Security Clearances may now just be G&S

[BeoBill]

Would those be OUO briefings you put in there?
Unless my agency has dropped the ball, or the threat really isn't that great, but I have yet to have multiple "briefings" about threats. Actually, ZERO briefings. I dunno, maybe that's because it's work as usual for us.
I am not fighting this. It's just an observation. I do see, like I said before, the fervor of thirsty applicant Maryland citizens for carry permits. Everyone is looking for every possible reason to try and get one and the "Isis threat" is the latest wave to surf towards it. I don't blame people for trying at all.

Because of my job on the Federal counter-terror side, I do carry. I have known incidents over the years of "employees" who have had legitimate contact, albeit not violent, with "threats". This is because their actual performance of their duties and foreign national surveillance. Now, it doesn't get any more legitimate of a threat than that, being followed and approached. I sure hope people aren't just trying to exaggerate their desk job duties.
How does one explain (who is TS or higher cleared) without divulging at a minimum, SSI, to The (not cleared, no need to know) MSP why they should grant a permit? Now, get a letter written up from an agency from your supervisor stating why you would need to carry is a different story and would bolster an approval. Not just a possible "general threat" notification to "all" hacked and cleared personnel.

Quite frankly, ISIS wants to kill ALL Americans. So I think the threat is just as great (or greater) to the everyday citizen than it may be to government employees. Maybe even easier because they don't have to follow and search out "cleared" employees, rather, just go to a mall on any given day and get as many as they want.

OK, let me try to clarify things a bit without violating any number of NDAs.

SF 86 database hack: "Officially Unidentified" perp, but probably state-level, so the smart money's on the Chinese or Russians; possibly Russian Mafia. Effect on G&S: Slight for stateside cleared people, as the material is more of an identity theft issue than anything else. Those stateside billets have already been issued permits by "cognizant agencies," so if you're not in this category your shot with this as G&S will probably fail and fail.

ISIS/Hezbollah/other radical Muslim terrorist group videos/tweets: These are the probably the source of the NSA worker's denial reversal. The word on the Interwebz is that there are fighters in several cities (including DC and Baltimore) ready to assassinate anti-terrorism and Military/Government workers in general. As well as anyone else they can get to. Never letting a good scare go to waste, DHS, DoD and the FBI issued Unclassified Sensitive (and classified if they stay in character) bulletins screaming that Dastardly Deeds could be done, but stating in the fine print something to the effect of "There is currently no likelihood of this happening. The probability currently is low to none." The U/Sensitive bulletins have been sent to LE by the FBI; whether the receiving agencies did anything with these "Movie Plot" level bulletins is a completely different story. I imagine this is probably the basis for the NSA worker's overturn of the MSP denial.

Note that this NSA worker's CCW issue is currently a one-off as far as I know, so don't expect to get a lot of mileage from MSP using this approach either.

I hope this helps in setting expectations. Me, I'm waiting to see how any non-cash carrying based Plans C, D, E, etc. pan out.

 

[navycraig]

Because of my job on the Federal counter-terror side, I do carry.

But to see people drooling who work desk jobs behind computers claiming apprehended danger is another and is pretty funny.

Are you making your posts from home on your day off or are you currently working a desk job behind a computer...claiming apprehended danger because you work on the Federal counter-terror side?

 

[erwos]

Are you making your posts from home on your day off or are you currently working a desk job behind a computer...claiming apprehended danger because you work on the Federal counter-terror side?

Wow. Blaster's not the dude I'd try this line of attack on. Just sayin'.

 

[BeoBill]

Are you making your posts from home on your day off or are you currently working a desk job behind a computer...claiming apprehended danger because you work on the Federal counter-terror side?

What difference does it make? He has to go home some time.

 

[navycraig]

Wow. Blaster's not the dude I'd try this line of attack on. Just sayin'.

It's not an attack of any sort and if it came off that way, not my intent. It's an honest question from someone in a 'similar', albeit probably not as significant situation. If his duties require him to be in the field a significant amount of time, I get it. If his duties are, like others of us, in an office, behind a desk, then how is his situation any more suitable?

What difference does it make? He has to go home some time.

We all do.

ETA: Re-reading my original post I can see where it sounds a bit snarky. Not my intent.

 

[Schipperke]

Would those be OUO briefings you put in there?
Unless my agency has dropped the ball, or the threat really isn't that great, but I have yet to have multiple "briefings" about threats. Actually, ZERO briefings. I dunno, maybe that's because it's work as usual for us.
I am not fighting this. It's just an observation. I do see, like I said before, the fervor of thirsty applicant Maryland citizens for carry permits. Everyone is looking for every possible reason to try and get one and the "Isis threat" is the latest wave to surf towards it. I don't blame people for trying at all.

Because of my job on the Federal counter-terror side, I do carry. I have known incidents over the years of "employees" who have had legitimate contact, albeit not violent, with "threats". This is because their actual performance of their duties and foreign national surveillance. Now, it doesn't get any more legitimate of a threat than that, being followed and approached. I sure hope people aren't just trying to exaggerate their desk job duties.
How does one explain (who is TS or higher cleared) without divulging at a minimum, SSI, to The (not cleared, no need to know) MSP why they should grant a permit? Now, get a letter written up from an agency from your supervisor stating why you would need to carry is a different story and would bolster an approval. Not just a possible "general threat" notification to "all" hacked and cleared personnel.

Quite frankly, ISIS wants to kill ALL Americans. So I think the threat is just as great (or greater) to the everyday citizen than it may be to government employees. Maybe even easier because they don't have to follow and search out "cleared" employees, rather, just go to a mall on any given day and get as many as they want.

Well, I think the fervor is extremely limited, but reading MDS daily would have you believe everyone in the state wants one. I often wonder how many who seek the permit are doing so because they really feel the need to carry daily vs the right to do so, if ever. I'm more in the 2nd camp. When I drive to FL and want to carry, it would be nice if I could do so in the damn state I reside in for the first ten miles of the trip . I still have no MD permit, but like many have applied as a business owner. It's no damn secret that most business owners don't need to carry a gun because of greater risk, it's just a loophole the state seems to grant. As irrational as it is, I'll try. I've been self employed since 1996, and never really considered the loophole until now, after reading anecdotes here it can work.

The point that people really stretch things to get a permit is amusing at times. I recall a thread where a respected carry advocate mentioned training dogs was some kind of excuse. Then came all the machinations how to use that to get a permit, or carry legally.. LR posted a graphic "of Hoops" to go through, which is absolutely accurate. Going out of the way to create a "shell" business just to get a permit is a bit strange, but to each their own. I'd do it for tax reasons before carry reasons..

 

[Blaster229]

Wow. Blaster's not the dude I'd try this line of attack on. Just sayin'.

I'm a pussycat who just can't shoot a Glock worth a damn.

He doesn't know as most don't, I understand and take no offense.
Thought I (vaguely)clarified a little in my previous post about knowing a little of being "out in the field" as opposed to being behind a desk.

As far as the government employee "needing to be armed" issue because of threats, I think there would be a real need for those "out in the field" employees versus ones who actually do sit behind a desk all day.

Say you have a "cleared and hacked" person who travels worldwide that is subject to surveillance in foreign countries and a cleared admin assistant who just goes to her office in Columbia off route 29 for 5 days a week.

First off all, the real threat is going to be to that employee while they are on travel.
Secondly, that person would most likely be the "priority" for surveillance and attack over here stateside because 1) they have been hacked and known and 2) they have been followed while on travel thus bolstering their "importance" because they have been seen "working". This is a pretty far off instance, but one nonetheless. Hell, this went for those employees long before there was even a hack or ISIS.

Now your admin assistant or "office" employee who is cleared....Why single out a plain old office worker out of hundreds of those cleared who are walking out of the same building everyday at 5pm? Just attack them all.
It's really a GRAND notion that you (meaning anyone) think you have all the secrets in your head and that you alone would be singled out for kidnap or violence. Far fetched.
Once people start getting specifically targeted and actually kidnapped stateside, then maybe The MSP would take the ISIS threat and hack serious.

That's my take on it. The real problem is when someone posts opinion and reason that goes against someone's hopes and dreams of a carry permit, then that person becomes persona non grata.

 

[Schipperke]

..........

The real problem is when someone posts opinion and reason that goes against someone's hopes and dreams of a carry permit, then that person becomes persona non grata.

Oh , you noticed..

 

[LoneRanger]

Oh , you noticed..

By how easily some of these folks get their feathers ruffled in an internet forum you have to question the wisdom of giving them a carry permit....

 

[BeoBill]

I'm a pussycat who just can't shoot a Glock worth a damn.

He doesn't know as most don't, I understand and take no offense.
Thought I (vaguely)clarified a little in my previous post about knowing a little of being "out in the field" as opposed to being behind a desk.

As far as the government employee "needing to be armed" issue because of threats, I think there would be a real need for those "out in the field" employees versus ones who actually do sit behind a desk all day.

Say you have a "cleared and hacked" person who travels worldwide that is subject to surveillance in foreign countries and a cleared admin assistant who just goes to her office in Columbia off route 29 for 5 days a week.

First off all, the real threat is going to be to that employee while they are on travel.
Secondly, that person would most likely be the "priority" for surveillance and attack over here stateside because 1) they have been hacked and known and 2) they have been followed while on travel thus bolstering their "importance" because they have been seen "working". This is a pretty far off instance, but one nonetheless. Hell, this went for those employees long before there was even a hack or ISIS.

Now your admin assistant or "office" employee who is cleared....Why single out a plain old office worker out of hundreds of those cleared who are walking out of the same building everyday at 5pm? Just attack them all.
It's really a GRAND notion that you (meaning anyone) think you have all the secrets in your head and that you alone would be singled out for kidnap or violence. Far fetched.
Once people start getting specifically targeted and actually kidnapped stateside, then maybe The MSP would take the ISIS threat and hack serious.

That's my take on it. The real problem is when someone posts opinion and reason that goes against someone's hopes and dreams of a carry permit, then that person becomes persona non grata.

 

[USAFRavenR6]

I'm a pussycat who just can't shoot a Glock worth a damn.

He doesn't know as most don't, I understand and take no offense.
Thought I (vaguely)clarified a little in my previous post about knowing a little of being "out in the field" as opposed to being behind a desk.

As far as the government employee "needing to be armed" issue because of threats, I think there would be a real need for those "out in the field" employees versus ones who actually do sit behind a desk all day.

Say you have a "cleared and hacked" person who travels worldwide that is subject to surveillance in foreign countries and a cleared admin assistant who just goes to her office in Columbia off route 29 for 5 days a week.

First off all, the real threat is going to be to that employee while they are on travel.
Secondly, that person would most likely be the "priority" for surveillance and attack over here stateside because 1) they have been hacked and known and 2) they have been followed while on travel thus bolstering their "importance" because they have been seen "working". This is a pretty far off instance, but one nonetheless. Hell, this went for those employees long before there was even a hack or ISIS.

Now your admin assistant or "office" employee who is cleared....Why single out a plain old office worker out of hundreds of those cleared who are walking out of the same building everyday at 5pm? Just attack them all.
It's really a GRAND notion that you (meaning anyone) think you have all the secrets in your head and that you alone would be singled out for kidnap or violence. Far fetched.
Once people start getting specifically targeted and actually kidnapped stateside, then maybe The MSP would take the ISIS threat and hack serious.

That's my take on it. The real problem is when someone posts opinion and reason that goes against someone's hopes and dreams of a carry permit, then that person becomes persona non grata.

When I and others receive our permits I will be sure to send you a pic. Until then, you are entitled to your options. I am here to tell you that you, as well as others are putting too much thought into this, and you need to check the box and move forward. While the MSP will shoot the idea down, I really dont care, its now fact that the HPRB will overturn if you can make any case to have a permit. That being said, no one is claiming they know alien secrets or anything of the sort, we are simply checking the box and using the system in order to obtain a positive outcome.

