Question for LEO's/Military/ETC

[Blackstar65]

I hate it. It won't help us. I wasn't able to pre order a Hellbreaker so I really hate it. I do agree with improvements to the background check system and private sale background checks. I know this stance won't garner me any friends here either.

 

[ohen cepel]

I do agree with improvements to the background check system and private sale background checks. I know this stance won't garner me any friends here either.

So if I inherit 25 firearms you think I should be taxed/extorted for a $$ amount to be determined by the dealer for me to receive my property?

Should all cars also go through a dealer to make sure someone with a DUI doesn't buy one?

Are there other items of my property you want to take my property rights on? What other taxes do you support on specific items and rights?

 

[Blackstar65]

So if I inherit 25 firearms you think I should be taxed/extorted for a $$ amount to be determined by the dealer for me to receive my property?

Should all cars also go through a dealer to make sure someone with a DUI doesn't buy one?

Are there other items of my property you want to take my property rights on? What other taxes do you support on specific items and rights?

I didn't say taxed. Inherited firearms are different from private sales.
Sing your sob story somewhere else. None of those prevent you from owning a firearm. If you legally can.

 

[Jim12]

i am on both sides, FFL and LEO. I hate the law from both angles. It's pointless and wont do anything to stop crime/gun violence. Most LEOs are against gun control and most are all for conceal carry for everyone. I dont fear law abiding citizens that carry guns.

What lobbyists have either side hired to make your point?

Last session, a MD Senator introduced a draconian bill to require private process servers to be licensed, get fingerprinted, obtain bond, etc., with exceptions... something about being associated with a law firm, iirc.

Last I heard, several MD process servers and their association immediately hired a connected lobbyist, and shortly thereafter the bill was tabled for further study.

 

[ohen cepel]

I didn't say taxed. Inherited firearms are different from private sales.
Sing your sob story somewhere else. None of those prevent you from owning a firearm. If you legally can.

No sob story, where do you get that? I'm simply trying to understand your logic of placing a fee on a private transaction. To require a background check puts a price on the transfer which I see as a tax, call it what you may.

Family inherits several weapons and wants to sell them. To force them all through a dealer for a background check at $50 each may cost the estate $1000. I simply do not see that.

Why would inherited items be any different? If you give them your logic they will take all they can.

Will you also require cars to go through dealers?
Computers (can be used for all sorts of illegal activity and we want to be sure to track you)?

Where do you draw the line when you opt to place fees onto rights and private property?

If you can only make accusations in the defense of your position then I think one may need to reconsider their position.

Are you LEO or military, just for clarity?

 

[Bafflingbs]

This law blows!

 

[jvegas]

What lobbyists have either side hired to make your point?

Last session, a MD Senator introduced a draconian bill to require private process servers to be licensed, get fingerprinted, obtain bond, etc., with exceptions... something about being associated with a law firm, iirc.

Last I heard, several MD process servers and their association immediately hired a connected lobbyist, and shortly thereafter the bill was tabled for further study.

not sure what this has to do with my post?

 

[1BADI5]

Personally, I swore an oath to the Constitution, all of it, as well as to protect it from ALL enemies foreign and domestic.

I did not swear an oath to lawyers, politicians, or bureaucrats.

Part of that oath says I am obligated to REFUSE illegal orders, this would include laws in direct opposition to an enumerated protection under the Constitution.

I no longer wear Army green, but my oath has no expiration.

Agreed, but I'm still active duty therefore my opinions do not reflect that of my employer.

I like many others here have personally defended these rights as a combat veteran.......its an insult and kick to the nutts and no thank you I don't want another.

I have served honorably and ask nothing more then to exersice my rights as outlined by our founding fathers.......nothing less and nothing more

 

[Blackstar65]

I am trying to understand where you found a monetary value mentioned in my post. It takes maybe 10 mins to run a background check to determine if you are a prohibited person. Granted some may take longer depending on the info received from meters/NCIC. Most station clerks have meters/NCIC access. However that is a declining trend. Your tax dollars already pay for this. It should be a free service akin to the MCP policy for finger printing county residents and county business employees. I also prefer open carry rather than concealed carry. I am a cop. I have been for 13 awesome and lucky years.

 

[Corporal Doug]

From a soldier's POV it is pretty stupid. Not to knock our LE friends, but your average Rifleman has more training in the use of Assault Weapons than your average LEO. Depending on job/unit, you may be significantly better trained in the use of rifles and pistols than the vast majority of LEOs.

Reference the 1986 FBI Miami Shootout:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_FBI_Miami_shootout

Two Army veterans armed with a Monte Carlo, Mini-14, shotgun, and few pistols (all currently not banned in MD) laid waste to eight "highly trained" FBI agents in a few minutes before dying from wounds themselves.

Remember the initial raid on the Branch Dividians in Waco TX? Abject panic by the ATF once the rounds started to fly.

Most recently we have the Navy Yard shooting where Alexis shot the LEO with an regular old unbanned Remington 870, took his gun, then went to shoot some more people.

