Why is SB281 so Vague?

[Patent Guy]

SB 281 is a 38 page bill which appears to be intentionally vague. IMO, they want you to be confused about whether you should register or apply for a license for your gun(s). You will have to construe the following terms for each gun you own (is it or isn't it one of the following):

Assault pistol
Assault pistol copy (“regardless of manufacturer”)
Handgun
Assault long gun
Assault weapon
Copycat weapon, or
Regulated firearm.

You cannot avoid worrying about whether you can keep & bear (i.e., posses and transport) your gun without registering or applying for a license every five years, unless you are certain none of these terms describe your gun. So if this bill passes, Marylanders will be required to decide whether each gun they own falls within one of these vague categories, and then set aside time and money to register and/or apply for a license or permit to keep them.

This confusing bill amends our already stringent gun laws. But one thing is made clear, over and over.

In several places, the bill gives Marylanders the following “safe harbor” for gun possession & transportation: These newly defined crimes do not apply to a Marylander
“while carrying a court order requiring the surrender of the [gun], transport the [gun] directly to the law enforcement unit, barracks, or station if the person has notified the law enforcement unit, barracks, or station that the person is transporting the [gun] in accordance with a court order and the [gun] is unloaded.”

How many Marylanders will try to understand this vague license requirement, become frustrated and then give up and just surrender any questionable semi-auto out of fear of being convicted for the crime of keeping the gun they own lawfully today? Are vagueness and fear of prosecution being used to drive gun owners to register or surrender their guns?

This matters, legally, because a standard called "strict scrutiny" should be applied when evaluating laws impacting fundamental individual rights protected by the Constitution.

 

[BeltBuckle]

You know, to think this is part of a deliberate plot gives them, I think, too much credit. It is clear these fookwits are dismally ignorant, and so convinced of their righteousness they are ineducable. It looks to me as if they think they know it all, and so they continue to step in it, oblivious of their ignorance. I don't think they're smart enough to be so devious as to deliberately sow ambiguity in the way we see.

However, it could be they are so smugly certain they are in the right they don't CARE about making those kinds of mistakes or injecting such ambiguity, and are simply too bloody lazy to educate themselves to get it right, confident that the resulting ambiguities will work to their benefit... they think.

One would think, though, that if they were even that minimally self-aware they'd realize that such ambiguity will increase the potential for defeat via judicial challenge.

Who knows? and in the end, who cares? Whichever it is, they must be defeated.

 

[Mr H]

IMO, it's less that it is "vague" than it is simply poorly constructed (and in haste).

It seems they took pieces of the 1994 Federal ban, cut and paste from the CA ban,m and added in their own knee-jerk idealogy, and threw it on top of existing MD law.

Problem is, little of it even matches up to existing MD law, and as such is often inconsistent and self-contradictory.

It may sound simplistic, but... Let's just keep fighting to knock this thing down, and try not to tip them off to what the problems actually are.

I can assure you that the calls, letters, and emails ARE having an effect in Annapolis, and votes are being influenced our way!

Any remaining Senators who vote for this thing will out themselves as hard-left idealogues (and Adminstration toadies) who deserve to be singled out for defeat in 2014.

 

[SomeGuy]

I am guessing that the 'safe harbor' is a cut and paste.
The various firearm names are invented each section of the bill (likely using a 'Wheel O Threatening Names For Bang Stick')
And the entire thing was assembled by an overworked intern, doing the best they could
Only checked to ensure that it contained Many Pages Of Evil
Then submitted using the President via the Speaker as the primary sponsor

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

 

[Inigoes]

I am guessing that the 'safe harbor' is a cut and paste.

Also a manufacturer Safety Harbor Firearms, who make KEG-12 AOWs

 

[hvymax]

Vaugness leaves everything up to officer interpretation so they can just arrest/charge/confiscate and let the judge sort it out.

 

[Mr H]

Very simply, this bill cannot survive any scrutiny as it is written. It really has little chance to pass, and IMO they may not have intended it to (except as a Hail Mary pass).

This is an opening salvo, I believe, to attempt to soften the opposition, possibly for a flood of little bills???

We need to not presume that every proposal will pass, or is as it appears on its face.

This smells like a bigger game to me. I just hope I'm wrong.

 

[Mike OTDP]

I'm not sure it's a Hail Mary, but it is definitely a cut-&-paste job from the California laws. I recognize the wording.

 

[erwos]

This matters, legally, because a standard called "strict scrutiny" should be applied when evaluating laws impacting fundamental individual rights protected by the Constitution.

I hate to tell you this, but not all Constitutional rights are protected by strict scrutiny, and there is not sufficient jurisprudence thus far that you could claim with a straight face that the 2A is in the strict scrutiny category. I think it should be in that category, but I am being honest here about what the courts have decided thus far.

I don't find the bill to be very vague, except for defining what's a "copy" of an existing named evil black rifle/shotgun/pistol. Some people are simply not interpreting it in the context of all of Maryland's firearms laws.

 

[Patent Guy]

I hate to tell you this, but not all Constitutional rights are protected by strict scrutiny, and there is not sufficient jurisprudence thus far that you could claim with a straight face that the 2A is in the strict scrutiny category. I think it should be in that category, but I am being honest here about what the courts have decided thus far.

I don't find the bill to be very vague, except for defining what's a "copy" of an existing named evil black rifle/shotgun/pistol. Some people are simply not interpreting it in the context of all of Maryland's firearms laws.

We can agree that McDonald v. Chicago made very clear that the 14th amendment and 2nd amendment provide the basis for SCOTUS' conclusion, namely, that the 2nd amendment applies to the States, and thus to Maryland, correct? We can also observe that the Equal Protection clause of the 14th amendment applies here.

 

[Mr H]

We can agree that McDonald v. Chicago made very clear that the 14th amendment and 2nd amendment provide the basis for SCOTUS' conclusion, namely, that the 2nd amendment applies to the States, and thus to Maryland, correct? We can also observe that the Equal Protection clause of the 14th amendment applies here.

I've said all along that 14A (OK, and 4, and 5...) applies to SB281 as much as 2A...

Thanks for the input!