" Foster a Bill" Drive

Mr H · Mar 2, 2014

Just a reminder...

The more your testimony has a personal aspect to it, the less the chance it will be seen as a "form letter".

If folks just send the same page multiple times, we risk looking like we're just following instructions, and not having individual concerns

Use these templates to guide your testimony... add personal considerations, and make it your own

Gryphon · Mar 2, 2014

ShafTed said:
Still writing furiously, just got done with this for HB36. I tried printing the figures on my home printer in B&W, didn't look bad at all and still able to get the point across.

A question: has anyone from Del. Mike's office ever said whether is better to send "a large pile of small pieces" in the form of a separate email for each piece of testimony, or one email with all of the testimony consolidated in one big, multi-page PDF?

Great job with the graphics

ShallNotInfringe · Mar 2, 2014

highfructosecornsyrup said:
which hand full of bills need some loving? Id like to see each bill have a good amount of testimonies...

need sample write ups for 717 and 719. nothing yet.

hodgepodge · Mar 2, 2014

ShallNotInfringe said:
need sample write ups for 717 and 719. nothing yet.

I'll pick up at least one of the orphans. It looks like I'll have some time at home tomorrow!

ShallNotInfringe · Mar 2, 2014

Mr H said:
Just a reminder...

The more your testimony has a personal aspect to it, the less the chance it will be seen as a "form letter".

If folks just send the same page multiple times, we risk looking like we're just following instructions, and not having individual concerns

Use these templates to guide your testimony... add personal considerations, and make it your own

exactly...

Please use the samples for information and as a way to get your motor running to write your own testimony.

Mr H · Mar 2, 2014

I go back to a Reporterette from WaPo last year, who asked several of us, "So what are you telling people to say?"

The other guys have trouble believing we are individuals acting independently for a common goal, but rather think we are driven by a larger organization to follow a plan.

Brooklyn · Mar 2, 2014

ShallNotInfringe said:
need sample write ups for 717 and 719. nothing yet.

I am just working my way along I am up to these now and will post .

I need all done my tonite so Andi has a chance... I hope we can get it all done..

BTW I am doing individual statement for each from scratch -- just using the samples as research -- it was helpful -- but its best that we not look cookie cutter in any way ...

TopShelf · Mar 2, 2014

1199 discussion

all discussion on 1199 - too many to quote inline

The omission of subsection 4-203 (b) from the bill, as pointed out by dblas, I would expect to be an oversight (as noted by Mr H). Normally anything they want to delete would be placed into brackets and bolded. That section does need to be added back in to the bill, or there is a big problem

As for the bill itself, I believe it is an attempt to break out the penalties for loaded vs unloaded weapons. It looks to want non-loaded weapons as misdemeanor, and loaded ones as felonies. Thoughts?

C) 1) II) 5) - this is a concern! multiplying the charges, instead of all as 1 charge? This multiplies the penalties? Looks to only apply to a loaded weapon.

I am going to step away from this bill for a few minutes and come back for another look...after my brain recovers from trying to decipher this one

Brooklyn · Mar 2, 2014

Mr H said:
I go back to a Reporterette from WaPo last year, who asked several of us, "So what are you telling people to say?"

The other guys have trouble believing we are individuals acting independently for a common goal, but rather think we are driven by a larger organization to follow a plan.

No they are just doing the disinformation stuff they always do .

But here copy and paste will not do. I still have hours of work ..

Mr H · Mar 2, 2014

Brooklyn said:
No they are just doing the disinformation stuff they always do ...

Trust me... we're both right on this one.

Brooklyn · Mar 2, 2014

Mr H said:
Trust me... we're both right on this one.

Ok but I still like to slam the press :lol2:

Mr H · Mar 2, 2014

If you only knew how funny that was.....

BDWMS · Mar 2, 2014

Did HB 715. Will work on others when the baby goes to sleep.

Mr H · Mar 2, 2014

BDWMS said:
Did HB 715. Will work on others when the baby goes to sleep.

Be sure to post your product... and thanks

iH8DemLibz · Mar 2, 2014

I'd like to chime in for a moment if I could regarding the Non-Loaded Handgun vs. Loaded Handgun.

You guys can kick me and spit on me when you see me Tuesday.

I'm not sure I mind them making a distinction between the two. In some respects, it could protect many of us. I and many other on this site shoot a lot. There have been times when I have forgotten about a handgun being in my truck after going to the range. After realizing it, I crap my pants, then take it inside and get on with my day. I'm sure others have as well. I would much rather have my brain fart found unloaded than loaded if I were pulled over and my vehicle searched.

Point 2. And this is where the tin foil comes in.

Since we all know criminals don't give a flying reindeer f**k about the law and will carry a loaded handgun if it serves their purposes, it must mean something else. For years, we have been fighting for a right to carry for self protection and for years they have been telling us to go pound sand. Here's the tin foil part. They know the world, not to mention Bloodymore, is becoming more and more dangerous. Tin foil getting tighter. What if this is designed to discourage us from saying f**k you, Annapolis and carrying for protection anyway. Separating this issue into un-loaded vs. loaded would certainly do that. Just my opinion, but I beleive they would love to serve one or two or a dozen of us up as an example/examples to the rest of us.

I welcome all thoughts on the matter.

Brooklyn · Mar 2, 2014

HB717 Supporting

I support HB717. Few are more concerned with firearms a safety than those who train regularly along side those who do not take it seriously. Had the mandated requirement not turned into something of a joke I might support it. It is at best a mockery. The fact that the legislature refused to consider accepting the NRA program, which is an industry wide gold standard for safety instruction, while bizarrely and in code, allowed NRA instructors to teach the course is yet another affront.

The NRA is in fact the most effective and wide spread safety program and advocate in the nation. Perhaps if you would learn that NRA is much more than gun lobby , has nothing whatsoever to do with the industry, and is in fact the gold standard of basic safety training, you might consider that your mandated training is actually making folks less safe by discouraging them them from getting real safety training.

While may of us are far more than willing to exceed by a far margin the meager standards of the HQL training , others of limited experience or funds may be duped into thinking that they are safe, a conceit that may in fact cost a life someday. Is your blind distrust of everything NRA so total that you ignore their good record on safety even if it costs a the life of a child. Thanks to this mandate I have an even harder time getting folks to take 'real traing'.

I urge a favorable report or at least consider an amendment to allow 'NRA Basic Pistol' to serve as the performance demonstration -- we will all be safer for it.

Thank you

Mr H · Mar 2, 2014

iH8DemLibz said:
I'd like to chime in for a moment if I could regarding the Non-Loaded Handgun vs. Loaded Handgun.

You guys can kick me and spit on me when you see me Tuesday.

I'm not sure I mind them making a distinction between the two. In some respects, it could protect many of. I and many other on this site shoot a lot. There have been times when I have forgotten about a handgun being in my truck after going to the range. After realizing it, I crap my pants, then take it inside and get on with my day. I'm sure others have as well. I would much rather have my brain fart unloaded than loaded.

Point 2. And this is where the tin foil comes in.

Since we all know criminals don't give a flying reindeer f**k about the law and will carry a loaded handgun if it serves their purposes. So, it must mean something else. For years, we have been fighting for a right to carry for self protection and for years they have been telling us to go pound sand. Here's the tin foil part. They know the world, not to mention Bloodymore, is becoming more and more dangerous. Tin foil getting tighter. What if this is designed to discourage us from saying f**k you, Annapolis and carrying for protection anyway. Separating this issue into un-loaded vs. loaded would certainly do that.

I welcome all thoughts on the matter.

Assuming you mean 1199...

Read what I sent in #276.

I intended to touch lightly on the inadvertent transgression, but not approach the "do it anyway"...

There is something bigger with 1199. What it is, though, completely confounds me.

Brooklyn · Mar 2, 2014

iH8DemLibz said:
I'd like to chime in for a moment if I could regarding the Non-Loaded Handgun vs. Loaded Handgun.

