HPRB April 19, 2016 Meeting Thread

lonzo said:

Since there are so many of the HPRB threads with a lot of comments, I'd thought of asking here. Sorry if its all been asked and answered and beat to death

I'm about to submit my proof, but something tells my MSP will deny it. I know I have two choices, but 1) do you have to be there in person? if so, 2) can you have a rep? Because of work and the days and times of HPRB meetings, I just dont think I'll be able to make mine when it comes up. Also, 3) can you ask for closed hearing?

Click to expand...

PJDiesel said:

1) As far as I know
2) Yes, but to assist you in the hearing (see number 1, I'm not positive on that)
3) Yes

Click to expand...

I thought the process du jour was if you were an applicant that your hearing had to be open but that if you were a permit holder it had to be closed unless you waived your right to privacy.

Unless of course you have "National Secret Squirrel" info which you really shouldn't be providing in either closed or open hearings to people without a clearance.....

No clue.

The whole "Closed" meeting ******** is old already. If someone has enough of a story or clearance, they shouldn't even have been drug that far into this dog and pony show of a process.

I pasted the closed meeting exceptions from the OMA into an earlier HPRB thread.

I posted a link to the the 1/19 meeting video where White is visably disappointed that video recording was allowed. Boggles the mind what kind of insane ******** must have went down years ago.

So, yes, I could based on "(2) protect the privacy or reputation of an individual with respect to a matter that is not related to public business; (getting a handgun permit isnt the public biz, one can argue) and yes, it is optional of showing up in person, but I'm sure that it only hurts if you arent there



12.09.01.04

.04 Request for Review.

A. An applicant shall make a request for review to the Board:

(1) In writing; and

(2) Within 10 days of the date the applicant received the Secretary's decision on the applicant's handgun permit.

B. Within 10 days of receipt of a request for review, the Chairman, or a designee, shall:

(1) Open a file on the request for review; and

(2) Notify the applicant, in writing, that the Board:

(a) Has received the request for review; and

(b) Shall decide on the request for review within 120 days of the Board's receipt of the request for review.

C. Processing a Request for Review.

(1) Within 30 days of the Board's receipt of the request for review, the Board may request, in writing, that the Secretary, or a designee, provide the Board with information concerning the action taken on the applicant's handgun permit.

(2) Within 90 days of the Board's receipt of a request for review, the Board shall act upon the request by:

(a) Reviewing at a Board meeting, information obtained under §C of this regulation and other information the Board acquires from the applicant or other sources; or

(b) Conducting a hearing.

(3) If the Board elects to conduct a hearing, the Board shall notify the applicant, in writing, at least 10 days before the date of the hearing.

(4) If the applicant fails to appear for a scheduled hearing, the Board may:

(a) Reschedule the hearing once; and

(b) If the applicant fails to appear for the rescheduled hearing, decide on the request for review without the applicant present.

(5) The Board's decision on an applicant's request for review shall be based on requirements under:

(a) Public Safety Article, §5-312, Annotated Code of Maryland; and

(b) COMAR Title 29.

(6) After processing a request for review, the Board may:

(a) Sustain the decision of the Secretary;

(b) Reverse the decision of the Secretary; or

(c) Modify the decision of the Secretary.

(7) A decision of the Board is based on a majority vote of Board members present at a meeting or hearing.

(8) If the Board is unable to reach a decision by majority vote, the decision of the Secretary stands.

lonzo said:

So, yes, I could based on "(2) protect the privacy or reputation of an individual with respect to a matter that is not related to public business; (getting a handgun permit isnt the public biz, one can argue) and yes, it is optional of showing up in person, but I'm sure that it only hurts if you arent there

Click to expand...

That has always been my way of thinking. I think the person appealing an MSP decision to the board should have the option of being heard in closed session.

I suspect the board thinks along the same lines as cases are referred to by case number with no mention of names.

I'd highly recommend showing up in person with all your support. The board lacks administrative support and has lost entire case files before. For instance, mine.

I believe hearings should be in public not because the applicant's desire for privacy isn't valid, but because the nature of the hearing is to establish G&S which is a subjective and undefined term and matter of policy. It is important for the basis of such decisions to be public. After all, if cases go to Circuit court i presume the case will be open to the public.

I believe the MSP / AGs office prefers everything to be in closed session so that that the unconstitutional practices of those offices receive as little day light as possible.

Anyone who asks for a closed session is well advised to bring an attorney because otherwise you are going to get rick rolled. The board will not care what kind of secret squirrel clearance you have, you will fight them alone and that's the worst damn way to fight.

Gryphon said:

From the DPSCS website today:

"Handgun Permit Review Board

The Handgun Permit Review Board will be meeting on April 5th and April 19th at 6776 Reisterstown Road, Baltimore, MD 21215.The agenda for April 5th will be 1 hearing for Permit Application #438-88413 and several reviews. The agenda for April 19th will be 2 hearings for Permit Application # 438-82124 and 438-83826A plus several reviews.

* * *

The HPRB's new policy and procedures will be forthcoming."

Click to expand...

The "A" means someone is trying to take a second crack (new initial application) at getting denied. I do not know if you get an "A" when doing a renew, but I know when I applied again after getting denied the first time I had the same Application (permit) number plus "A".

If you are concerned about not having to be there in person, then request a Review instead of a Hearing.

Much less likely to obtain a favorable result, but you won't have to show up. Along that slippery slope, simply not appealing u out denial will require the least time and effort.

Biggfoot44 said:

If you are concerned about not having to be there in person, then request a Review instead of a Hearing.

Much less likely to obtain a favorable result, but you won't have to show up. Along that slippery slope, simply not appealing u out denial will require the least time and effort.

Click to expand...

its about obligations and time. I travel out of state everyday and for the meeting, I would have to travel another 30+ miles to get there..so that's a 3+ hour drive during the week and that depends on traffic..so thats why I ask about a rep.... I can do that..I think...but if not, I guess I'll have to wait till I move or till the courts hash it out..
5 more years in Maryland...

So we are back to tie votes. Has the issue of ties been resolved back to what they are suppose to indicate? No vote to overturn MSP. The MGA isn't stupid.

Been out of town for 2 days, and just got back in this morning. Plus I am still trying to unpack my office after a relocation late last week, so I am not sure if I will be able to make tonight's meeting.

For those curious, and since I may not be in attendance, I have not received the Board's written decision following its action on March 15th to reverse the MSP and order the "issue of an unrestricted permit valid where not prohibited by law." Because the Chairman announced back on April 5 that the letter was finalized, approved and being mailed, and since it's now more than 30 days after the hearing, I have made several inquiries but not gotten a response yet.

Gryphon said:

I have made several inquiries but not gotten a response yet.

Click to expand...

Get used to it. I'd write up and sign a document instructing your wife to file suit against the MSP and HPRB in the event you are met with an untimely death that could have been avoided with proper protection.

They think it's all a joke, as evidenced by not giving a flying fvck how long they take to do everything.

I wish I could be there tonight, but can't. Someone ask them who is taking minutes!

W2D said:

Someone ask them who is taking minutes!

Click to expand...

Someone ask them what exactly is the disconnect between their meetings/decisions and the MSP actually printing a permit.

PJDiesel said:

Someone ask them what exactly is the disconnect between their meetings/decisions and the MSP actually printing a permit.

Click to expand...

I somewhat asked Mr. Wilson this at the last meeting. I gave him a letter that I copy and pasted from a previous thread, about handing the MSP their decision right after the hearing in an effort to cut down on some of the time between hearings, letters being approved and then sent to MSP. His response was that they could not due to some current policy/rule? And they where not going to start making policy changes until after their confirmations.

There should be a flood of letters then - or are they going to revisit the cases of every one of Jurgena's votes?

Tonight should be enlightening. I may or may not be able to attend, but will follow the play by play here.

W2D said:

There should be a flood of letters then - or are they going to revisit the cases of every one of Jurgena's votes?

Click to expand...

His votes still hold, if I understand correctly.