Go Back   Maryland Shooters > Gun Rights and Legislation > Maryland 2A Issues

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old February 8th, 2014, 08:56 PM   #1
Knuckle66
Member
 
Knuckle66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Hagerstown
Posts: 516
Larry Hogan 2A

All, I just read on Change Maryland's FB page that he is for 2A and against SB281. If you want to see the comment go here https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...3375900&type=1
Once there under someone else's post Bill Thomas Change Maryland replied to his question about 2A. I've copied and pasted it here for the people that don't have FB.

Quote:
Change Maryland Larry Hogan & Boyd Rutherford are not career politicians and have never held elected office. Larry is a small business owner with over 25 years in the private sector and a proven track record of bringing hundreds of businesses and thousands of jobs to Maryland. Boyd also has a wealth of private sector experience and both have the right public management experience from their respective roles as Maryland Cabinet Secretaries and Boyd as an administrator on the federal level under George W. Bush. Boyd has also been credited with making government more effective and less costly for taxpayers at the same time. In addition Larry Hogan is a strong supporter of the Second Amendment and is opposed to SB 281. He will work to keep guns away from criminals and the mentally ill. Hogan supports tougher mandatory sentencing for criminals who commit crimes with a gun, but he is against taking away the rights of law abiding citizens


__________________
I'm not in the Dark I'm in the Shade
Knuckle66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 9th, 2014, 02:33 PM   #2
Straightshooter
Senior Member
 
Straightshooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Baltimore County
Posts: 2,743
Doesn't sound like any better stance on 2A then we got from Ehrlich.
We need to pin both Hogan and Craig down on a promise to order MSP to accept personal protection as G&S and their willingness to push for repeal of FAS2013, not simply that the stand for 2A.


__________________
SAF Life Member
MSI Member
#250A
Straightshooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 9th, 2014, 07:09 PM   #3
oupa
Member
 
oupa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 816
"... supports tougher mandatory sentencing..."

Anyone who says this is someone I'd be leery of. The framers put a legal system in place like no other. It's primary goal was protection of the innocent even at the cost of allowing the guilty to go free in the absence of evidence unfitting such protections of basic rights. They did this because THEY saw first hand how a government gone astray can trample the individual who gets in it's way. We can see it today when the full weight of the largest nation on earth is directed at individuals for both good and bad reasons.

Each case was to be judged individually and penalties handed down accordingly.

"Mandatory sentences" is merely a legislator's way of getting around said protections for the purpose of appearing "tough on crime" for the sole purpose of getting elected. The problem is "the law of unintended consequences."
Anyone who embraces mandatory minimums must first believe that government will not turn on it's own citizens.

Most cops and prosecutors are normal working stiffs out to do a good job. Unfortunately, as the founders knew they would, some are not. Our principals are in place to protect us all. Once we pervert the principals to make it easier to penalize the guilty, we also make it easier to penalize the innocent. Mandatory minimums make it impossible to be understanding of a clear, mistake. ...if only life were so clear and easy to navigate.


__________________
"A citizen may not be required to offer a good and substantial reason why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs." Judge Lamb
If 1A extends protection to hardcore internet porn, how can 2A not extend protection to my AR?
oupa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2014, 12:01 AM   #4
Knuckle66
Member
 
Knuckle66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Hagerstown
Posts: 516
I believe tougher sentencing means the opposite of what MoM is doing now, which is basically letting them go. You can have tougher sentencings like mandatory 5 years for a crime with a gun and no parole. Instead of 1 or 2 years with a chance for parole. I believe that if you make the sentencing more harsh people will think twice about committing the crime in the first place.
(I don't know what the law says now I didn't look it up, I'm just making an example)


__________________
I'm not in the Dark I'm in the Shade
Knuckle66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2014, 12:02 AM   #5
Knuckle66
Member
 
Knuckle66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Hagerstown
Posts: 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Straightshooter View Post
Doesn't sound like any better stance on 2A then we got from Ehrlich.
We need to pin both Hogan and Craig down on a promise to order MSP to accept personal protection as G&S and their willingness to push for repeal of FAS2013, not simply that the stand for 2A.
100% agree. But at least this is a step in the right direction. I was going to make a post on his FB page but you can't, you can only comment on posts they make.


__________________
I'm not in the Dark I'm in the Shade
Knuckle66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2014, 08:32 AM   #6
jc1240
Member
 
jc1240's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Carroll County
Posts: 760
Quote:
Originally Posted by oupa View Post
"... supports tougher mandatory sentencing..."

Anyone who says this is someone I'd be leery of. The framers put a legal system in place like no other. It's primary goal was protection of the innocent even at the cost of allowing the guilty to go free in the absence of evidence unfitting such protections of basic rights. They did this because THEY saw first hand how a government gone astray can trample the individual who gets in it's way. We can see it today when the full weight of the largest nation on earth is directed at individuals for both good and bad reasons.

Each case was to be judged individually and penalties handed down accordingly.

"Mandatory sentences" is merely a legislator's way of getting around said protections for the purpose of appearing "tough on crime" for the sole purpose of getting elected. The problem is "the law of unintended consequences."
Anyone who embraces mandatory minimums must first believe that government will not turn on it's own citizens.


Most cops and prosecutors are normal working stiffs out to do a good job. Unfortunately, as the founders knew they would, some are not. Our principals are in place to protect us all. Once we pervert the principals to make it easier to penalize the guilty, we also make it easier to penalize the innocent. Mandatory minimums make it impossible to be understanding of a clear, mistake. ...if only life were so clear and easy to navigate.
The other edge of that sword is to balance the judges who impose pathetically weak sentences. I used to be in favor of of mandatory sentences, but I've grown weary of them. Weak judges and politicians are the problem for convicted felons being allowed to continue their evil ways against the public.


__________________
John
jc1240 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2014, 11:46 AM   #7
BeoBill
Crank in the Third Row
 
BeoBill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Baja Bowie
Posts: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Straightshooter View Post
Doesn't sound like any better stance on 2A then we got from Ehrlich.
We need to pin both Hogan and Craig down on a promise to order MSP to accept personal protection as G&S and their willingness to push for repeal of FAS2013, not simply that the stand for 2A.
So has anyone been able to pin him down on this issue yet?

Will anyone try?


__________________
.
NRA Life Member
--------------------------
WWJD? Carry concealed.
BeoBill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2014, 11:55 AM   #8
Straightshooter
Senior Member
 
Straightshooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Baltimore County
Posts: 2,743
If I see him again I'll definitely ask him. Had a chance twice but it didn't cross my mind at the time. The best bet would be for MSI or another body to pose the question as that word hold more water than SS standing up later and asking when he's going to keep his promise should he win.


__________________
SAF Life Member
MSI Member
#250A
Straightshooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2014, 12:09 PM   #9
abean4187
Senior Member
 
abean4187's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,093
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knuckle66 View Post
I believe that if you make the sentencing more harsh people will think twice about committing the crime in the first place.
(I don't know what the law says now I didn't look it up, I'm just making an example)
It won’t make people think twice, criminals rarely have long term goals and ambitions. Rather, this would keep violent offenders behind bars for a longer period of time and keep them off the streets, which is a good thing.

Overall, it would reduce violent crime because most of the violent crime is done by repeat offenders. Granted, concealed carry keeps them off the streets forever, if you catch my drift.


__________________
SAF Life (Defenders Club), NRA Member
abean4187 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2014, 12:11 PM   #10
Inigoes
Head'n for the hills
 
Inigoes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: SoMD / West PA
Posts: 28,960
Unless the candidate is willing to issue an official gubernatorial proclamation stating "self-defense is a good and substantial reason", they are blowing smoke up everyone's backside.
Inigoes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2014, 12:22 PM   #11
Straightshooter
Senior Member
 
Straightshooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Baltimore County
Posts: 2,743
That's exactly what I said. Unless we pin them down on their willingness to make a proclamation including a time period to get it done, then were back to the same " if they send me a ccw bill I'll sign" crap that Ehrlich fed us. Who among us ever thought such a bill would make it out of the GA?


__________________
SAF Life Member
MSI Member
#250A
Straightshooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2014, 02:37 PM   #12
Ragnar
Senior Member
 
Ragnar's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Davidsonville, Anne Arundel County, Maryland
Posts: 1,019
How about if MSI or Take Back Maryland sends around a short survey to all gubernatorial candidates asking their positions on 3-4 specific gun issues like repeal of FSA, shall-issue carry permits, etc.?


__________________
When they kick out your front door
How you gonna come?
With your hands on your head
Or on the trigger of your gun?

--The Clash
Ragnar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2014, 02:43 PM   #13
Boondock Saint
Returnedish Member
 
Boondock Saint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: White Marsh
Posts: 13,056
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar View Post
How about if MSI or Take Back Maryland sends around a short survey to all gubernatorial candidates asking their positions on 3-4 specific gun issues like repeal of FSA, shall-issue carry permits, etc.?
MSI has done that in the past but I couldn't say if there are plans to do it for this election cycle.
Boondock Saint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2014, 03:33 PM   #14
oupa
Member
 
oupa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 816
Quote:
Originally Posted by jc1240 View Post
The other edge of that sword is to balance the judges who impose pathetically weak sentences. I used to be in favor of of mandatory sentences, but I've grown weary of them. Weak judges and politicians are the problem for convicted felons being allowed to continue their evil ways against the public.



__________________
"A citizen may not be required to offer a good and substantial reason why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs." Judge Lamb
If 1A extends protection to hardcore internet porn, how can 2A not extend protection to my AR?
oupa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2014, 04:11 PM   #15
Lougotagun
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Baltimore City
Posts: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by oupa View Post
"... supports tougher mandatory sentencing..."

Anyone who says this is someone I'd be leery of. The framers put a legal system in place like no other. It's primary goal was protection of the innocent even at the cost of allowing the guilty to go free in the absence of evidence unfitting such protections of basic rights. They did this because THEY saw first hand how a government gone astray can trample the individual who gets in it's way. We can see it today when the full weight of the largest nation on earth is directed at individuals for both good and bad reasons.

Each case was to be judged individually and penalties handed down accordingly.

"Mandatory sentences" is merely a legislator's way of getting around said protections for the purpose of appearing "tough on crime" for the sole purpose of getting elected. The problem is "the law of unintended consequences."
Anyone who embraces mandatory minimums must first believe that government will not turn on it's own citizens.

Most cops and prosecutors are normal working stiffs out to do a good job. Unfortunately, as the founders knew they would, some are not. Our principals are in place to protect us all. Once we pervert the principals to make it easier to penalize the guilty, we also make it easier to penalize the innocent. Mandatory minimums make it impossible to be understanding of a clear, mistake. ...if only life were so clear and easy to navigate.
Very well put.
Lougotagun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2014, 06:37 PM   #16
willandtestament
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeoBill View Post
So has anyone been able to pin him down on this issue yet?

Will anyone try?
I will. I am friends with Boyd and we have discussed this extensively in the past. I do not know Larry but I will be getting to know him well in the future. This is at the top of my list to be addressed in addition to obvious business issues for full support.
willandtestament is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 11th, 2014, 12:13 AM   #17
Biggfoot44
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 6,780
For any R to have any vaguely realistic chance of winning statewide office , they will need to get substantial number of votes from the proverial Triangle . Not a majority , but double digit percentages. If they were to go on record for the things we really want , they would be totally demonized by the Dems and the media , and there crossover votes would dry up. And thereby not come close to getting elected.

Our dream candidate would need three things :

1. Let us know by winks and nods that he will come thru on 2A.

2. Once elected remember those winks and nods.

3. Take office acepting that he will be un-reelectable , and any further political ambitions in Md are dead. Don't waste any effort futile bipartisanship or compromise, and go scorched earth from day 1.
Biggfoot44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 11th, 2014, 07:15 AM   #18
abean4187
Senior Member
 
abean4187's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,093
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggfoot44 View Post
For any R to have any vaguely realistic chance of winning statewide office , they will need to get substantial number of votes from the proverial Triangle . Not a majority , but double digit percentages. If they were to go on record for the things we really want , they would be totally demonized by the Dems and the media , and there crossover votes would dry up. And thereby not come close to getting elected.

Our dream candidate would need three things :

1. Let us know by winks and nods that he will come thru on 2A.

2. Once elected remember those winks and nods.

3. Take office acepting that he will be un-reelectable , and any further political ambitions in Md are dead. Don't waste any effort futile bipartisanship or compromise, and go scorched earth from day 1.
^This

Moderate Republicans have zero chance of winning in MD so I am not sure why people are calling for Republicans to start hitting up the Tea Party mantra. If Republicans are going to win they are going to have to hardcore lie about what they stand for. Just remember, Obama said he wasn’t coming for our guns and then after he was re-elected the first thing he did was come for our guns. Had he ran on that he would have lost. Likewise, if you run on a pro gun platform in MD you will lose.


__________________
SAF Life (Defenders Club), NRA Member
abean4187 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 11th, 2014, 01:23 PM   #19
Knuckle66
Member
 
Knuckle66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Hagerstown
Posts: 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by abean4187 View Post
It won’t make people think twice, criminals rarely have long term goals and ambitions. Rather, this would keep violent offenders behind bars for a longer period of time and keep them off the streets, which is a good thing.

Overall, it would reduce violent crime because most of the violent crime is done by repeat offenders. Granted, concealed carry keeps them off the streets forever, if you catch my drift.
Oh I catch your drift.


__________________
I'm not in the Dark I'm in the Shade
Knuckle66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 11th, 2014, 03:57 PM   #20
Knuckle66
Member
 
Knuckle66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Hagerstown
Posts: 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggfoot44 View Post
For any R to have any vaguely realistic chance of winning statewide office , they will need to get substantial number of votes from the proverial Triangle . Not a majority , but double digit percentages. If they were to go on record for the things we really want , they would be totally demonized by the Dems and the media , and there crossover votes would dry up. And thereby not come close to getting elected.

Our dream candidate would need three things :

1. Let us know by winks and nods that he will come thru on 2A.

2. Once elected remember those winks and nods.

3. Take office acepting that he will be un-reelectable , and any further political ambitions in Md are dead. Don't waste any effort futile bipartisanship or compromise, and go scorched earth from day 1.
100% agree!


__________________
I'm not in the Dark I'm in the Shade
Knuckle66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  Home Page > Forum List > Gun Rights and Legislation > Maryland 2A Issues


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2013, Maryland Shooters, LLC