21st Gun Bill Day thread

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Status
    Not open for further replies.

    smokey

    2A TEACHER
    Jan 31, 2008
    31,412
    Who's going to be there tomorrow? Here's a thread for updates, pictures, meetups...general stuff related to being in annapolis on the 21st. Hopefully we can also arrange a nice after-action bar crawl in this thread for participants of people getting off of work that want to be caught up to speed by those there.

    activist tool thread for those who can't be there
    msi overview of bills coming up
     

    smokey

    2A TEACHER
    Jan 31, 2008
    31,412
    Look forward to meetin ya mr h. I'm charging up my battery for my camera and laptop tonight. I feel like it'll be a good chance for fun pictures tomorrow.
     

    bnich82

    African American w/a Gun!
    Dec 8, 2011
    362
    Going to see if I can figure out your mailing list tool tonight so I can fire out my "testimony" that I would give if I could make it to the hearing tomorrow. It will be based on my "Introduction Thread" as my job has be out all times of the hour any given day in rough neighborhoods. The passage of this bill will be key to me feeling more secure in my job as well as my day to day duties.

    Just because I can't be there, I want my voice to be heard.....

    Thank you MSI and all that you do for us...It's time for us to give back too...
     

    zoostation

    , ,
    Moderator
    Jan 28, 2007
    22,857
    Abingdon
    I have to go out of state tomorrow, so I am limited to writing letters. This is the text of my letter on HB618, the one to create a task force to come to a predetermined conclusion that MSP "needs" access to gun buyers personal mental health records. Feel free to copy and paste all of it or whatever you like.

    I wish to write today to express my concern over House Bill 618, Delegates Simmons, Dumais, and Kramer's bill to establish a so-called "Task Force" to, in the bill's own words:
    "(2) consider and make recommendations regarding legislative options for
    (i) further limiting the access of individuals with a history of mental illness to regulated firearms; and
    (ii) expanding the access of law enforcement officers to certain mental health records"

    As you may know this bill began in the House last year as an attempt to expand the prohibited persons category in the Public Safety Article to include all persons who had been treated for any mental health issue in the DSM-IV in the past five years. This would have included people with "disorders" such as caffeine addiction, smoking withdrawal, or insomnia. After the predictable firestorm of criticism from the mental health community as well as the Fraternal Order of Police, the sponsor altered the bill to make it simply a task force to study the issue. After the bill failed in committee last year, it appears it has once again been brought to light.

    I submit that this bill is still unacceptable, the task force structure as proposed is inherently not objective, and it is clear from the very wording of the bill that it seeks only to create a source of justification in the next legislative session. Justification for allowing the state police to delve deeper into personal medical records, and to further restrict and intimidate law-abiding Marylanders who wish merely to exercise their Second Amendment rights.

    I know that time is at a premium so late in the session, so I will restrict my comments to these highlights.

    There is no correlation between mental ilness in general and a propensity for violence. This has been shown time and again in clinical research. For legislators to use the public stage to imply otherwise is in my opinion a sad, transparent, and shameless attempt to whip up bigotry and hysteria for political ends.

    The mantra of the bill's sponsor, repeated over and over again at last year’s hearing, is inaccurate. Maryland law does not only restrict access to regulated firearms to those committed for over 30 days in an institution. The current law already excludes those with a mental disorder and a history of violence against themselves or others.

    The task force membership is overwhelmingly stacked in favor of pro gun-control interests. Of the twelve members, many are bureaucrats from the executive branch of state government. It is no secret where the current administration stands on gun control. Many others are from interests not traditionally friendly to gun rights. It appears the inclusion of the NRA and perhaps FOP representatives is little more than a shallow attempt to provide for a faux claim of inclusiveness to the task force.

    There is no representation at all for veterans, National Guardsmen, reservists, or active duty military personnel. It seems ironic in a very sad way that those who sustain emotional trauma in battle defending our rights will have their own rights taken away for that very reason. As well, many of these individuals return home to jobs where they are required to be able to possess a firearm for work. Yet this entire class of citizens is ignored in the bill.

    The inclusion if the highly biased Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy Research, an organization that seems from past legislative sessions to never have found a gun control law they didn't like, casts further doubt on the objectivity of the task force. Further concerning is their director Dr. Webster's testimony before the US Congress on May 10, 2007 where he stated: " Mental illnesses...........also significantly heighten risk for committing acts of both interpersonal violence and self-inflicted violence." Such an untrue, inaccurate, and shockingly broad-brushed statement from a person supposedly educated in the social sciences can only cause one to question the speaker's objectivity.

    The task force is charged with researching more access to mental health records for the state police. Given both recent and more distant history, one can only say that increased surveillance powers have not been something that the state police have had a history of handling particularly well. Does anyone seriously want them having more access to the most sensitive of medical records of law-abiding citizens?

    The task force idea starts from a conclusion that the field of mental health is even capable of giving an accurate prediction of future violent behavior. This seems unlikely from much research that has been done on the matter. Monahan (1981) reviewed five separate studies of this topic and found that psychological professionals were only accurate one time out of every three in their predictions of violent or non-violent behavior.

    This bill is, in my opinion, nothing more than a cheap attempt at the use of bigotry and ignorance for political purposes. An effort below the dignity of the General Assembly that, again just in my opinion, should make its sponsors feel ashamed. It will do nothing to prevent violence, but will make it more difficult to encourage individuals to seek help when they could benefit from it. I hope that is it is brought to a vote, the committee will view it unfavorably.

    Thank you for your time.
     

    matt.ruszala

    Active Member
    Jan 31, 2012
    399
    NorthEast Baltimore City
    I have to go out of state tomorrow, so I am limited to writing letters. This is the text of my letter on HB618, the one to create a task force to come to a predetermined conclusion that MSP "needs" access to gun buyers personal mental health records. Feel free to copy and paste all of it or whatever you like.

    Very well written though bashing the establishment will more than likely create a barrior between your intent to protect rights and and the outcome you desire.

    Imagine someone reading this that was for the bill. Now you just insulted them indirectly with your choice of words. I wouls suggest you take your quality pen work and seek a softer approach and persuade instead of inflict defensive behavior by the reader.

    Just my opinion. You caught my attention to a bill that didn't really draw my interest until I read your words. Though I am on your side by default of the second amendment rights we seek to protect.

    Keep up the good work. Just hone the delivery and you'll have them jumping to our side in no time.
     

    Boxcab

    MSI EM
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 22, 2007
    7,866
    AA County
    Something for future consideration...

    Have we tried the "online petition" route yet?

    My boss asked me about that yesterday, and I couldn't come up with an answer for him.

    They have been tried in the past, a search might lead you to one.

    The General Assembly members accept them for what they are. They are not considered serious as it only takes 5 sec. to vote and any clown with a computer can stack the deck. The GA looks harder at efforts that require more passion (passion carries over to election votes) and time to complete. There are no single solution and any effort will generally help.
     

    smokey

    2A TEACHER
    Jan 31, 2008
    31,412
    Getting out of shower, tossing on blue polo and should b on the road by 8 if any around severn need a ride
     

    tsmith1499

    Poor C&R Collector
    Jan 10, 2012
    4,253
    Southern Mount Airy, Md.
    Can't be there in person, but have sent several hand written letters and emails to our "elected" officials in Annapolis. To all the guys that are going down, thank you for your efforts. Maybe I will be able to join you next time.
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,925
    Messages
    7,259,296
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom