Shall Issue being hijacked. YOU MUST ACT NOW!‏‏

[Glaug-Eldare]

Seems to be some confusion regarding just what HB 579 as amended will impact. Spent some time with it today and will give my understanding of what the amendments will do if the bill is passed. I am no expert so if you find something wrong or you disagree with please speak up.

The code sections involved are:

 

[MJD438]

Seems to be some confusion regarding just what HB 579 as amended will impact. Spent some time with it today and will give my understanding of what the amendments will do if the bill is passed. I am no expert so if you find something wrong or you disagree with please speak up.

The code sections involved are:

In short, the amendments attempt to accomplish the following:

1. Modify Public Safety Section 5-118 to remove the "no charge" language from the MSP-sponsored online course, opening the door to an undocumented/unlimited charge for the training requirement prior to purchasing, transferring, or renting any regulated firearm unless one is covered under the exemptions listed in the section.
2. The second amendment modifies Public Safety Section 5-306 to require, of ALL permit applicants PRIOR to submitting a permit application, completing an in-person training course, supervised by the MSP exclusively. This amendment fails to set any standards for the course required, in addition to failing to set a limit on the charge for the course, expected duration, or number of possible offerings and/or participants. It leaves all of that in the hands of unelected political appointees and bureaucrats, allowing this to be used as the replacement for the "Good and Substantial" gatekeeping function that was recently declared unconstitutional.

Plainly put, both of these are about wholesale disenfranchisement of Marylanders constitutionally-protected rights. As others have noted, based on past experience, we are all certain that "exceptions" will be made for certain politically connected persons and designated cronies, without being codified in Maryland law once the regulatory agencies get their paws in the mix.

 

[Lightning]

To put it bluntly, no. Go to about 1:16 for the beginning of the Frosh bit, and go to 1:45 for what Frosh thinks of gun owners:

This can only be defined as tyranny. The exact thing our founders were trying to prevent. AS I said before and will continue to say in the future. All incumbents need to go. The playing field needs to be reset!

 

[esqappellate]

In short, the amendments attempt to accomplish the following:

1. Modify Public Safety Section 5-118 to remove the "no charge" language from the MSP-sponsored online course, opening the door to an undocumented/unlimited charge for the training requirement prior to purchasing, transferring, or renting any regulated firearm unless one is covered under the exemptions listed in the section.
2. The second amendment modifies Public Safety Section 5-306 to require, of ALL permit applicants PRIOR to submitting a permit application, completing an in-person training course, supervised by the MSP exclusively. This amendment fails to set any standards for the course required, in addition to failing to set a limit on the charge for the course, expected duration, or number of possible offerings and/or participants. It leaves all of that in the hands of unelected political appointees and bureaucrats, allowing this to be used as the replacement for the "Good and Substantial" gatekeeping function that was recently declared unconstitutional.

Plainly put, both of these are about wholesale disenfranchisement of Marylanders constitutionally-protected rights. As others have noted, based on past experience, we are all certain that "exceptions" will be made for certain politically connected persons and designated cronies, without being codified in Maryland law once the regulatory agencies get their paws in the mix.

Exactly........

 

[mvee]

When this comes up for a vote, it would be a good idea to find out who voted for it. We could support whoever runs against them in the next primary and general elections. I don't think it necessarily matters if we don't live in their district. We should let them know if they vote for this we will mobilize to work against them inthe future. I don't know if this would be a too hostile message to send to them. I wonder what impact we could expect if when we called we would ask how they are planning to vote on thie bill. If they were to say they are for it we could let them know we will be actively working against them in the future.

 

[OLD FORD GUY]

Some how my message posted before I completed it. Sorry
Here is what I wanted to post:
Seems to be some confusion regarding just what HB 579 as amended will impact. Spent some time with it today and will give my understanding of what the amendments will do if the bill is passed. I am no expert so if you find something wrong or you disagree with please speak up.

The code sections involved are:
5-118 FIREARM APPLICATION
5-119 EXEMPTION FROM CERTIFIED FIREARMS TRAINING COURSE REQUIREMENT
5-134 RESTRICTIONS ON SALE, RENTAL OR TRANSFER OF REGULATED FIREARMS
5-304 APPLICATION FOR PERMIT
5-306 QUALIFICATIONS FOR PERMIT

The original intent of HB 579 was to exempt retired law enforcement officers from the requirements of completing a certified firearms safety training course by adding "IS A RETIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, THE STATE, OR ANY LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY IN THE STATE;" to both 5-119 and 5-134 sections of the code.
Amendment 1 Changes a portion of the Title of HB 579 from "Exemption from Training Course" to "Training Requirements"
Also the purpose was changed from "providing an exemption from certain requirements.....if an individual is a retired law enforcement officer..." to "repealing a requirement that a certain firearms safety training course be conducted without charge; requiring a person to complete a certain firearms safety training course before applying for a certain permit"
Also 5-118 is introduced into the document along with 5-306. 5-134 remains as in the original bill.

This means that 5-118 FIREARM APPLICATION and 5-306 QUALIFICATION FOR PERMIT (the carry permit) have now been tied to a safety training course that does not have to be "without charge" and must be completed before one can apply for a "certain" permit.

Amendment 2 Inserts 5-118 All text is the same as in existing 5-118 except "WITHOUT CHARGE" is removed from section (b) (3) (x).

Amendment 3 Adds 5-306 QUALIFICATION FOR PERMIT at the end of HB 579 with identical wording to 5-306 except a paragraph was added to include "has completed a certified firearms safety course in person approved by the Police Training Commission before submitting an application for a permit"

In summary the 3 amendments take out the "WITHOUT CHARGE" wording regarding the training course and impose an unspecified training course to be taken before applications can be submitted for "CERTAIN PERMITS" carry permit and handgun application.
Again this is how I see it. Comments and corrections welcome. Hope this helps clarify the situation.

 

[hvymax]

This can only be defined as tyranny. The exact thing our founders were trying to prevent. AS I said before and will continue to say in the future. All incumbents need to go. The playing field needs to be reset!

When this comes up for a vote, it would be a good idea to find out who voted for it. We could support whoever runs against them in the next primary and general elections. I don't think it necessarily matters if we don't live in their district. We should let them know if they vote for this we will mobilize to work against them inthe future. I don't know if this would be a too hostile message to send to them. I wonder what impact we could expect if when we called we would ask how they are planning to vote on thie bill. If they were to say they are for it we could let them know we will be actively working against them in the future.

These are Domestic Enemies of the Constitution plain and simple.

 

[Straightshooter]

It's amazing how a bill that was intended simply not to require a LEO to sit in front of his computer for 20 minutes and click a mouse several times, has been bastardized to this extent.

 

[bpSchoch]

I live in the 'Frosh' district. The problem is that almost everybody in this district is so pro-liberal that they aren't even open to hearing any thing else.

In the 2010 election, I helped with with prescint work. I carried a list of registered republicans who had voted in the prior elections and knocked on doors. It is so bad here that non-liberals are afraid to even put up a candidate sign in their yard or to even show their face to help due to actual and preceived threat of being 'socially banned' ie they neighbors don't know that they are not liberal and it would complete break the neigborhood fabric if they knew. Some stated that in the past when they had posted signs in the yards, that they houses were rolled, air taken out of tires etc. This is the reality of this area.

Bernie

 

[Boondock Saint]

I live in the 'Frosh' district. The problem is that almost everybody in this district is so pro-liberal that they aren't even open to hearing any thing else.

In the 2010 election, I helped with with prescint work. I carried a list of registered republicans who had voted in the prior elections and knocked on doors. It is so bad here that non-liberals are afraid to even put up a candidate sign in their yard or to even show their face to help due to actual and preceived threat of being 'socially banned' ie they neighbors don't know that they are not liberal and it would complete break the neigborhood fabric if they knew. Some stated that in the past when they had posted signs in the yards, that they houses were rolled, air taken out of tires etc. This is the reality of this area.

Bernie

I thought Bethesda was a hippie paradise? Who knew these culturally advanced people would behave in such a way.

 

[skip-a-long]

I have been sending e-mails to everybody and his brother for the past few days. I would like to convey my thanks to all the fellows and gals at MSI, as well as some of the more knowledgeable members on this forum, for keeping us informed and providing links to send theser e-mails to.

Thanks so much for your time and effort that you put into this.

 

[Seagrave1963]

It is so bad here that non-liberals are afraid to even put up a candidate sign in their yard or to even show their face to help due to actual and preceived threat of being 'socially banned' ie they neighbors don't know that they are not liberal and it would complete break the neigborhood fabric if they knew. Some stated that in the past when they had posted signs in the yards, that they houses were rolled, air taken out of tires etc. This is the reality of this area.

Bernie

lib·er·al [lib-er-uhl, lib-ruhl]
1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2. (often initial capital letter ) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.
6. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
7. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners.
8. open-minded or tolerant, especially free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.


They can't be liberals cause TPing yards (like a juvenile) and simple vandalism aren't in the above definition for "Liberals". So maybe they're just plain hypocrites.

hyp·o·crite [hip-uh-krit] Show IPA
noun
1.a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, especially a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.
2.a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, especially one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.

 

[Seagrave1963]

BTW - Got a very good response from Delegate Schulz about the amendments "I agree with you that the Senate amendments have altered the entire intent of the bill. I did vote for the bill when it was in its original state, however, I will NOT support the amendments of the Senate as they do place more restrictions on purchasing firearms in Maryland. I assure you, I will be voting to protect your 2nd Amendment rights!"

Thank You Delegate Schulz!

...............and phone calls will be starting out tomorrow am !

 

[LCPIWB]

Please pardon my ignorance but these things read like Ikea instructions to me . But the HB579 , does that pertain to only getting a concealed carry permit , a regulated firearm purchase or both ? Ether way emails have been sent by me but if I can bring this up to family members and friends who only hunt it may get them off the fence that ive been trying to push them off of for years .

The way I read the text. Quoted below...Any firearm to be purchased, rented or transferred. I do not read anything about Handgun carry permits, or CCW. Please let me know if you find any words in the Amended bill that indicate that.

regulated firearm information for each regulated firearm to be purchased, rented, or transferred;

 

[Spoon]

Is it odd that after sending emails I received not one auto response?

 

[Glaug-Eldare]

Is it odd that after sending emails I received not one auto response?

Are you sure you selected the entire list of representatives? In the list of names, you need to press Home, then hold down shift and press End. If all the names are blue, you're good to go.

 

[Spoon]

Are you sure you selected the entire list of representatives? In the list of names, you need to press Home, then hold down shift and press End. If all the names are blue, you're good to go.

Yup, make sure I did it correctly. Made quite a few calls during the week when I could too... always spoke to a staffer, never the actual person. The first email was a standard form email, the second was something I sent out this morning that I personally composed.

 

[dblas]

The way I read the text. Quoted below...Any firearm to be purchased, rented or transferred. I do not read anything about Handgun carry permits, or CCW. Please let me know if you find any words in the Amended bill that indicate that.

See Amendment #3 Below which starts on the end of page 2 and ends on page 4. Note the Bold part which is the amended language being added.

http://mlis.state.md.us/2012rs/amds/bil_0009/hb0579_82887801.pdf

AMENDMENT NO. 3
On page 2, after line 32, insert:

HB0579/828878/1 JPR
Amendments to HB 579
Page 3 of 4


“5–306.

(a) Subject to subsection (b) of this section, the Secretary shall issue a permit within a reasonable time to a person who the Secretary finds:

(1) is an adult;

(2) (i) has not been convicted of a felony or of a misdemeanor for
which a sentence of imprisonment for more than 1 year has been imposed; or

(ii) if convicted of a crime described in item (i) of this item, has
been pardoned or has been granted relief under 18 U.S.C. § 925(c);

(3) has not been convicted of a crime involving the possession, use, or
distribution of a controlled dangerous substance;

(4) is not presently an alcoholic, addict, or habitual user of a controlled
dangerous substance unless the habitual use of the controlled dangerous substance is
under legitimate medical direction; [and]

(5) HAS COMPLETED A CERTIFIED FIREARMS SAFETY TRAINING
COURSE IN PERSON APPROVED BY THE POLICE TRAINING COMMISSION
BEFORE SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT; AND

[(5)] (6) based on an investigation:

(i) has not exhibited a propensity for violence or instability that
may reasonably render the person’s possession of a handgun a danger to the person or
to another; and

(ii) has good and substantial reason to wear, carry, or transport
a handgun, such as a finding that the permit is necessary as a reasonable precaution
against apprehended danger.”.

 

[Patriot]

Well I just sent out another round of emails. I also talked to a lot of friends and family today to try to spread the word and get others involved in sending emails and making phone calls as well. It seems like there has been a huge response and outcry over this bill. Hopefully it is enough to stop it.

 

[Seagrave1963]

Is it odd that after sending emails I received not one auto response?

I tried the ACG method of mass eMails and did not get a response. Finally, just used "cut and paste' to each Delegate and Senator (sans a few, e.g. Frosh and Pugh) and sent them through the Maryland Assembly site. A little time consuming, but worth it!