Can we agree on SB281 (& NOT FSA2013)?

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!
  • slsc98

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    May 24, 2012
    6,852
    Escaped MD-stan to WNC Smokies
    Can we all agree it makes sense to "make a habit" of referring to OweMalley's stake through the heart of law and order in MD as "SB281" and NOT THE TITLE HE CHOSE?

    I ask as we've all noticed the tendency of former MD Governors (Schaeffer, Glendening, etc.) and most other gun-grabbing liberals to insidiously title their legislative garbage with names purposely designed and intended to tug at emotions (right-side of the brain). And, not just here but, NY ("SAFE Act"), CO, CA, MA and NJ, etc. :sad20:

    This tactic is especially effective with the majority of the ever increasing population of sheeple inhabiting MD AND MOREOVER, when people talk about a landmark gun grab years and decades after we lost the fight to stop or derail, let's see, Schaeffer's "Saturday Night Special Law" or, Glendening's "Anti-Crime Omnibus Bill." :envy:

    Anyhoo, up until recently, I saw just about all bandwidth on our forums referring to "SB281."

    Having been a participant and spectator in our General Assembly's perennial idiocy, it has been with some consternation that I now see thread titles referring to SB281 increasingly using the "emotional play" (and utterly deceitful) title chosen by OweMalley's delusional staff. :deal:

    I mean, "Firearms Safety Act?" Really? I don't think there is anyone here on MDS that is not aware that the General Assembly actually has succeeded in making MD a much, much more dangerous place to live (let's not even get into their quashing amendments calling for increased penalties for use of firearms by career criminals while simultaneously piling ridiculous pitfalls and landlines for otherwise law abiding citizens to tip toe around and eventually step on!) :mad54:

    Just curious if anyone else has noticed this trend over the decades and, more recently, the last several weeks or so . . .? :patriot:
     

    Bald Fat Guy

    Active Member
    Oct 7, 2014
    418
    Well the thing of it is that while the term *SB281* will forever live in infamy with "us" , the numbering system in the General Assembly starts over every session. When 281 was mentioned to lawmakers in 2014 they had no idea what we were talking about, and tried to remember/ look up the totally unrelated Bill 281 of 2014 .

    I get you about not wanting to play into their propaganda of mislabeling , but if we're going to engage with anyone outside our own in group , we need them to know what we're refering to.
     

    fabsroman

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 14, 2009
    35,883
    Winfield/Taylorsville in Carroll
    We just discussed this matter last week, and I think the consensus was that if we are going to refer to it as SB281, we do so with SB281-2013. Thing is, I am pretty sure that everybody on this board knows exactly what is meant by SB281. The question is, how do we refer to it in public? Me, I prefer the Massive 2nd Amendment Infringement Act of 2013 that was preceded by the Reach Into Your Wallet and Take Everything You Have Act which was preceded by the Wealth Redistribution Act.
     

    Mr H

    Banana'd
    Facts are stubborn things, I guess.

    A "SB" (or a "HB", for that matter) is a good reference until the next session. After that, it's [technically] useless.

    It is what it is... the FSA13.

    Wow... I managed to type that without using the actual words, and no one burst into flames.

    Amazernating.
     

    Brooklyn

    I stand with John Locke.
    Jan 20, 2013
    13,095
    Plan D? Not worth the hassle.
    Seriously.

    If thats what we are left with we have lost.


    F.,k the name. call it the intolerable act if you want.

    But its got an official name and we cant by pass that in briefs testimony or public advocacy.

    Thats it.
     

    Jim12

    Let Freedom Ring
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 30, 2013
    34,027
    When 281 was mentioned to lawmakers in 2014 they had no idea what we were talking about, and tried to remember/ look up the totally unrelated Bill 281 of 2014 .

    I get you about not wanting to play into their propaganda of mislabeling , but if we're going to engage with anyone outside our own in group , we need them to know what we're refering to.

    They knew. They were playing dumb. They want to change the subject and they want you to forget. Changing and controlling the the lingo is one way to do that. Keep reminding them.

    With all the controversy, protests, and packed galleries in the MGA just last year, does anybody believe that they don't know what you're talking about? If they don't, they are suffering from memory loss and need to be evaluated.
     

    dogbone

    Ultimate Member
    Nov 14, 2011
    2,981
    GTT - Gone To Texas
    They knew. They were playing dumb. They want to change the subject and they want you to forget. Changing and controlling the the lingo is one way to do that. Keep reminding them.

    With all the controversy, protests, and packed galleries in the MGA just last year, does anybody believe that they don't know what you're talking about? If they don't, they are suffering from memory loss and need to be evaluated.

    Of course they knew but if they play dumb they can bypass your questions and outrage. Call it FSA2013 and they are pinned down. If they pretend not to know what FSA2013 is, I'm sure you can enlighten them.
     

    Jim12

    Let Freedom Ring
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 30, 2013
    34,027
    Of course they knew but if they play dumb they can bypass your questions and outrage. Call it FSA2013 and they are pinned down. If they pretend not to know what FSA2013 is, I'm sure you can enlighten them.

    Total opposite. If they pretend not to know what SB281 is, don't allow them to bypass it. It presents the perfect opening for you to dredge up the old wounds, call them on their bs memory lapse, and mock them for having such a short memory and for obviously trying to forget.
     

    DC-W

    Ultimate Member
    Patriot Picket
    Jan 23, 2013
    25,290
    ️‍
    If you talk to your reps or anyone else in Annapolis (you do, don't you?), saying SB281 has nothing to do with that law anymore.
    Call it what it is. Feel slimy and use the official title or just use the acronym; FSA2013.

    Example:
    You: "SB281 is an unconstitutional infringement of the 2nd Amendment!"
    Senator: "Okay... SB281 has to do with renaming a highway, so I'm not sure how it infringes on your 2nd Amendment right."

    Look at that! SB281 in 2014 had to do with the Selective Service and didn't even make it out of committee: http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmga/frmMain.aspx?id=sb0281&stab=01&pid=billpage&tab=subject3&ys=2014RS

    Hell. Even just calling it "the gun bill" probably gets more understanding than SB281.
     

    ShafTed

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 21, 2013
    2,223
    Juuuuust over the line
    My nomenclature has been Firearms Suppression Act of 2013. I actually used that a couple of times in testimony this session, and noticed knowing smirks from "our" committee members.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,390
    Messages
    7,279,727
    Members
    33,445
    Latest member
    ESM07

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom