Handgun Permit Review Board Reform

CypherPunk · Jun 3, 2015

There can and should be a vigorous discussion regarding how the board should operate.

The most important issue I believe is empowering the 3 new appointees with information before they become "influenced" by the so called old guard and Knaub.

Then, there needs to be a debate about what if anything should be done in secret.

If I understand NRA's position, they think testimony should be private and policy debate and voting in public. I am warming to this idea.

My only issue is that Dems can abuse secrecy, as the have repeatedly before, to cover up thief shenanigans.

Also, my recollection is that MD law demands that all license or permit hearings be public.

I also concur that because many are forced to appeal for their civil rights, and reveal intimate details in their plea to be "allowed" to defend themselves- I hope there can be a way to strike a balance to protect their privacy somewhat as well as the publics right to know.

DC-W · Jun 3, 2015

Agreed on all counts.

We all heard each applicants PII in near full yesterday. There needs to be a balance set.

While we were out of the room for deliberation, we did hear voices being raised and quite some time passed before we were allowed back in on a couple of the cases.

CypherPunk · Jun 3, 2015

Did the HPRB follow all MD's Open Meetings Law requirements for adjourning to a closed session he asked, already knowing the answer?

TTMD · Jun 3, 2015

Has anyone invited Gov. Hogan to attend one of these meetings? It may help the HPRB AND the policy reform processes if he sees this farce first-hand.

TTMD · Jun 3, 2015

CypherPunk said:
My only issue is that politicians and political appointees can abuse secrecy, as they have repeatedly before, to cover up their shenanigans.

FIFY?

Tomcat · Jun 3, 2015

Just throwing an idea out there. Maybe get one of our friendly delegates to attend (or several of them) then report to the governor. :shrug:

Gryphon · Jun 3, 2015

TTMD said:
Has anyone invited Gov. Hogan to attend one of these meetings? It may help the HPRB AND the policy reform processes if he sees this farce first-hand.

Hahaha! Somebody better change the venue, or at least get out the paint brushes and a few new chairs out. Otherwise its going to make for an awful bad photo op! :lol2:

CypherPunk · Jun 3, 2015

The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them.

Patrick Henry

Capt-D · Jun 3, 2015

hitwtom said:
Just throwing an idea out there. Maybe get one of our friendly delegates to attend (or several of them) then report to the governor.

Just an FYI House Republican Leader, Delegate Nic Kipke's wife is the Grassroots Coordinator for the NRA. He was very involved in the Governor's Campaign and would probably be worth contacting.

https://www.facebook.com/susannah.warner.7

Kharn · Jun 3, 2015

Gryphon said:
Hahaha! Somebody better change the venue, or at least get out the paint brushes and a few new chairs out. Otherwise its going to make for an awful bad photo op!

The governor had better be early or he might get the broken chair. :lol2:

DC-W · Jun 3, 2015

Kharn said:
The governor had better be early or he might get the broken chair.

I should have taken pictures. That room felt like it was in a basement.

montoya32 · Jun 3, 2015

I am sure Del. Grammer and Senator Ready would be interested.

LCPIWB · Jun 3, 2015

DC-W said:
I should have taken pictures. That room felt like it was in a basement.

Yea it did. The windows were like 7 feet off the ground and 6 inches tall.

CypherPunk · Jun 3, 2015

pilotguy299 said:
Performing an "Administrative Function" does not need to be held in open session under the open meetings act.

http://www.oag.state.md.us/opengov/openmeetings/10_1_14_OPEN_MEETINGS_ACT.pdf

OPEN MEETINGS ACT (as recodified effective October 1, 2014 and put inTitle 3 of
the General Provisions Article of the Maryland Code)

§3–101.
(a) In this title the following words have the meanings indicated.
(b) (1) “Administrative function” means the administration of:
(i) a law of the State;
(ii) a law of a political subdivision of the State; or
(iii) a rule, regulation, or bylaw of a public body.

...