Also, no one is suggesting that anyone is going to be kidnapped. What I have been suggesting is that as a result of this hack, advisers now have my clearance as well as home address. I need to show a heightened sense of danger than that of the average citizen, which I did. Terrorists dont need to get the top HVT on their list, they need to hit anyone within the DoD in order to claim success.

 

[USAFRavenR6]

Wow. Blaster's not the dude I'd try this line of attack on. Just sayin'.

Why? People around here take this board and some of the posters way too seriously. There was no attack, relax.

 

[Blaster229]

Why? People around here take this board and some of the posters way too seriously. There was no attack, relax.

See, if I were an investigator, I would ask what you thought your threat was and what is it in your job that you do that puts you in danger. More danger than any other citizen that is walking down the street right now.
Is that when you say "if I told you, I'd have to kill you" or "Well you're not cleared at the proper level and don't have the need to know".

Tell us, so we may better understand the credible threat and not a general bulletin from the fbi or other govt agency that says govt employees and contractors could be attacked. I'm in the business and I just don't see it, from the inside or out.

 

[Rab1515]

I think alot of people on this thread have started to believe MPS about who needs or is entitled to a permit. I believe I can say with confadence that almost all of us her would like or at least be able to get a permet. Towards yhat end alot of people are looking for "excuses" that MSP has justified as G&S in the mean time untill a 2a rights have been restored; when self defence is G&S. Yes, the isis threat is pushing MSP's defonitions. However what other choice do we have?

 

[Minuteman]

Small progress won't hurt. The way going about it is what hurts.
Knowing real people on the "ground" with clearances that have a legitimate need is one thing. But to see people drooling who work desk jobs behind computers claiming apprehended danger is another and is pretty funny. Our office cleaning ladies are cleared to some extent. No doubt their names and employer is out there, do they have apprehended danger?
Like I keep saying, more power to them. I want all non prohibited people to carry.
Unfortunately it will take the HPRB to overturn and approve these applications to HOPEFULLY get the MSP to change their ways.

Who's drooling? What's the distinction between a person 'on the ground' and anyone else that can be affiliated with any group being actively targeted by a known terrorist group? The threat is what it is, nothing less or more. Your inference that people applying now under this new consideration is somehow unjustified is intriguing. Because I believe you when you say everyone (not prohibited) should be able; that's the very definition of 'shall issue'. But then you seem to at times laugh at those that follow the process and exercise that very option. I'm not going to guess your motive, there's clearly a scale of tolerance and understanding here; I've seen you promote this cause in person. Keep up the good work encouraging and helping others navigate these hostile waters to get a permit.

For anyone new to this forum:

The policy (sop included) has never been clearer, we've never before (in Maryland) had a more friendly Review Board, or MDSP team. If someone wants to apply for a permit, more power to them. They have never had a greater chance of being approved, and even if denied, have never had a better chance of getting it over turned in their favor. All the other conversation is irrelevant.

I'm here, many of us are, to provide helpful information/encouragement and socialize with other like minded folks. This is among the most popular (pro-gun) forums in the world. Stay safe.

 

[LoneRanger]

SO .... If small progress will just make the MGA angry and be worse upopn us, and exploring additional new ways to move forewards, will just make MGA angry and spank us, then other than having wet dreams about wholesale 75% turnover of politicians , we should all just give up and quit ?

You don't need to quit....you just need to quit going in the wrong direction.

It is not going to take a 75% turnover of politicians to effect change. It will take far less than 75% to get the MGA's attention.

Members of the MGA are no different than any other politicians.....really only interested in one thing....keeping their seat.

Unlike on the national level where politicians fear the NRA, there is no such fear with the MGA. The pro-2a folks in Maryland are just not an effective lobby.

Until we as a group can instill that fear, nothing changes. It's going to take unseating a couple of anti-2a legislators to make the point that the pro-2a lobby in Maryland should no longer be taken lightly.

 

[Schipperke]

By how easily some of these folks get their feathers ruffled in an internet forum you have to question the wisdom of giving them a carry permit....

