2112rws
Active Member
- Jan 18, 2013
- 163
Do we know when the Senate votes?
S446 Senate National Reciprocity Act
- Thread starter swinokur
- 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:
esqappellate
President, MSI
- Feb 12, 2012
- 7,408
It is less than clear (to me at least) that you have to have a CC permit from your home state. The operative language applies to a permit issued pursuant to the law of *a* state. Then limits its reach to cases where the handgun has been shipped in interstate commerce other than in the state of the residence. If the Colt is made in Conn. and is shipped to MD where is is purchased by a MD resident, that the interstate shipment requirement is satisfied. A NR permit is issued by “a” state.
2112rws
Active Member
- Jan 18, 2013
- 163
Would this mean that a C&R pistol like a CZ82 be legal to carry in MD with an out of state permit because it is was received from out of state under the Senate bill?
So MDers who own nothing but a Beretta 92FS aren't covered. Ugh.
thomfantomas
Crna Ovca
Even though it is "state of residence" as written it is still a big step forward if it passes. Not as big a step as we all would have liked with nationwide shall-issue of course, but still very helpful.
This bill will put the democrats in the GA in the very uncomfortable position of having to say why people from other states can carry in Maryland but Marylanders can't. Try telling a local elitist liberal that someone from Alabama or Texas can do something in Maryland that they aren't allowed to do. It won't matter if it's concealed carry or self-administered lobotomies, they aren't going to like hearing that at all. I think it might also raise some equal protection arguments in court as well.
This bill will put the democrats in the GA in the very uncomfortable position of having to say why people from other states can carry in Maryland but Marylanders can't. Try telling a local elitist liberal that someone from Alabama or Texas can do something in Maryland that they aren't allowed to do. It won't matter if it's concealed carry or self-administered lobotomies, they aren't going to like hearing that at all. I think it might also raise some equal protection arguments in court as well.
whistlersmother
Peace through strength
What political downside is it for the MGA to not pursue in-state carry permits while those outside the state can carry? I would submit most Marylanders wouldn't even care. Liberal elites putting pressure on the MGA to go shall issue? I'm not seeing it. If anything, those that want to take advantage will simply declare residency outside of Maryland, get a shall issue permit, then carry in Maryland. The leftist elites don't care because they got the resources to get carry permits regardless - the rest of us be damned.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
I didn't say the hard core leftists will put pressure on the GA to go shall issue. We both know that will never happen. The hard core leftists won't change their position on gun control, I agree with this. They will just be angry about it. But the middle of the road fence sitters, both voters and representatives, they may care. At the very least I think you will see some loosening of the current "good an substantial" standard, either in statute or in practice. And regardless, it is a start. Once it passes and the public sees the streets don't run red with blood it makes it easier to pursue a loosening of the current law in Maryland and may make it possible to get the state of residence requirement taken out of the federal law. I doubt Maryland will ever go shall-issue without a federal law or court decision, but this could help chip away at the current basically insurmountable standards for many.
- Nov 11, 2009
- 30,871
This sort of solution, if utilised by a reasonable number of soon to be ex-Marylanders, will attract attention of lawmakers sensitive to the loss of tax revenue, hopefully. Of course, it didn't seem to bother them when Beretta pulled up stakes and moved to Tennessee.
whistlersmother
Peace through strength
We'll just have to be of differing opinions. A look around the USA should have provided fence sitters that the streets won't run red.
I just see many average fence sitters not caring because they haven't cared before.
Now, if the MGA makeup changes, then I think we'll see a small minority being able to drive changes in Maryland CCW, especially if this becomes law.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
INMY01TA
Ultimate Member
- Dec 29, 2008
- 5,827
Perhaps if it passes Hogan may finally have an inclination to loosen G&S...
whistlersmother
Peace through strength
What loss of tax revenue? How so?
Sell your house to someone else with similar income and real estate tax?
Decreasing property values and resulting loss of real estate tax would get their attention, but who is willing to take a loss on their house?
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
- Nov 11, 2009
- 30,871
Only if he has national ambitions, or possibly if he manages to get re-elected in 2018. He won't touch it before the next election.
- Nov 11, 2009
- 30,871
I suppose you're right. The Greater Fool Rule would seem to apply to MD demographics. And I guess no one is concerned with Baltimore's population decline, as the place probably operates at a net loss anyway.
iH8DemLibz
When All Else Fails.
2112rws
Active Member
- Jan 18, 2013
- 163
Since most MD permits have restrictions ie. "When working as ...." and most out of states permits would not have restrictions how might MD permits change if Senate bill version becomes law?
With all respect Bob, they won't care. If they could charge four hundred dollars on say a full five percent of the population getting a LTCH (a high number, even Texas is only around 3%), you'd only be talking about $140M or so in a budget of $43 billion, even before you add in the processing costs.
Our legislators in control by and large seem to have the mindset that federal government work drives the state's economy and always will. At least the ones who bother to think about it. I think some don't even know and just seem to view tax dollars in the same manner a child believes in the tooth fairy's quarters. They just show up...somehow, but they are expected.
As for the hundreds of people they put out of work or forced to move with Beretta leaving, not to mention the people in local ancillary businesses out of work after that community left, I think they simply don't care. Sacrifice for principles is golden to a liberal, as long as it's someone else doing the sacrificing. I doubt some of them who have spent their entire lives in gated communities and upscale law practices even have a concept of what unemployment or blue collar job hunting really is. Reminds me of what a New York State legislator said when Remington was going to move. She said the employees could just make "yogurt" in the factories instead. Yes, just wave a wand and Magical Yogurt Ponies will descend from the sky and set up a factory for you complete with a supply chain and customers. Clueless.
iH8DemLibz
When All Else Fails.
This is what I meant by "Interesting".
I see Maryland going full retard spiteful.
With the MGA passing new laws.
Things like: Out of state reciprocity is only good for passing through the state. You can wear/carry your handgun, but you can't stop anywhere. Every square inch of Maryland will become a restricted area.
Mr H
Banana'd
When this push in MD started under Woollard, the estimate from the best numbers available (which were still mostly estimates themselves) was that the people in MD actually interested in lawful CC totaled about .3% (.003) of residents (apx 6 million), or 18,000 people.
Granted, this is a soft number, and really didn't account for occupational permits, etc., but I found it illustrative of the challenge. Most Marylanders just didn't care. And, of those who did, we learned through conversations across the state that they were just too discouraged to even give it a try.
I don't know what the interest numbers are now but, if they're double, I wouldn't be surprised (but it's still not too encouraging).
Granted, this is a soft number, and really didn't account for occupational permits, etc., but I found it illustrative of the challenge. Most Marylanders just didn't care. And, of those who did, we learned through conversations across the state that they were just too discouraged to even give it a try.
I don't know what the interest numbers are now but, if they're double, I wouldn't be surprised (but it's still not too encouraging).
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
MD DNR Outdoor Recreation Survey -- Outdoorsman Responses Needed (8 Viewers)
- Started by Derwood
- Replies: 1
-
-
-
-
-
-