Referendum? Think Again....

[RealtorMatt]

Sorry if this is a dupe, but I saw this come across my facebook page this morning and I thought it needed to be shared.

http://www.wbaltv.com/news/politics/Bill-would-make-it-more-difficult-to-petition-new-Maryland-laws-to-referendum/-/9379266/19224804/-/yhw4pr/-/index.html


Basically, Maryland wants to make it harder to take issues to referendum and allow the public to vote. They'd much rather just jam things down our throat than let the people decide what it is that they want.

I know this isn't directly 2A related, but I have a feeling this bill was only presented because of the amout of vocal opposition we are showing to their gun control bills. Somebody get these people the hell out of office.

This state is broken.

 

[MDFF2008]

I am going to be brutally honest, and it's nothing personal.

With the stunning success of petitions in 2012, going 0 for the count, why are people excited to try to petition this bill?

 

[teratos]

I am going to be brutally honest, and it's nothing personal.

With the stunning success of petitions in 2012, going 0 for the count, why are people excited to try to petition this bill?

Placebo effect.

 

[Song Dog]

Who remembers the Gun Referendum on the Ballot back in 90's ?

We lost, since political climate worse now than 15-18 years ago better off taking our chances in the Courts, just say'n

 

[Seeker]

Here's the thing... The referendum process is part of the MD Constitution. Any changes to the Constitution automatically go to the referendum vote. And if they try to work around that by trying to just change the way petitions are gathered (paper vs. electronic), then we can still use the existing referendum process both for the current session (by law such a change could not go into effect until June). It also would not be able to stop us from using the existing process to get the gun bills on the ballot.

Using the referendum to fight this may be a losing proposition in the end, but it at least delays the bill's effects until after the 2014 election. That buys us time to mount a proper counter-attack. On the downside, it also means gun owners won't "feel the pain" before then, meaning that it may be harder to get them riled up enough to vote the suckers out of office!

 

[Brooklyn]

Placebo effect.

But the language in the petition bill is onerous and should be opposed regardless.


Not our issue here, and we can only do so much...

But talk to your neighbors about it anyway.

Anything that makes the entrenched power more encrenched is a bad thing for us and Maryland...

 

[Brooklyn]

Here's the thing... The referendum process is part of the MD Constitution. Any changes to the Constitution automatically go to the referendum vote. And if they try to work around that by trying to just change the way petitions are gathered (paper vs. electronic), then we can still use the existing referendum process both for the current session (by law such a change could not go into effect until June). It also would not be able to stop us from using the existing process to get the gun bills on the ballot.

Using the referendum to fight this may be a losing proposition in the end, but it at least delays the bill's effects until after the 2014 election. That buys us time to mount a proper counter-attack. On the downside, it also means gun owners won't "feel the pain" before then, meaning that it may be harder to get them riled up enough to vote the suckers out of office!

Look it will moot the court case until then. Let MSI make the call..

They are good at what they do.

 

[aray]

1. Just because the specific petitions failed in the last cycle does not mean that they will always fail in the future.

2. As stated above at a minimum this delays activation of the law for a year until the next election. In particular those who would like to make purchases of some guns now, but can't due to the shortages, will at least have a chance to get them down the road over the next year.

3. On principle I oppose the government taking power away from the citizenry and making it harder for their voices to be heard.

 

[BondJamesBond]

I am going to be brutally honest, and it's nothing personal.

With the stunning success of petitions in 2012, going 0 for the count, why are people excited to try to petition this bill?

Exactly. When you put something to referendum, you are putting it back into the hands (and votes) of the imbeciles who voted these people into office in the first place.

 

[Inigoes]

3. On principle I oppose the government taking power away from the citizenry and making it harder for their voices to be heard.

It's par for the progressive democrats to cement their hold on power.

By eliminating the death penalty to secure more votes from their constituents, and stripping us law-abiding residents of our fundemental enumerated rights.

 

[mlance238]

The referendum process is an important tool at our disposal and it is a serious check on the Democrats' overwhelming power in Annapolis. They don't like checks on their power, hence this bill.

Getting the gun bills to referendum, if (when) they pass, suspends their status as law until at least the election, correct? And this will interefere with our potential court objectives how? If anything, it gives our side more time to build our case if the referendum fails.

 

[Bohlieve410]

I agree with limiting referendums.

Us peasants should leave the business of governing to our elected comrades, such as Supreme Leader O'Malley and Chairman Frosh. They know what's best for us after all.

 

[notme0255]

This is where our "friends" at the ACLU may help us out. This change has to do somebody an injustice...

 

[teratos]

Look it will moot the court case until then. Let MSI make the call..

They are good at what they do.

The call of MSI regarding a referendum on the gun issue is that we would lose in MD. The courts are where this needs to be handled.

 

[Brooklyn]

The call of MSI regarding a referendum on the gun issue is that we would lose in MD. The courts are where this needs to be handled.

My call as well.


I am going to talk about the anti Democratic restrictions on the referendum process however.. I find liberals ( the true believers ) do not like that sort of thing and it helps to break the ice when you start an argument by agreeing

 

[plinkerton]

My .02, put the anti-referendum to referendum, and the anti-gun to referendum. I'm sure both will lose but at least it's going down fighting.

 

[Brooklyn]

My .02, put the anti-referendum to referendum, and the anti-gun to referendum. I'm sure both will lose but at least it's going down fighting.

If you put it on the ballot which will take time and money, then the case will be in hold until after the election.

This means a better chance of having one or two more Obama appointments on the court.

Not to mention that the time and money should be spent campaigning for or against ( as needed ) candidates for state office ..

And as a general rule we have a better chance if we do not put some referendum which will evangelize the opposition and get out there vote.

That's why I say let MSI make the call. They know everything I just told you, and they did not need to hear it from me

They are good. Support them and trust them..

 

[expat]

I agree with limiting referendums.

Us peasants should leave the business of governing to our elected comrades, such as Supreme Leader O'Malley and Chairman Frosh. They know what's best for us after all.

Didn't Chairman Frosh say "All power comes from the barrel of a gun"?
Or was that another leftist Chairman?

 

[danb]

just thinking out loud: a specific referendum on this bill is likely to fail.

However, the MD constitution has no specific provision for the right to keep and bear arms.

So, what about a much simpler referendum, say, on the incorporation into the Maryland Constitution the right to keep and bear arms, something like the following:

A person has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of self, family, home and State, and for hunting and recreational use. ​

Who would vote against this? I would like to actually see people vote against something like this and then get plastered.

The above was taken from the Delaware constitution, but here's some others:

http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/beararms/statecon.htm

 

[zoostation]

I don't know that a referendum would win, but I would still like to see one if they pass this bill just to throw a monkey wrench in their plans, piss them off, make them keep working, and has been said, hold the bill's implementation up for a year.

If there's statutory or case law somewhere that a bill can't be challenged in court because a referendum is active on it, that would change my mind. But I would like to see it. I'm not being a smart-alec, I simply don't know if there is.