Compulsive behavior about anything isn't a good thing. When it comes to a few obsessed with carrying a gun, yes one has to wonder. Even if the obsession is strictly for the "right" itself. It leads to delusional solutions.

Apply , deny , appeal

 

[Schipperke]

See, if I were an investigator, I would ask what you thought your threat was and what is it in your job that you do that puts you in danger. More danger than any other citizen that is walking down the street right now.
Is that when you say "if I told you, I'd have to kill you" or "Well you're not cleared at the proper level and don't have the need to know".

Tell us, so we may better understand the credible threat and not a general bulletin from the fbi or other govt agency that says govt employees and contractors could be attacked. I'm in the business and I just don't see it, from the inside or out.

Imagine if the bolded above was asked to business owners. Maybe one out of ten would get a permit. Lets get real. A guy with a web site building business who works from his basement and gets 100% of revenue via paypal is at no more risk than any non business owner.

 

[USAFRavenR6]

See, if I were an investigator, I would ask what you thought your threat was and what is it in your job that you do that puts you in danger. More danger than any other citizen that is walking down the street right now.
Is that when you say "if I told you, I'd have to kill you" or "Well you're not cleared at the proper level and don't have the need to know".

Tell us, so we may better understand the credible threat and not a general bulletin from the fbi or other govt agency that says govt employees and contractors could be attacked. I'm in the business and I just don't see it, from the inside or out.

I will explain this one more time for you as well as everyone else here. I feel as though I have been a broken record on this and that you can easily go back through the 16 pages on this thread to obtain the information you are looking for, yet you continue to ask for it. If you were an investigator, you would not be doing a very good job so I will once again spell it out for you.

The question is, "what puts you in more danger than any other citizen walking down the street right now?" The answer is simple. As a result of a recent database hacking, where all of my information (ALL information including physical description) was compromised, adversaries intent to do harm to US Military personal now have my home address. Now, based off of recent ISIS releases, such as the one which can be found here: http://thinkprogress.org/world/2015...tary-data-servers-leaked-personnel-addresses/, the islamic state is calling for American based ISIS soldiers to target military personal to attack. Not every citizen walking down the street, military personal by use of their home addresses. So the difference here is, the threat is made towards military personal (which I am part time, not the average citizen) by the use of hacked information (OPM database breach, which I am a part of, not the average citizen), in order to attack. They are not concerned with the average citizen, they want the military and members of the DoD to feel the pain. The average citizen does not have their home address in the hands of islamic militants who want to behead them, I do. So hopefully that answers your question. We only need to show something outside of our own personal paranoia, so the multiple news stories as well as the recent shootings in TN now bring credit to this. As small a chance as it maybe, there is still the chance and that chance is greater than Joe Snuffy walking down the street. Do you disagree with this? My MSP investigator surely did not.

Second, I never made claims to know ultra top secret info or I am a clandestine agent playing some cloak and dagger game. You don't need to to be in that role to have your information leaked in this hack, you only need to have applied for a clearance in the past 10 years. You are the one who brings it back to that. Like I said a hundred times, you only need to check the box. Of course we know MSP is going to shoot this down, I have no doubts about that, what we now have is a legitimate board who will right the wrong. So give them the opportunity to do so and encourage others opposed to being so negative. You dont need to see the angle, the HPRB does and based on prior decisions I say we are in good shape with this approach.

 

[LoneRanger]

Of course we know MSP is going to shoot this down, I have no doubts about that, what we now have is a legitimate board who will right the wrong. So give them the opportunity to do so and encourage others opposed to being so negative. You dont need to see the angle, the HPRB does and based on prior decisions I say we are in good shape with this approach.

Might, maybe, possibly work with the current HPRB...no guarantee it works with the next, assuming there still is an HPRB.

If the MGA sees the HPRB is routinely and regularly overruling the MSP, I can easily see a scenario where Mike and Mike decide the HPRB is no longer needed and the MSP has the final say.....applicants don't like it they can then use the courts to seek relief.

Gee, I wonder if any North Vietnamese terrorists have all my info from back when I had my clearances.....wonder if the MSP would buy into that....