§3–103.
(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section and § 3–104 of this
subtitle, this title does not apply to:
(1) a public body when it is carrying out:
(i) an administrative function;
(ii) a judicial function; or
(iii) a quasi–judicial function; or
(2) a chance encounter, a social gathering, or any other occasion that is
not intended to circumvent this title.
(b) This title applies to a public body when it is meeting to consider:
(1) granting a license or permit; or
....

1. The General Assemblies’ Policy Determination §10-501(a) states: “It is essential to the maintenance of a democratic society that, except in special and appropriate circumstances: (1) public business be performed in an open and public manner; and (2) citizens be allowed to observe: (i) the performance of public officials; and (ii) the deliberations and decisions that the making of public policy involves.” This statement has the force of is law.

2. The Open Meetings Act §10-504 states, “Conflict of laws - Whenever this subtitle and another law that relates to meetings of public bodies conflict, this subtitle applies unless the other law is more stringent. I interpret “more stringent” to be in favor of open government, because even when the act sets out exceptions to the general rule, the exceptions themselves are to be “strictly construed in favor of open meetings of public bodies.” According to the act (§10-508(c)).

3. The Open Meetings Act adds, §10-505. Open sessions generally required - Except as otherwise expressly provided in this subtitle, a public body shall meet in open session. No where in the subtitle does it mention SB281.

4. The Open Meetings Act §10-503 is also applicable: (b) Applicable. -- The provisions of this subtitle apply to a public body when it is meeting to consider: (1) granting a license or permit…” This section specifically precludes any qausi-judicial exemptions.

BeoBill · Jun 3, 2015

The room sounds like Gestapo HQ. What a shame.

CypherPunk's findings seem to leave some leeway in either direction. Perhaps we can get Esq. or someone equally well-versed to weigh in with case law?

:popcorn:

CypherPunk · Jun 3, 2015

Per the OP. I am interested in hearing your views;

Should hearings be held in secret and debates and votes be held in open session, referring only to "the applicant"?

Should the entire hearing and verdict be held in public, with only the HBRB deliberations held in closed session?

Should all phases of the process be open and transparent?

Should there be a penalty when the Board fails to act in a timely matter - say a preliminary or default approval?

Should the Board automatically deny "no-brainers" like prohibited people to save time and resources and then simply forward those people to the Circuit Court where they have to pay a fee to file?

montoya32 · Jun 3, 2015

CypherPunk said:
Per the OP. I am interested in hearing your views;

Should hearings be held in secret and debates and votes be held in open session, referring only to "the applicant"? Yes! Unless the applicant requests a private meeting, which should be their option, then all aspects of the board should be open and public.

Should the entire hearing and verdict be held in public, with only the HBRB deliberations held in closed session? YES!

Should all phases of the process be open and transparent?YES! YES! YES!

Should there be a penalty when the Board fails to act in a timely matter - say a preliminary or default approval?YES!

Should the Board automatically deny "no-brainers" like prohibited people to save time and resources and then simply forward those people to the Circuit Court where they have to pay a fee to file?I think if they find a disqualifying factor, then that should be cited and the denial be automatic. Unless there has been an oversight or new information to be submitted, then a disqualifying crime is DISQUALIFYING.

I guess following laws and policy is too difficult.

montoya32 · Jun 3, 2015

I had a picture of the room sent to me today. SMH

6pack · Jun 3, 2015

montoya32 said:
I had a picture of the room sent to me today. SMH

That's actually much nicer looking...

Gryphon · Jun 3, 2015

6pack said:
That's actually much nicer looking...

That's not the room. That is a 4 star interrogation room, and much better atmosphere than the HGPRB meeting room!

The room in the pic actually has a few functional chairs, and decent lighting.

Handgun Permit Review Board Reform

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Opinions Are My Own

Ultimate Member

Opinions Are My Own

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Formerly Known As HITWTOM

inveniam viam aut faciam

Opinions Are My Own

Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Needs an avatar

Opinions Are My Own

Crank in the Third Row

Opinions Are My Own

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

MSI BOD Member

inveniam viam aut faciam

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics