How to file a complaint to the MSP Internal Affair Unit

montoya32 · Nov 9, 2015

I have been made aware of some inaccuracies and misconduct by the MSP during handgun permit applications and during HPRB meetings. If you have an application that was never decided, if you had a hearing/review that was conducted without your knowledge, if you submitted information to MSP for your appeal that was not added to your file and given to the HPRB for your appeal, if you requested a hearing and were not granted one or if your application/hearing/appeal/review is outside of the timeframes that the MSP dictates, contact me so we can file formal complaints against all of those involved.

Racer Doug14 · Nov 9, 2015

You go Tim! Kick them in the stones!

BeoBill · Nov 9, 2015

NICE!

Who'da thunk?

montoya32 · Dec 2, 2015

Just wanted to share a little file I compiled for those who may need these contacts. I will try to keep it updated. I encourage anyone to use this info as needed.

PJDiesel · Dec 2, 2015

http://msa.maryland.gov/msa/mdmanual/23dsp/html/dsp.html

Note terrorism hot line for the non-existent threat of.... err,... terrorism as conveyed in their written testimony last night.

Link shared with me last night after I inquired with Jack about the head count in Licensing.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...7FP78vAnA&sig2=p6FvKaBGCg0f7bQ6qNN0xw&cad=rja

Mark75H · Dec 2, 2015

Decline in 2014 disapprovals; result of prerequisite
application screening

Is this "prerequisite application screening" before or after paying the $50 fee?

moojersey · Dec 2, 2015

PJDiesel said:
http://msa.maryland.gov/msa/mdmanual/23dsp/html/dsp.html

Note terrorism hot line for the non-existent threat of.... err,... terrorism as conveyed in their written testimony last night.

Link shared with me last night after I inquired with Jack about the head count in Licensing.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...7FP78vAnA&sig2=p6FvKaBGCg0f7bQ6qNN0xw&cad=rja

Stop it now. There is obviously no credible terror threat to MD or the USA by any type of radicalized group such a ISIS. You guys are paranoid. :rolleyes:

Inigoes · Dec 2, 2015

moojersey said:
Stop it now. There is obviously no credible terror threat to MD or the USA by any type of radicalized group such a ISIS. You guys are paranoid.

Does our liberties being attacked by the MD AG count?

BeoBill · Dec 2, 2015

PJDiesel said:
http://msa.maryland.gov/msa/mdmanual/23dsp/html/dsp.html

Note terrorism hot line for the non-existent threat of.... err,... terrorism as conveyed in their written testimony last night.

Link shared with me last night after I inquired with Jack about the head count in Licensing.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...7FP78vAnA&sig2=p6FvKaBGCg0f7bQ6qNN0xw&cad=rja

The MCAC is the public nexus of CT INTEL for the state of Maryland. One would assume that the MSP (even the monks in the LD) obtain info from them.

Public linky: http://www.mcac.maryland.gov/

You pay for it - look around for G&S fodder. :innocent0

Hawkeye · Dec 2, 2015

So I'm not in this situation, but if someone had applied for a permit, was denied, and requested a hearing but was then instead assigned only a review by Ms. Street, who would the proper person be to speak to about that?

Is IA the route to go with a non-sworn employee of the MSP?

(I am guessing that Ms. Street is not sworn here.)

PJDiesel · Dec 2, 2015

I'm starting to get a feeling I know why she might want to (personally and immediately) redact her name from board documents.......

PJDiesel · Dec 2, 2015

Hawkeye said:
So I'm not in this situation, but if someone had applied for a permit, was denied, and requested a hearing but was then instead assigned only a review by Ms. Street, who would the proper person be to speak to about that?

Is IA the route to go with a non-sworn employee of the MSP?

(I am guessing that Ms. Street is not sworn here.)

IA of the MSP is going to have nothing to do with her, it's a board issue.

I'll defer to the pros, but I think the MSP is out of the loop at that point.

dblas · Dec 2, 2015

Hawkeye said:
So I'm not in this situation, but if someone had applied for a permit, was denied, and requested a hearing but was then instead assigned only a review by Ms. Street, who would the proper person be to speak to about that?

Is IA the route to go with a non-sworn employee of the MSP?

(I am guessing that Ms. Street is not sworn here.)

she is an employee of DPSC not MSP. The HPRB falls under DPSC, not MSP.

montoya32 · Dec 2, 2015

PJDiesel said:
I'm starting to get a feeling I know why she might want to (personally and immediately) redact her name from board documents.......

She was complicit with the denial of hearings and pushing through reviews?

Biggfoot44 · Dec 2, 2015

Just a wild guess, but prerequisie screening is probably those conversations along the lines of " look buddy, you're going to get turned down anyway, so I'll do you the favor of letting you withdraw your application " .

PJDiesel · Dec 3, 2015

montoya32 said:
She was complicit with the denial of hearings and pushing through reviews?

She was (in my opinion) attempting to inform the chair if a written request was that of a request for HEARING or REVIEW.

She is apparently in charge (somehow) of scheduling who goes before the board and when, yet doesn't seem to know the difference between a review and a hearing. At minimum she attempted to have the board act on a request for hearing as if it were a review, which we know has happened several times prior.

The board itself doesn't know how to handle EITHER instance, they displayed that to over 20 onlookers on the 1st of December.

Hawkeye · Dec 3, 2015

dblas said:
she is an employee of DPSC not MSP. The HPRB falls under DPSC, not MSP.

Ahhh ok. For some reason I had it in my head that she was employed at the Licensing Division of MSP. That clears that up.

PJDiesel said:
I'm starting to get a feeling I know why she might want to (personally and immediately) redact her name from board documents.......

My (fairly uneducated) guess from reading the proceedings of the meetings lately would be because the spotlight is getting shined in her direction and it's become clear that she has been making decisions that she should not have been making in relation to the HPRB, as well as the fact that with increased scrutiny of and interest in these meetings that she has been "bothered" a lot by the public lately.

RoadDawg · Dec 3, 2015

PJDiesel said:
IA of the MSP is going to have nothing to do with her, it's a board issue.

I'll defer to the pros, but I think the MSP is out of the loop at that point.

Correct...

The Internal Affairs Section of the MDSP is there for the sole purpose of investigations into complaints/reports/allegations of violations of existing Laws or Departmental Policy, Rules and Regulations, by members of that agency.

Complaints about non members of that agency, are not within the scope of their duties.

ras_oscar · Dec 5, 2015

My guess, based on the HPRB thread, is she was doing the same thing she was doing in the previous administration; reducing the numbers of denied permits through beaurocratic shenanigans. Now the real process is coming to light, as it should the open meetings laws. They don't want their approval criteria to become public, lest more people realize they also qualify. IMHO, our next step ought to be to repeal the ability of the board to do ANYTHING in private session. If they are referring to applicants by application number rather than name, there should be no privacy issues. Also, there ought to be an attorney on the board, either as a member or an advisor, to help them understand what the law actually says and how current supreme court decisions define their authority and limitations. I remember when I went before the Fairfax county zoning board, the zoning executive director was constantly reminding the board that their deliberations were falling outside the scope of their authority, based on the laws passed by the legislature.

BeoBill · Dec 5, 2015

ras_oscar said:
My guess, based on the HPRB thread, is she was doing the same thing she was doing in the previous administration; reducing the numbers of denied permits through beaurocratic shenanigans. Now the real process is coming to light, as it should the open meetings laws. They don't want their approval criteria to become public, lest more people realize they also qualify. IMHO, our next step ought to be to repeal the ability of the board to do ANYTHING in private session. If they are referring to applicants by application number rather than name, there should be no privacy issues. Also, there ought to be an attorney on the board, either as a member or an advisor, to help them understand what the law actually says and how current supreme court decisions define their authority and limitations. I remember when I went before the Fairfax county zoning board, the zoning executive director was constantly reminding the board that their deliberations were falling outside the scope of their authority, based on the laws passed by the legislature.

I would LOVE to see that happen during HPRB deliberations. Needless to say, YMMV depending on which side of the fence Counsel was on. Neutrality is paramount, which means the AG Office is immediately disqualified.

How to file a complaint to the MSP Internal Affair Unit

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Ultimate Member

Thread killer

Crank in the Third Row

Ultimate Member

Attachments

Banned

MD Wear&Carry Instructor

Sic Semper Tyrannis

Head'n for the hills

Crank in the Third Row

The Leatherstocking

Banned

Banned

Past President, MSI

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Banned

The Leatherstocking

Nos nostraque Deo

Ultimate Member

Crank in the Third Row

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics