backnblack
Ultimate Member
- Nov 6, 2009
- 1,184
All 4 of us here sent emails....
Yes...and Underlining is the amendment...which in this case the old 5ii, is included in the Amendment 5-135, para 6(ii)......G&S all over again.......
If I read this right...seems it is unconstitutional based on the Legg decision.....
But then I know not about such things....
R
That was nice of Frosh. Take a small bill meant to help retired police out just a hair and totally change it into something to suit his personal gun control agenda. What a prick.
That was nice of Frosh. Take a small bill meant to help retired police out just a hair and totally change it into something to suit his personal gun control agenda. What a prick.
That is already existing in the law, which will likely not be changed until the appeals process is worn out.
When reading bills:
- Text in bold is being added to the code in the designated sections
- Text in [ ] or strike-through is being removed from the designated sections
http://mlis.state.md.us/2012rs/proceedings/senate/sen_curr_$2040637113.htm
Can anyone share their email so I have something to start with I suck at this sort of thing and want to help PM is fine. Or a link to a form letter or something ?
"Dear Sir/Ma'am,
Please oppose House Bill 579. This was a bill that was designed to exempt retired law enforcement officers from the training commission video course requirement when purchasing a regulated firearm. It has now been molded into something completely different pertaining to requiring potentially costly and lengthy training of all concealed handgun permit applicants. A completely different purpose from what the bill was introduced for.
The anti-gun agenda of a few members of the Assembly should not be carried on the backs of retired police officers.
Also note that for some reason, at the time of this writing, the MLIS system is incomplete and is not showing the amendments to the third reading of the bill.
Thank you"
It's important to let them know mlis is not up to date because that's the first place they're liable to go look. It also makes proponents of the amendments look shady for it not being up to date.
I'm new to this so might be reading it incorrectly, but this link seems to show the third reading and the training amendment.
http://mlis.state.md.us/2012rs/amds/bil_0009/HB0579_82887801.pdf
I'm new to this so might be reading it incorrectly, but this link seems to show the third reading and the training amendment.
http://mlis.state.md.us/2012rs/amds/bil_0009/HB0579_82887801.pdf