2024 MGA Session

[Mi.Lee]

There are bills trickling in, and I don't want to clog up this thread with a bazillion posts for each one (dblas is already doing a good job of separate threads).

Folks can go to the MGA website and use the Filter query for "firearm" or other keywords to see what is filed:

House: https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Index/house
Senate: https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Index/senate

One particular bill that stands out because it has a bunch of cosponsors -

HB430 Insurance requirement for anyone "carrying" a firearm

(no exclusion for home carry; if convicted you supposedly "lose" your right to own/possess any firearm, but can get the charge dismissed pre-trial or remove the post-trial prohibition if you obtain said insurance coverage)

Synopsis

Altering the circumstances under which a person is disqualified from possessing a regulated firearm, a rifle, and a shotgun; prohibiting a person from wearing or carrying a firearm under certain circumstances unless the person has obtained certain liability insurance related to wearing and carrying a firearm up to $300,000; providing for the form and issuance of a citation for a violation of the Act; etc.

Thank you for posting this as I believe the discussion and your reasoning will help in my letter to my friendly neighborhood legislators.

One of my many issues with this proposed legislation, if you have to use your firearm, you are charged with a crime, normally a felony. Insurance does not cover criminal acts, they cover civil acts. So, you are asking someone to pay for a policy that may not pay out. I believe that there have been a few cases lately of one of the big CCW carriers denying coverage. If insurance covered a criminal act, why not insure a heist and ask the insurance to pay out when you get caught or fail?

The largest group of new gun owners are women, specifically single women of color, I am not sure how other women feel but in the current economy, it would be a stretch to pay for yet another Fee to protect myself and my family.
That being said, if you did not have insurance, they take not just the firearm you are carrying but EVERYONE. I would think that would amount to a takings but I am not an attorney. It also makes this bill look like a big ole gun grab. Where is the compensation for taking what you have?

With the gun grabbing in mind, The MVA does not come out to your house and take every car in your name because you do not have insurance and drive on the street. (a vehicle can be a deadly weapon) The County does not come out and take your house if it is paid off and you have no insurance, and I guess we could say that the Government does not come out and penalize you because you do not have health insurance. (They may tax you to death)

Then you have the concealment part, if you are not supposed to pull your firearm unless you plan to use it, how would the officer know? Is he walking around looking for CCWs because they will have a quota of guns to get off of the street? I am sure we all are aware that Maryland has a registry that they use.

I have also seen someone term this bill as the "Barney Bill" I noted that it did not apply to unloaded firearms, only loaded. Whoever started that I commend you for your wit.

BTW, a 12 year old assisted with determining that, insurance will not cover a crime. What is that saying for those who proposed this legislation? SMH

 

[Phoenix_1295]

One particular bill that stands out because it has a bunch of cosponsors -

HB430 Insurance requirement for anyone "carrying" a firearm

(no exclusion for home carry; if convicted you supposedly "lose" your right to own/possess any firearm, but can get the charge dismissed pre-trial or remove the post-trial prohibition if you obtain said insurance coverage)

Synopsis

Altering the circumstances under which a person is disqualified from possessing a regulated firearm, a rifle, and a shotgun; prohibiting a person from wearing or carrying a firearm under certain circumstances unless the person has obtained certain liability insurance related to wearing and carrying a firearm up to $300,000; providing for the form and issuance of a citation for a violation of the Act; etc.

Out of curiosity, what insurance companies provide liability insurance, specifically, for accidental damage from a firearm?

Most firearms specific related insurance seems to be related to costs arising from a self-defense situation.

 

[RFBfromDE]

Out of curiosity, what insurance companies provide liability insurance, specifically, for accidental damage from a firearm?

While I've never handled a claim for it, negligent use of a firearm is not excluded from the liability portion of typical Homeowners, Renters or Condo insurance policies.

Criminal acts, as expected, are.

 

[rbird7282]

The MGA can:

View attachment 450079

That bag isn’t big enough for them, we need to send them a 55 gallon drum


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Phoenix_1295]

While I've never handled a claim for it, negligent use of a firearm is not excluded from the liability portion of typical Homeowners, Renters or Condo insurance policies.

Criminal acts, as expected, are.

Thanks. I think I will check mine.

 

[Slackdaddy]

I have been "going to Annapolis" for 30+ years, not every year, but many.
It was one thing in the days of "Mike Miller" and the bunch, They would listen to their constituents and soften their stance on many items,, After all, they were there to line their pockets and stay in power.

Things have changed, The new crop of Dems in Annapolis are a mixture of 3rd word rejects, straight up communists, Racists and "Guilty" white apologists.
They are on a mission and that is to fulfill their global donors wishes.
And one item on that list is disarming the law abiding public. And they will stop at nothing.

In the last 5 years, has your testimony changed one mind ??

 

[dblas]

There are bills trickling in, and I don't want to clog up this thread with a bazillion posts for each one (dblas is already doing a good job of separate threads).

Folks can go to the MGA website and use the Filter query for "firearm" or other keywords to see what is filed:

House: https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Index/house
Senate: https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Index/senate

One particular bill that stands out because it has a bunch of cosponsors -

HB430 Insurance requirement for anyone "carrying" a firearm

(no exclusion for home carry; if convicted you supposedly "lose" your right to own/possess any firearm, but can get the charge dismissed pre-trial or remove the post-trial prohibition if you obtain said insurance coverage)

Synopsis

Altering the circumstances under which a person is disqualified from possessing a regulated firearm, a rifle, and a shotgun; prohibiting a person from wearing or carrying a firearm under certain circumstances unless the person has obtained certain liability insurance related to wearing and carrying a firearm up to $300,000; providing for the form and issuance of a citation for a violation of the Act; etc.

As they get filed, there are individual threads for each bill, sorry if posting them isn't fast enough.

 

[dblas]

Thank you for posting this as I believe the discussion and your reasoning will help in my letter to my friendly neighborhood legislators.

One of my many issues with this proposed legislation, if you have to use your firearm, you are charged with a crime, normally a felony. Insurance does not cover criminal acts, they cover civil acts. So, you are asking someone to pay for a policy that may not pay out. I believe that there have been a few cases lately of one of the big CCW carriers denying coverage. If insurance covered a criminal act, why not insure a heist and ask the insurance to pay out when you get caught or fail?

The largest group of new gun owners are women, specifically single women of color, I am not sure how other women feel but in the current economy, it would be a stretch to pay for yet another Fee to protect myself and my family.
That being said, if you did not have insurance, they take not just the firearm you are carrying but EVERYONE. I would think that would amount to a takings but I am not an attorney. It also makes this bill look like a big ole gun grab. Where is the compensation for taking what you have?

With the gun grabbing in mind, The MVA does not come out to your house and take every car in your name because you do not have insurance and drive on the street. (a vehicle can be a deadly weapon) The County does not come out and take your house if it is paid off and you have no insurance, and I guess we could say that the Government does not come out and penalize you because you do not have health insurance. (They may tax you to death)

Then you have the concealment part, if you are not supposed to pull your firearm unless you plan to use it, how would the officer know? Is he walking around looking for CCWs because they will have a quota of guns to get off of the street? I am sure we all are aware that Maryland has a registry that they use.

I have also seen someone term this bill as the "Barney Bill" I noted that it did not apply to unloaded firearms, only loaded. Whoever started that I commend you for your wit.

BTW, a 12 year old assisted with determining that, insurance will not cover a crime. What is that saying for those who proposed this legislation? SMH

Discussion thread specifically for the bill is here: https://www.mdshooters.com/threads/...lic-wearing-and-carrying.281262/#post-7348241