PERMIT APPLICATION RETURNED

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!
  • Patrick

    MSI Executive Member
    Apr 26, 2009
    7,725
    Calvert County
    Which leads to an interesting question in these tough times: If the state wished to continue the full background interviews, including references, who is going to pay for them?

    Our fees are statutorily defined. That $75 doesn't last an hour in the government. Assuming a full set of interviews/chasing down references takes 2 hours per app, then an additional 1 hour labor in processing, the state is out about $150 per head.

    This upcoming special session is going to be interesting. We expect another attack based on fees.

    Depending on how we do in that fight might determine how hard it is to get a permit, not only in terms of cost but also in terms of steps. If we starve the process of cash, the state may have no choice but to reduce the more ridiculous efforts we go through and get us closer to other Shall-Issue states.

    Increased costs will result in fewer people with permits and a disproportionate hit on the poor. It's right out of the Bloomberg playbook.
     

    Jim Sr

    R.I.P.
    Jun 18, 2005
    6,898
    Annapolis MD
    Which leads to an interesting question in these tough times: If the state wished to continue the full background interviews, including references, who is going to pay for them?

    Our fees are statutorily defined. That $75 doesn't last an hour in the government. Assuming a full set of interviews/chasing down references takes 2 hours per app, then an additional 1 hour labor in processing, the state is out about $150 per head.

    This upcoming special session is going to be interesting. We expect another attack based on fees.

    Depending on how we do in that fight might determine how hard it is to get a permit, not only in terms of cost but also in terms of steps. If we starve the process of cash, the state may have no choice but to reduce the more ridiculous efforts we go through and get us closer to other Shall-Issue states.

    Increased costs will result in fewer people with permits and a disproportionate hit on the poor. It's right out of the Bloomberg playbook.

    :rolleyes:
     
    Last edited:

    esqappellate

    President, MSI
    Feb 12, 2012
    7,407
    Which leads to an interesting question in these tough times: If the state wished to continue the full background interviews, including references, who is going to pay for them?

    Our fees are statutorily defined. That $75 doesn't last an hour in the government. Assuming a full set of interviews/chasing down references takes 2 hours per app, then an additional 1 hour labor in processing, the state is out about $150 per head.

    This upcoming special session is going to be interesting. We expect another attack based on fees.

    Depending on how we do in that fight might determine how hard it is to get a permit, not only in terms of cost but also in terms of steps. If we starve the process of cash, the state may have no choice but to reduce the more ridiculous efforts we go through and get us closer to other Shall-Issue states.

    Increased costs will result in fewer people with permits and a disproportionate hit on the poor. It's right out of the Bloomberg playbook.
    See
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast. Seriously the entire process is premised on the expectation that applications would be very few in number and heavily justified, viz security guards. There is a reason that the state was able to claim a 97% approval rate. That turned on 5ii Once 5ii is gone the process makes no sense at all. You don't see anything like this in shall issue states. Yet MD is stuck with awful and expensive by statute. Richly ironic, IMHO. :D
     

    Threeband

    The M1 Does My Talking
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 30, 2006
    25,232
    Carroll County
    ...This upcoming special session is going to be interesting. We expect another attack based on fees.

    Depending on how we do in that fight might determine how hard it is to get a permit, not only in terms of cost but also in terms of steps. If we starve the process of cash, the state may have no choice but to reduce the more ridiculous efforts we go through and get us closer to other Shall-Issue states.

    Increased costs will result in fewer people with permits and a disproportionate hit on the poor. It's right out of the Bloomberg playbook.


    We should be ready with information on costs and application processes used by other states.

    It's hard to assemble information on comparative costs. USACarry.com is full of mistakes and bad information. Still, it looks like a lot of states charge about $75 for a five year permit. That's $15 per year. Pennsylvania apparently varies by county, but it's cheaper than average.

    Maryland is already very expensive, and the permit is only good for two years.



    It seems to me the legislators are totally clueless about the entire subject, and turn to the State Police for information. The MSP in turn seem so blinded by their institutional mindset, they are incapable of conceiving of a more efficient process.

    Much of the inefficiency and high cost can be traced back to this fundamental assumption underlying the state's entire approach to firearms law: that the private ownership of firearms is not legitimate, in other words, the people should not have guns. Thus the state should discourage and limit gun possession as much as possible. In other words, the assumption is that the state has a duty to infringe the keeping and bearing of arms.
     

    5.7

    Just trying to be free
    Jan 21, 2012
    197
    95% of the work for a permit is done based on the finger print/CJIS report. The last 5 % is the actual making of the permit. MD chooses to add in the interviews and all of the other useless crap. I mean come on, who would provide a reference that would not work for them? Please--stupid.

    Va. does it on the cheap with a simple plan piece of paper/hard stock card that you must have a photo ID with, unlike other states that have a "drivers license" type permit that is a hard card style with a picture. Making those cards cost money, but they could tool up the drivers license type machines to do it. Hell where I work (like alot of places) makes ID's with chips embedded for security reasons. It isn't that hard, they CHOOSE TO MAKE IT HARD AND EXPENSIVE.

    Like alot of you have eluded too, Md does the way they do to try and preclude folks from having permits.

    it isn't about Money, that illness is placed on us with the fees for the check. Florida figured it out. It is an administrative process and they gave it to the Dept of Ag so as not to burden the LEO branches.
     

    esqappellate

    President, MSI
    Feb 12, 2012
    7,407
    We should be ready with information on costs and application processes used by other states.

    It's hard to assemble information on comparative costs. USACarry.com is full of mistakes and bad information. Still, it looks like a lot of states charge about $75 for a five year permit. That's $15 per year. Pennsylvania apparently varies by county, but it's cheaper than average.

    Maryland is already very expensive, and the permit is only good for two years.



    It seems to me the legislators are totally clueless about the entire subject, and turn to the State Police for information. The MSP in turn seem so blinded by their institutional mindset, they are incapable of conceiving of a more efficient process.

    Much of the inefficiency and high cost can be traced back to this fundamental assumption underlying the state's entire approach to firearms law: that the private ownership of firearms is not legitimate, in other words, the people should not have guns. Thus the state should discourage and limit gun possession as much as possible. In other words, the assumption is that the state has a duty to infringe the keeping and bearing of arms.

    Excellent analysis. I agree on all counts
     

    PJDiesel

    Banned
    BANNED!!!
    Dec 18, 2011
    17,603
    Florida figured it out. It is an administrative process and they gave it to the Dept of Ag so as not to burden the LEO branches.

    Pretty much sums it up. There are tens of thousands (or more?) of us locally in MD & surrounding states that have FL permits, I know of exactly zero who have ever un-holstered a firearm, let alone used it.

    This isn't about money or the perceived risk to public safety, it's just plain DUMB at this point. The state (made up of MD residents) is making us look stupid with this whole cluster F. :sad20:
     

    Biggfoot44

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 2, 2009
    32,881
    Thanks guys. Actually there are two memos, the newer (and more explicit) one is on first page of the thread Ingoes linked.
     

    Inigoes

    Head'n for the hills
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 21, 2008
    49,362
    SoMD / West PA
    Thanks guys. Actually there are two memos, the newer (and more explicit) one is on first page of the thread Ingoes linked.

    So far there are two municipalities that will get your long gun confiscated automatically: Baltimore City, and Leonardtown MD.

    You gotta pay attention to the 1/1/1985 preemption law.
     

    FRISteve

    Active Member
    Apr 2, 2012
    113
    Dover, PA
    Which leads to an interesting question in these tough times: If the state wished to continue the full background interviews, including references, who is going to pay for them?

    If it becomes shall issue, I think that it is fair to project 200,000 permits in the first year. At $75/per, you're looking at a quick $15M. Sounds like the MSP could hire 25 permit processing clerks (most states use non-LEOs to process permit apps) at $40K/year whose sole jobs are to process apps, call references and do telephone interviews. That would cost $1M/year and they'd realize $14M for other uses.

    Or hire 50 and show a $13M profit.

    Sounds fiscally sound to me.
     

    Merlin

    Ultimate Member
    Dec 31, 2009
    3,953
    Carroll County, Maryland
    Which leads to an interesting question in these tough times: If the state wished to continue the full background interviews, including references, who is going to pay for them?

    Our fees are statutorily defined. That $75 doesn't last an hour in the government. Assuming a full set of interviews/chasing down references takes 2 hours per app, then an additional 1 hour labor in processing, the state is out about $150 per head.

    This upcoming special session is going to be interesting. We expect another attack based on fees.

    Depending on how we do in that fight might determine how hard it is to get a permit, not only in terms of cost but also in terms of steps. If we starve the process of cash, the state may have no choice but to reduce the more ridiculous efforts we go through and get us closer to other Shall-Issue states.

    Increased costs will result in fewer people with permits and a disproportionate hit on the poor. It's right out of the Bloomberg playbook.


    If we go to a full shall issue state I think they MD will streamline that process. If not right away as the save face, then in a few years.

    If for no other reason then to start making money from this. Permits will likely go up in price, and even if they do not, if they get a process like PA, where you can get your ccw in less then 30 min (I'm told), then $75 is ALLOT of money for 30min or less work.

    And think about how fast and easy the renewals will go. By the time we get our very first MD ccw renewed MD will surely bump up the fee by then. We are in MD after all.

    They can make the good people of MD safer by taking the money and buying more equipment or hire more troopers.
     

    Mr H

    Banana'd
    If it becomes shall issue, I think that it is fair to project 200,000 permits in the first year. At $75/per, you're looking at a quick $15M. Sounds like the MSP could hire 25 permit processing clerks (most states use non-LEOs to process permit apps) at $40K/year whose sole jobs are to process apps, call references and do telephone interviews. That would cost $1M/year and they'd realize $14M for other uses.

    Or hire 50 and show a $13M profit.

    Sounds fiscally sound to me.

    Need to let Peter Franchot know... he likes whizzing in the Lord Governator's Malt-o-Meal...
     

    Patrick

    MSI Executive Member
    Apr 26, 2009
    7,725
    Calvert County
    If we go to a full shall issue state I think they MD will streamline that process. If not right away as the save face, then in a few years.

    If for no other reason then to start making money from this. Permits will likely go up in price, and even if they do not, if they get a process like PA, where you can get your ccw in less then 30 min (I'm told), then $75 is ALLOT of money for 30min or less work.

    And think about how fast and easy the renewals will go. By the time we get our very first MD ccw renewed MD will surely bump up the fee by then. We are in MD after all.

    They can make the good people of MD safer by taking the money and buying more equipment or hire more troopers.

    I think there is not a state in the union that makes real coin from the permit process. Florida is the perennial favorite for claims that the state just is a permit mill, but I don't think they make anything from it. I know most states lose in the process, which is why the eventually make the process easier.

    Maryland has something similar: the state regulated arms/handgun training course. The law stipulates it is free, so they did not go with extensive (ie: expensive) processes because it would be a big loser. This last session it was clear they wanted to allow cost, and the only reason to do that would be to force more process on us.

    It is 'starving the beast' in a way. This is yet another reason why we need to fight against fees so hard.
     

    Squaredout

    The Widows Son
    Mar 25, 2010
    461
    I think there is not a state in the union that makes real coin from the permit process. Florida is the perennial favorite for claims that the state just is a permit mill, but I don't think they make anything from it. I know most states lose in the process, which is why the eventually make the process easier.

    Maryland has something similar: the state regulated arms/handgun training course. The law stipulates it is free, so they did not go with extensive (ie: expensive) processes because it would be a big loser. This last session it was clear they wanted to allow cost, and the only reason to do that would be to force more process on us.

    It is 'starving the beast' in a way. This is yet another reason why we need to fight against fees so hard.

    I agree :thumbsup:
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,921
    Messages
    7,259,000
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom