Petition for Concealed Carry for Veterans

I agree with Patrick and others on this. Remember during SB281, they made of point of making a distinction between hunters and the rest of us. I remember working gun shows then and having guys walk up and ask about their hunting rifles and shotguns. Once they were satisfied that SB281 did not affect them, they walked away. Like others have said, we do not want to create classes of citizens. Last time I checked, there is nothing in 2A that talks about rights being departmentalized.

We need to stick together as all citizens and 2A supporters. That is where we are the strongest.

I'm pretty sure the ultimate goal is "Shall Issue" around here, not adding more classifications of people to "May Issue."

Norton said:

No more special classes. All animals are equal, none more so than others.

We have enough special classes of people in this state.

Click to expand...

+1

Either the Constitution applies or it doesn't!

MDvet said:

Are there "rights" that needs to be earned? I believe so.

To exercise our right to vote, we need to register. Or we cannot commit crime. To exercise our right to free speech, we must abide by certain limitations.

So being a veteran earns someone what?

Click to expand...

Rights are not earned, or given as a political favor. Rights are endowed by our creator at birth.

The only limitation one needs to abide by, is their conscience.

Inigoes said:

Rights are not earned, or given as a political favor. Rights are endowed by our creator at birth.

The only limitation one needs to abide by, is their conscience.

Click to expand...

MDvet said:

Are there "rights" that needs to be earned? I believe so.

To exercise our right to vote, we need to register. Or we cannot commit crime. To exercise our right to free speech, we must abide by certain limitations.

So being a veteran earns someone what?

Click to expand...

I didn't volunteer for the military to earn anything "special" or additional "rights" that do not apply to every other citizen. I volunteered out of a sense of duty, I did my stint, I got out, I need nor want anything special from anyone for that service.

So, being a veteran earns me nothing, nor should it earn me anything.

dblas said:

I didn't volunteer for the military to earn anything "special" or additional "rights" that do not apply to every other citizen. I volunteered out of a sense of duty, I did my stint, I got out, I need nor want anything special from anyone for that service.

So, being a veteran earns me nothing, nor should it earn me anything.

Click to expand...

Not true, Sir... you, and all others that have sacrificed for their country have earned respect... mine and many others. Thank you for your service...

Applehd said:

Not true, Sir... you, and all others that have sacrificed for their country have earned respect... mine and many others. Thank you for your service...

Click to expand...

+1 ^This

Signed, ya gotta start somewhere.

I would sign it but don't twitter, tweet or facebook or any of that kind of stuff...I also see where some are of the opinion that what's good for Vets is also good for non-Vets and I can't argue with that. Stand together lest you stand alone...already enough of that going on.

Yellowhand said:

I would sign it but don't twitter, tweet or facebook or any of that kind of stuff...I also see where some are of the opinion that what's good for Vets is also good for non-Vets and I can't argue with that. Stand together lest you stand alone...already enough of that going on.

Click to expand...

Again

What Patrick et al said.

The real goal is the overhaul of the whole scheme , starting with G&S .rights belong to all , not just the prevedledged classes. BUT

*******

All of the above is true. BUT Maryland being Maryland , and in particularily the MGA being the MGA. A total overhaul will have to be force from outside , and the MGA won't do it internally. IF it could actually be done internally , it would quickly put 10's of thousands of Permits in the hands of relativly "normal" citizens, which would increase the number of permit holders several fold over existing. When the blood DOESN't run in the streets ( or the hallways of schools ) it would give directly Md based facts to sway the MGA to further allow carry.



Yeah , that's weak and convolted , probably doesn't override the larger principles involved , and has low chance of getting anywhere. And online petitions probably have even less effect than peeing in your own pants.


I wouldn't initiate any push for this personally. If any of the organized groups cared about my opinions , I'd recomend assigning a priority of about 900rth . But if Delegates/ Senators spontaniously introduce this , it makes it out of Committees , and more inclusive reforms don't ... THEN I would lobby the heck out of it for the above incremental tactical reasons.

Keystone70 said:

...Remember during SB281, they made of point of making a distinction between hunters and the rest of us. I remember working gun shows then and having guys walk up and ask about their hunting rifles and shotguns. Once they were satisfied that SB281 did not affect them, they walked away. Like others have said, we do not want to create classes of citizens. Last time I checked, there is nothing in 2A that talks about rights being departmentalized.

We need to stick together as all citizens and 2A supporters. That is where we are the strongest.

Click to expand...

The Demanding Mommies and Bloomberg are targeting Maryland this year for a background check/registration and 7-day waiting period for all long guns, which pretty much means the hunting rifles and shotguns that some in the hunting community didn't think would be affected.

In short, we know for sure that they want a 77-R type system for all long guns. Now that they banned the AR-15, they want the old "assault rifle" laws applied to the "traditional hunting rifles" that they said they'd never go after...

Hunters supported us in SB281, but we could have had more. There are a lot of "I got mine" people out there who won't step up until they are in the crosshairs. I say, "welcome to the team", even if belatedly.

Patrick said:

I am a veteran, and I want no "right" that my fellow citizens cannot also enjoy. So respectfully, I cannot support this proposal. I don't want to be an "only one" - the only ones permitted a right, based on attachment to government service.

I am not questioning your motives or your desire to do the right thing. I think we all want to support veterans. But I didn't swear to uphold a Constitution just so some of its most fundamental rights would only apply to me, but not my neighbor.

Thanks for hearing me out, and thanks for the thought.

Click to expand...

Any ground we gain is good. The more armed good guys we have, the better off we will be.

Patrick said:

I am a veteran, and I want no "right" that my fellow citizens cannot also enjoy. So respectfully, I cannot support this proposal. I don't want to be an "only one" - the only ones permitted a right, based on attachment to government service.

I am not questioning your motives or your desire to do the right thing. I think we all want to support veterans. But I didn't swear to uphold a Constitution just so some of its most fundamental rights would only apply to me, but not my neighbor.

Thanks for hearing me out, and thanks for the thought.

Click to expand...

I agree 100%!

SB281 and veterans: to answer the questions, "what does being a veteran get me?"

In SB281 we worked to exempt veterans from the training requirement for HQL. That was more a practical issue than a "I served, so I deserve" matter.

Also, we worked pretty hard to get rid of the penalties on registration for active-duty military. As proposed, the law would have given you a 30-day window to register your affected guns, or face a felony with possible 3-years of prison. There were no exceptions for deployed personnel. So if you owned an AR/AK and were off in Afghanistan fighting a war, you would be an instant felon when you returned. No exceptions.

We pushed an amendment that we though a slam-dunk: modify the law to allow a delayed registration period for those who were deployed. There were no other attachments to the amendment - this was a straight-up effort to keep people from criminal violation. Again, we didn't add anything to the amendment or use the issue for other gain. It was a simple change: if you are fighting the war, your registration window shifts to the time when you are next home, and no jail if you miss the original 30-day window.

The amendment failed in a party-line vote in Mike Miller's Senate. I was in the Senate when it happened, and mouths hung agape. It was explained to Senators - in detail - what the law would do to the military (and deployed DoD civilians), and why this change was needed. Even if registration passed, we were just protecting active-duty people from arrest.

The Democratic majority did not care. They literally voted to put active-duty warfighters into jail, just for owning a gun that Bloomberg hates, while fighting our wars overseas. Demanding Mommies demanded soldiers rot in prison.


EDIT: Would like to point out that we were able to kill registration entirely once the bill got to the House, so this issue became moot. Registration was killed with some odd allies not military related. But this was one of our "big wins" in a bad year: registration and many criminal penalties for non-violent acts were nixed.

Patrick said:

The Demanding Mommies and Bloomberg are targeting Maryland this year for a background check/registration and 7-day waiting period for all long guns, which pretty much means the hunting rifles and shotguns that some in the hunting community didn't think would be affected.

In short, we know for sure that they want a 77-R type system for all long guns. Now that they banned the AR-15, they want the old "assault rifle" laws applied to the "traditional hunting rifles" that they said they'd never go after...

Hunters supported us in SB281, but we could have had more. There are a lot of "I got mine" people out there who won't step up until they are in the crosshairs. I say, "welcome to the team", even if belatedly.

Click to expand...

What?!?!

I'm usually glad to see Friday roll around but hearing this news has completely crapped in the cornflakes of my weekend. I know they'll be looking for a few "easy wins" after the drubbing in the midterms and may be emboldened by the BS they got passed in Washington but I had some small hope they wouldn't try the same silliness here in Maryland.

Thank you, Patrick, for the intel on our enemy's intent. Ruined my weekend and likely the entire holiday season but kicked me into gear for the fight ahead.

dogbone said:

What?!?!

I'm usually glad to see Friday roll around but hearing this news has completely crapped in the cornflakes of my weekend. I know they'll be looking for a few "easy wins" after the drubbing in the midterms and may be emboldened by the BS they got passed in Washington but I had some small hope they wouldn't try the same silliness here in Maryland.

Thank you, Patrick, for the intel on our enemy's intent. Ruined my weekend and likely the entire holiday season but kicked me into gear for the fight ahead.

Click to expand...

Their plans pre-dated Hogan. We'll see what happens next.

Also, more intel coming about other groups as we get details. Right now it's somewhere between RUMINT and HUMINT (same thing?). Either way, don't want to start something without some confirmation.

Upside is this is not going to be 2013. Downside is more work for us all.

Rights are not earned. They come from our creator.

Privileges are earned.

MDvet said:

Are there "rights" that needs to be earned? I believe so.

To exercise our right to vote, we need to register. Or we cannot commit crime. To exercise our right to free speech, we must abide by certain limitations.

So being a veteran earns someone what?

Click to expand...

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.