Freakin zoomies, always mucking up a thread with information that can be found in other threads.
You do realize that the bills you mentioned have their own threads?
It's kind of how we do things around here.
SB118 (2023) - Criminal Law – Prohibitions on Wearing, Carrying, or Transporting Firearms
- Thread starter dblas
- Start date
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!
Member Benefits:
You do realize that the bills you mentioned have their own threads?
It's kind of how we do things around here.
Dan, it's going to be so bad I will be ignoring ALL the related threads here on MDS and just reading MSI.
Meh, we need to educate the newbies, might as well do it during what will arguably be one of the ugliest, busiest legislative sessions we have seen.
Make no mistake, we will need everyone this session, every phone call, every e-mail, every body that can show up in person, and every one that wants to testify in person.
NO.
A ban on all firearms in ALL the places named in each of the bills.
In 118, it is a ban effectively everywhere that isn't your own property. That could be interpreted to include public roads since they are controlled by the government.
It's crazy. We won't even be able to leave the state without becoming a criminal on the way out.
86 is a real piece of crap. Poorly written as all 2A infringements are.
It also makes anyone who sought in patient treatment at a drug or alcohol rehab a prohibited person for life.
Criminals, including corrupt public officials wrote this. They want to be assured of a safe work place. Can't extort "protection" money from people that can defend themselves. Can't safely rob a place when the customer might shoot back.
smokey
2A TEACHER
- Jan 31, 2008
- 31,593
So who else is going to ignore this and carry anyway. It's so blatantly unconstitutional that you can pretty much guarantee a court win and payday.
Bertfish
Throw bread on me
This is the way
I've shared all this with a couple of relatively newbie gun owners here in MoCo. They aren't arch conservatives, generally just go-along-get-along types. They are convinced that we can't be interpreting the language in these bills correctly, that there must be some mistake, because this can't be what they mean because that wouldn't make any sense, blah blah. Welcome to the party, pal(s)!
The challenge is in getting middle of the road people (by Maryland standards, especially MoCo standards) to grasp how this sort of crap is just the tip of the Undo The Bill Of Rights camel's nose coming in under the tent. It's not about guns, I tell them, it's about completely upending the entire philosophical framework of the nation's founding, as codified in the Constitution. But because guns are icky and even new MoCo gun owners are sympathetic to their poor invertebrate, pearl clutching Karen neighbors, they are the easy low hanging fruit in the REAL battle, which is about liberty generally, not just 2A specifically. I'm torn between the noisy and likely only barely successful fight to keep these bills from getting out of committee, and the more substantive long term benefits of letting them become law, and then having them resoundingly - but very slowly and expensively - crushed in court for the long haul.
The challenge is in getting middle of the road people (by Maryland standards, especially MoCo standards) to grasp how this sort of crap is just the tip of the Undo The Bill Of Rights camel's nose coming in under the tent. It's not about guns, I tell them, it's about completely upending the entire philosophical framework of the nation's founding, as codified in the Constitution. But because guns are icky and even new MoCo gun owners are sympathetic to their poor invertebrate, pearl clutching Karen neighbors, they are the easy low hanging fruit in the REAL battle, which is about liberty generally, not just 2A specifically. I'm torn between the noisy and likely only barely successful fight to keep these bills from getting out of committee, and the more substantive long term benefits of letting them become law, and then having them resoundingly - but very slowly and expensively - crushed in court for the long haul.
I don't follow Unconstitutional laws.
thomfantomas
Crna Ovca
All i have to say is for every tom,dick and harry issued their handgun permit,warrants them to show up in annapolis to voice their opposition.
Hoping that a high majority are self-aware of this potiential infringement being law!!!
Hoping that a high majority are self-aware of this potiential infringement being law!!!
Hahahahaha!!!!
The MGA believes that active duty soldiers are developing weapons and ammunition and not scientists and engineers on federal property! Want to F the defense ability of the US Army? Prohibit APG from what it does on a daily basis.
D) A PERSON MAY NOT KNOWINGLY WEAR, CARRY, OR TRANSPORT A FIREARM IN OR ON PROPERTY CONTROLLED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, THE STATE GOVERNMENT, OR A LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
The MGA believes that active duty soldiers are developing weapons and ammunition and not scientists and engineers on federal property! Want to F the defense ability of the US Army? Prohibit APG from what it does on a daily basis.
D) A PERSON MAY NOT KNOWINGLY WEAR, CARRY, OR TRANSPORT A FIREARM IN OR ON PROPERTY CONTROLLED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, THE STATE GOVERNMENT, OR A LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
D&Ds
Active Member
well its nice to se they dont want any local government entities making decisions either.
Title 14 U.S. Code § 522, 523, and 524 - Law enforcement
(B) THIS SECTION DOES NOT APPLY TO:(2) A PERSON WHO HAS RETIRED AS A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER 2 IN GOOD STANDING FROM A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY OF THE UNITED STATES, 3 THE STATE, OR A LOCAL UNIT IN THE STATE; 'm
I'm covered so is every Active Duty Coasty along with Retired Coastys
Rubbing our noses in it, for those of us that won't be exempt?
Bertfish
Throw bread on me
CG is not a law enforcement agency. It's a military branch.
What's the purpose of this post?
Actually, you could in that case. FOPA should protect you if you are traveling out of state IIRC.
One note, I didn't check all of the bills, but I think all of these are effective 10/1/2023 (at least one of them, SB1?, is). Not that it makes anything much better. But that does at least give some breathing room for lawsuits, versus NJ and NY which were "SCREW YOU GUN OWNERS. IMMEDIATELY!"