It is common enough for LEOs to be killed with their own gun. The FBI has done some significant research as to why this continues to happen.

What wins the day in a violent encounter is a willingness to be violent - usually more violent than the other guy. As the saying goes, it is not the size of the dog in the fight but the size of the fight in the dog. It all boils down to combat mindset. The mind is the ultimate weapon - everything else is supplemental. Too much talk is made about weapons and gear, while quite a bit less is said of training, mental state, and overall mindset.

As worrisome as the antis find EBRs, what should really concern them are plain old rifles suitable for sporting purposes:

http://www.amazon.com/Fry-The-Brain-Sniping-Guerrilla/dp/0971413398

I have plenty of rifle/carbine experience. To go with your post though: if you can't be safe, be dangerous.


I hate gun control! Worst idea eve. With the exception of mentally unstable and criminals, everyone should be trained and armed.

 

[Blackstar65]

Also Alexis shot a security guard and took his gun the K9 handler was shot in the legs during the exchange that killed him. He was not disarmed. Most FBI agents even today are highly trained investigators not street cops. Albeit many of my fellow street cops don't take firearms training as seriously as the should. But that is changing. Its a pride issue for my team and I we all shoot mid 90's or higher but still aren't satisfied.

 

[MDvet]

Hi All,


I just wanted to ask the aforementioned what you all think about SB281/the Gun Ban/ this whole situation. You all are on the ground dealing with crime and potential combat situations often. So what's your analysis of this situation?

I'd be very interested in seeing what your perspective is vs. some politician that sits in some ivory tower.

SB 281 has little to do with the military. We don't use privately owned weapons. Motivated military members can buy their own weapons and practice to increase their marksmanship, but not required.

 

[K31]

Only the military and police should have questions.

 

[janklow]

I do agree with improvements to the background check system and private sale background checks.

alright, but are you saying SB281 did anything to improve the background check system/private sale background checks?

 

[Boom Boom]

SB281 has nothing to do with preventing crime or enhancing public safety. The vast majority of MD's gun crime is committed by previously-convicted felons using stolen and/or illegally-obtained handguns. SB281 is a convenient excuse to crack down on enumerated fundamental civil rights and is another step towards creating complete dependency on the state. Those who voted for SB281 despise people who are self-sufficient and net contributors to society.

 

[Tim460]

I'm an LEO I find SB281 to be completely ridiculous, it will do nothing to stop gun crime as many others have already stated. Most firearms found in the hands of criminals are stolen or obtained through straw purchases. It's basically a feel good law for legislators so they can say see, look, we did something. If they wanted to stop gun crime all they had to do was enforce the laws already on the books. If people actually did hard time for their crimes they may actually think before repeating those crimes in the future.

The HQL, though I'm exempt is absurd. I view it as a tax on a constitutional right.

 

[RoadDawg]

I'm an LEO I find SB281 to be completely ridiculous, it will do nothing to stop gun crime as many others have already stated. Most firearms found in the hands of criminals are stolen or obtained through straw purchases. It's basically a feel good law for legislators so they can say see, look, we did something. If they wanted to stop gun crime all they had to do was enforce the laws already on the books. If people actually did hard time for their crimes they may actually think before repeating those crimes in the future.

The HQL, though I'm exempt is absurd. I view it as a tax on a constitutional right.

A point that I have been hammering since I joined the PD in 1986.

Enforcement of the current laws and actual service of the penalties assigned thereto would have an actual effect on crime committed using all weapons.

The lawyer gets the suspect off or the charge reduced in a bargain that includes NOTHING of the public interest. The criminal justice system works very hard to insure that the criminal is the only one who gets any "justice". Criminals are treated with kid gloves and huggy kissy slaps on the wrists when they NEED a kick in the BALLS. Don't focus on eliminating guns... Eliminate the F'n criminal. Take THEM off of the street. Gun crime will disappear. OweTards, burn in hell!

 

[FrankZ]

IMost firearms found in the hands of criminals are stolen or obtained through straw purchases.

One of their arguments for SB281 is that it will prevent straw purchases. These are already illegal yet they can't seem to show they are enforcing laws against it, or prosecuting those that already commit straw purchases.

Personally I think using the straw purchase problem is like saying "You don't want to see dead children do you?" to argue why gun control is needed.

Not pointing fingers at you. We need to change our vocabulary and refuse to let them set the phrases in the arguments.

 

[ThunderStick]

Not one single banned.....

....firearm, or not banned firearm has jumped up by itself and shoots people. Whether they're stolen, legally purchased or even straw purchased. They don't shoot people on their own. Laws "banning" certain classes of firearms do nothing but make the "do-gooders" "feel good". SB281 is a classic example.
This retired LEO doesn't like it one dammed bit!

 

[sfchoffman]

From Military and law Enforcement background. These grabs at our rights has nothing to do with saving lives. Thats just pandering to the stupid. IT'S ALL ABOUT CONTROL, AND MAKING THE POPULANCE SUBSERVANT TO THE GOVERNMENT.....I hope Maryland can turn it around, but it doesn't look good !