact.com/wisconsi...americans-support-background-checks-all-gun-/

Just do a Google search of "Do Americans favor universal background checks" and read up on it. Figure out which way the wind is blowing, and in this case it is pretty much a hurricane. Then, try to fight that hurricane. My only question is whether the NICS check has actually been litigated. If it is Constitutional, then I seriously doubt we will be avoiding universal background checks.

 

[teratos]

The constitution is a living document, just as valid today as when it was written. Why, because it's a framework bound by spiritual principals the nature of which have not and will not change EVER!!
I cannot think of another document in modern civilization written with a closer convergence between mans law & God's!!

The “living document” thing is liberal speak. While it can be amended, The Constitution is, in fact, a very concrete document.

 

[rseymorejr]

This recent Gallup poll shows 92% of those polled favor requiring background checks for all gun sales. You have to scroll about 1/4 of the way down and it is the 2nd of a group of statements.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx

https://www.politifact.com/wisconsi...americans-support-background-checks-all-gun-/

Just do a Google search of "Do Americans favor universal background checks" and read up on it. Figure out which way the wind is blowing, and in this case it is pretty much a hurricane. Then, try to fight that hurricane. My only question is whether the NICS check has actually been litigated. If it is Constitutional, then I seriously doubt we will be avoiding universal background checks.

Many of the same people who are OK with UBC also believe that we can order a gun off the internet or buy from a dealer at a gunshow without a background check. I'd be OK with having access to the NICS as an individual to be able to check out a stranger that wanted to buy a gun from me. None of this shit will have any effect on crime. It's just another expense and a pain in the ass.

 

[fabsroman]

The “living document” thing is liberal speak. While it can be amended, The Constitution is, in fact, a very concrete document.

An a liberal would say that "The Constitution being a concrete document" is conservative speak.

The Constitution is open to interpretation by SCOTUS and it is open to Amendment. So, the moderate says "The Constitution is concrete, SCOTUS is a sledgehammer and Amendment is a jackhammer."

 

[PowPow]

If you were able to ask chickens if they liked white meat or dark meat, 92% would probably give you the popular answer. However, those same chickens would give you a completely different answer if they found out the question's answer required them to be dinner. The folks answering these UBC polls have no idea what they are being asked, but they give the answer that the poll was intended to facilitate. This is also why we do not want to live in a Democracy, and the founders knew that.

There's a really good book you all might want to check out on a rainy day. It's called The 5000 Year Leap, by W Clean Skousen.

 

[Art3]

I don't even understand what this thread is about any more, but I feel the urge to get IBTL...

"We Will Not Comply..." Personally, I like to subtitle it in conversation with, "...because 'We Shall Overcome' was already taken."

Rack...I love, respect and admire the guy...but for all his insight and intelligence, I really wish he could see when he was being baited/trolled into crossing the line and just side step Especially when something is being organized this weekend...we really need him here. His overall presence here is more important than an untenable argument with a single "member." I get it; the rules are the rules. He shouldn't get special treatment...but he also should have known better.

Some folks won't mind UBC's? Honestly, as a life long Marylander, it's kinda been my life anyway However, I'll fight the good fight to the bitter end against UBC's simply because they are one more cut. I don't have any personal interest in bumpstocks either but that doesn't mean I want to give them up. When all the ruckus was about getting rid of bump stocks, for the children, there wasn't much talk of UBC's, was there? Now that bump stocks are essentially gone, it's going to take UBC's to save the children. Once UBC's have passed, what are they going to take away from us next to save the children? Semiautos? Ammo regulation? Magazines? I DO care about all of them, that's why I want the line in the sand drawn as far past the things I don't care about as possible.

Probably a lot of folks didn't care about the Sudetenland or even Poland...but maybe if they had fought Hitler there, he wouldn't have gotten to France...which, apparently some folks did care about.

 

[44man]

See, that is the thing. You probably associate only with far right leaning people in the country. Sadly, there are some big cities in Maryland that have high population counts that are mostly liberal. They are fine with UBC. Heck, I am fine with UBC. I can take it or leave it. I am not clamoring for it, but if they pass it, meh.

I know people that are in the moderate camp that are fine with UBC. One if a really good friend of mine and he moved to Wisconsin last year and does not miss Maryland a bit. He leans to the right like me. He was also alright with UBC before I was alright with it.

If I thought NICS could lead to a national registry and eventual confiscation, I would not be alright with it. Granted, I understand the worry. We are just one more step away from NICS becoming a registry by them passing just one more law. Thing is, we already have a registry here in Maryland via the Form 77R. If it went all NICS across the board and we could say goodbye to the Form 77R, I would feel a lot better about things.

Maryland is full of leftist anti gun douchbags and freeloading hood rats so any poll taken here doesn’t surprise me but I do not believe that a majority of Americans are for ubc’s.

Polls ask questions that steer ignorant people to the answer they want chosen.

Ask most Americans if when their ten year old nephews and nieces wangbto go hunting and you want to give them a gun for Christmas but you have to get the child a background check they will tell you you’ve lost your mind. Ask them if when uncle bob dies and aunt Jane wants to give you his guns and you have to get a back ground check , again crazy.

And nics puts your name on a list already and that’s what they want, to know every time you get a gun , any way you get a gun. They may say different but they are lying.

To think any other way is to be anti gun, anti 2a and foolish.

The dems, leftists and socialists want our guns gone.

Do you ever wonder why?

And they haven’t “ just passed a law” to do it yet because they are scared of the consequences

 

[Jimboy]

Right on 44man!

But as a CPA I am way too busy at this time of year to write encyclopedias so I'll stop right here lol.

 

[fabsroman]

Right on 44man!

But as a CPA I am way too busy at this time of year to write encyclopedias so I'll stop right here lol.

Get your law degree. Then you can type faster and string words together a lot easier too.

You can read a lot quicker too and really think on your feat. World of difference between CPA work and legal work. Granted, not all CPA's are cut out for law school. However, the bar exam was a heck of a lot easier than the CPA exam.

 

[fabsroman]

Maryland is full of leftist anti gun douchbags and freeloading hood rats so any poll taken here doesn’t surprise me but I do not believe that a majority of Americans are for ubc’s.

Polls ask questions that steer ignorant people to the answer they want chosen.

Ask most Americans if when their ten year old nephews and nieces wangbto go hunting and you want to give them a gun for Christmas but you have to get the child a background check they will tell you you’ve lost your mind. Ask them if when uncle bob dies and aunt Jane wants to give you his guns and you have to get a back ground check , again crazy.

And nics puts your name on a list already and that’s what they want, to know every time you get a gun , any way you get a gun. They may say different but they are lying.

To think any other way is to be anti gun, anti 2a and foolish.

The dems, leftists and socialists want our guns gone.

Do you ever wonder why?

And they haven’t “ just passed a law” to do it yet because they are scared of the consequences

Yes, that is the far right thinking. Already posted the results of polls showing that 90%, if not more, of US citizens want universal background checks. Me, I want them to keep the guns out of the hands of crazies. On the fence about keeping guns out of the hands of criminals.

Somewhat crazy to think that Trump got elected and the Republicans had both the Senate and House for 2 years when 90% of the country is standing on the left side.

What evidence do you have that NICS is a registry of how many guns I buy? Do you have any evidence of that, or is that just rhetoric? Assuming arguendo that you actually do have evidence of that, how would NICS keep track of which guns I currently own versus me not owning any gun? Does NICS keep track of the exact gun I buy?

Like I said, way more worried about the Form 77R than the Form 4473, but hey, that is just me.

 

[44man]

Yes, that is the far right thinking. Already posted the results of polls showing that 90%, if not more, of US citizens want universal background checks. Me, I want them to keep the guns out of the hands of crazies. On the fence about keeping guns out of the hands of criminals.

Somewhat crazy to think that Trump got elected and the Republicans had both the Senate and House for 2 years when 90% of the country is standing on the left side.

What evidence do you have that NICS is a registry of how many guns I buy? Do you have any evidence of that, or is that just rhetoric? Assuming arguendo that you actually do have evidence of that, how would NICS keep track of which guns I currently own versus me not owning any gun? Does NICS keep track of the exact gun I buy?

Like I said, way more worried about the Form 77R than the Form 4473, but hey, that is just me.

In 2013 we were told by valerio (sp and it may be the wrong name, it’s been a while) that md knows of every gun you ever bought that you filled paperwork on. He said it during testimony on one of the bills. Most likely they know you purchased a gun but not the exact gun when you’ve had a nics check andvthe exact gun with a 77r.

Your to smart to think they aren’t keeping track. How do they have a list with the number of guns you have when your red flagged?

Ftf sales they don’t know about scares them to death because they don’t know how many guns to take from you when it’s time. So they want a list of them too.

Plus all the new ugc’s Will stop a lotta of folks getting others into hunting or shooting by putting another barrier in front of you to giving them or getting them a gun.

And if 90% of Americans were leftists and for ubc’s trump would not be president and your cherished hunting guns would already have been chopped up to make the chains to bind you with.

Your too smart for the stupid line of thinking your spewing. Ubc’c are just another infringement and if you think the mga is gonna trade ubc’s for 77r’s or give any anti gun commy laws back to us then you need to seek professional help.

Again, your too smart to think this way or else you have the worse case of Stockholm syndrome I have ever heard of

I hope you get better

 

[Some Guy]

Yes, that is the far right thinking. Already posted the results of polls showing that 90%, if not more, of US citizens want universal background checks. Me, I want them to keep the guns out of the hands of crazies. On the fence about keeping guns out of the hands of criminals.

Somewhat crazy to think that Trump got elected and the Republicans had both the Senate and House for 2 years when 90% of the country is standing on the left side.

What evidence do you have that NICS is a registry of how many guns I buy? Do you have any evidence of that, or is that just rhetoric? Assuming arguendo that you actually do have evidence of that, how would NICS keep track of which guns I currently own versus me not owning any gun? Does NICS keep track of the exact gun I buy?

Like I said, way more worried about the Form 77R than the Form 4473, but hey, that is just me.

The NICS record retention regulations are written broadly enough to allow for government abuse. They can and are retained more than 90 days for broadly written and poorly described purposes. And records that "may" indicate violations can be retained indefinitely.

Anyone interested in these regulations can read them here:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/25.9