You guys can kick me and spit on me when you see me Tuesday.

I'm not sure I mind them making a distinction between the two. In some respects, it could protect many of. I and many other on this site shoot a lot. There have been times when I have forgotten about a handgun being in my truck after going to the range. After realizing it, I crap my pants, then take it inside and get on with my day. I'm sure others have as well. I would much rather have my brain fart unloaded than loaded.

Point 2. And this is where the tin foil comes in.

Since we all know criminals don't give a flying reindeer f**k about the law and will carry a loaded handgun if it serves their purposes. So, it must mean something else. For years, we have been fighting for a right to carry for self protection and for years they have been telling us to go pound sand. Here's the tin foil part. They know the world, not to mention Bloodymore, is becoming more and more dangerous. Tin foil getting tighter. What if this is designed to discourage us from saying f**k you, Annapolis and carrying for protection anyway. Separating this issue into un-loaded vs. loaded would certainly do that.

I welcome all thoughts on the matter.

Not sure of the context..in which you are speaking

In the bill I was referring to the penalty is enhanced even if the gun is unloaded-- that is no distinction.

I do not have an issue with transport being unloaded only-- transport is not carry and its not bear. The fought for bearing arms is still on going.

TopShelf · Mar 2, 2014

1199- oppose

short and sweet - running out of time

These bills looks to be an attempt to break out and define penalties for loaded Vs unloaded firearms. I have several concerns with the bill as it is written:

• Subsection 4-203 (b) has been completely removed without the customary placement of the section in [bracketed bold] so as to denote its removal
• Subsection 4-203 (A) i, ii, iii, and iv never specify loaded vs unloaded firearm, so adding a section v that calls out loaded firearm is ambiguous.
• I do not feel these crimes warrant being classified as a felony.
• I do not feel that simply carrying a gun, loaded or not, warrants a mandatory jail sentence
• I feel a probation before judgment for these crimes is something that should not be explicitly excluded in the law

I respectfully request you give this bill an unfavorable report.

TopShelf · Mar 2, 2014

iH8DemLibz said:
I'd like to chime in for a moment if I could regarding the Non-Loaded Handgun vs. Loaded Handgun.

You guys can kick me and spit on me when you see me Tuesday.

I'm not sure I mind them making a distinction between the two. In some respects, it could protect many of us. I and many other on this site shoot a lot. There have been times when I have forgotten about a handgun being in my truck after going to the range. After realizing it, I crap my pants, then take it inside and get on with my day. I'm sure others have as well. I would much rather have my brain fart unloaded than loaded.

Point 2. And this is where the tin foil comes in.

Since we all know criminals don't give a flying reindeer f**k about the law and will carry a loaded handgun if it serves their purposes, it must mean something else. For years, we have been fighting for a right to carry for self protection and for years they have been telling us to go pound sand. Here's the tin foil part. They know the world, not to mention Bloodymore, is becoming more and more dangerous. Tin foil getting tighter. What if this is designed to discourage us from saying f**k you, Annapolis and carrying for protection anyway. Separating this issue into un-loaded vs. loaded would certainly do that. Just my opinion, but I beleive they would love to serve one or two or a dozen of us up as an example to the rest of us.

I welcome all thoughts on the matter.

If you are talking 1199, see my post here: http://www.mdshooters.com/showpost.php?p=3061883&postcount=299

I would be okay with them lightening up penalties for unloaded carry...lets say a $5 fine or so hahaha

Check out the rest of my post for the issues I take with the 1199 as written, and as per my non-lawyer understanding

" Foster a Bill" Drive

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Banana'd

inveniam viam aut faciam

Lil Firecracker

Senior Member (Gold)

Lil Firecracker

Banana'd

I stand with John Locke.

@TopShelfJS

I stand with John Locke.

Banana'd

I stand with John Locke.

Banana'd

Active Member

Banana'd

When All Else Fails.

I stand with John Locke.

Banana'd

I stand with John Locke.

@TopShelfJS

@TopShelfJS

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics