HB1302-"The Neighborhood Bag Lady Can Take Your Guns" bill

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!
  • Hawkeye

    The Leatherstocking
    Jan 29, 2009
    3,971
    First of all, (though it goes without saying that the bill is unconstitutional and I'd like to see it killed altogether) this is fantastic news. Awesome work by all involved.

    During this time playing "catch-up" on this all-out attack on the MD 2A community, it has become clear that next year, we must seek out "Bill Minders"--people who will take responsibility to focus on the process of ONLY ONE BILL and update the thread as to its intent and its ramifications.

    In the digital age, a Bill Minder can observe and report hearings dates, mark-ups dates, voting dates, etc and never travel to Annapolis. It is the perfect job for someone too far away from Annapolis to comfortably contribute in person there.

    The Bill Minder will be the resource for folks who DO go to Naptown to testify, demonstrate, email, phone or visit the legislators in-person.

    I would be more than happy to do that next year. My personal life doesn't often permit me time to travel to Annapolis, but I can use the MGA website with the best of them, and though I'm no lawyer, I can read and decipher bills like these pretty well also.

    It sucks that this thing is still alive, but at least some of the teeth have been pulled. The amendments that got made match almost exactly (though not nearly as forcefully) a set of thoughts that I wrote up and sent out as a result of an in-depth discussion of the whole thing with one of my legislators. Again, it sure isn't perfect, but the amended bill at least attempts to address most of the more horrendous parts of the old bill.
     

    EL1227

    R.I.P.
    Patriot Picket
    Nov 14, 2010
    20,274
    Hear, Hear !!!

    What happened in the MGA this year has been a major civics lesson for thousands of us. And the keynote lecturers for that lesson were Rack & Mr. Pennak.

    You two, Norton, plus others and the communities behind you, blunted a corporate media-backed, billionaire-funded massive attack on basic civil rights and due process, let alone the 2A. And in one of the bluest of blue states, no less, against a, autocratic legislative leadership that has been entrenched for more than a quarter century.

    But don't let that get to your heads - we're not at Sine Die yet. And you can bet Everytown and their smug, shrill, well-funded posse will be back next session for another bite at the apple.

    Maryland citizens who believe in civil liberties owe you all a debt of gratitude.

    There are parallels that can be drawn to our Founders Patriots; those who surrendered their lives and fortune as the price if freedom for ALL of us.

    Mark is our Jeffersonian Statesman, while Jeff can be none other than Patrick Henry for his open act of defiance in the face of Miller's ordered assault on 1A. I am sure that more associations can be drawn to the Patriot Picket, as a body and as individuals, who spontaneously gathered to resist the modern day Redcoats in Annapolis, not to mention those who manned the 'printing press' of social media in their own version of Franklin's Pennsylvania Gazette.

    Miller had better tighten his powdered wig because our fight has just begun.



    Huzzah !!!
     

    Jim12

    Let Freedom Ring
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 30, 2013
    33,864
    What good gun bill came out this year?

    They killed the approval before training, which is common sense.

    Hogan signs either of these and I will sit this election out.


    The Patriots here are the only reason more bad laws weren't passed.

    Because a rabidly Left-leaning, repeal the 2A altogether, gun grabber would be better than Hogan?
     

    welder516

    Deplorable Welder
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 8, 2013
    27,307
    Underground Bunker
    Because a rabidly Left-leaning, repeal the 2A altogether, gun grabber would be better than Hogan?

    And this is why "our friends" gun friendly delegates sold us down river .

    Because voting for them is better then voting for the gun grabbers , when in fact there is a fine line between them both .
    Neither can be trusted as far as i could throw them .

    Sad fact for me is i will vote for Hogan and the other idiots because the other choice is worse . What a way to live a life in Maryland politics . :mad54:
     

    ddeanjohnson

    autodidact
    Aug 21, 2010
    801
    Some preliminary thoughts on Senate committee version, and what comes next

    After days of hearings and discussions in the Senate (seven Democrats, 4 Republicans) the pushback from the various 2A orgs and Republicans on the committee, combined with outrage directed at the Judicial Proceedings Committee through emails, phone calls and Patriot Picket sign-messaging outside their offices, the bill was amended . . .

    I haven't followed as closely as I should have but I thought the Senate changed the House-passed bill. If so, would it not need to go back to the House for approval?

    We are all indebted to Rack&Roll for his dogged monitoring of this legislation.

    The best information I've been able to obtain indicates that the House of Delegates will not simply embrace the version of HB 1302 that the Senate will soon approve (probably on Friday?), but will request a conference committee. In practice, the majority of a conference committee can do anything it likes to bill language, within the general subject area covered by the bill, including incorporation of new language that was not approved on the first go-around by either house. So it is possible that the bill that goes to the Gov. Hogan will contain further substantial changes from the version reported by the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee.

    Moreover, I have not yet seen even a copy of HB 1302 that incorporates all of the changes that were made in the Senate committee -- as of this writing, it has not yet been posted on the MGA website. But on the basis of what I witnessed at the committee's April 3 voting session, and on Rack&Roll's summary above, none of the Senate's committee's changes fundamentally change the way that the law would operate, nor provide any real protection against abuses of the ex parte (one-sided) judicial processes that it employs for issuing the "short-term" gun-confiscation orders. The direct empowerment of "any other interested person" will no doubt stay out, but while that change is welcome, I think that not too much should be made of it. Does it not seem likely that in some of the urban jurisdictions like Montgomery and Prince George's counties, if anybody who is not a notorious gangster complains to the police about a gun owner supposedly saying or doing something that the complainant considers ominous or bothersome, then the police are just going to fill out an "Extreme Risk Protection Order" (ERPO) form and transmit it to the nearest district court commissioner? The commissioner most likely will be neither inclined or equipped to apply any critical scrutiny (I think most of them are not even lawyers), and will routinely issue a short-term ERPO (confiscation order). Even if the petition is placed before a real judge (which the bill no longer requires), the judge will have absolutely no information other than the allegations in the petition, which in some cases may be riddled with error or subjectivity, or based on hearsay which the police are merely transmitting. The petitioner may have motivations that the judge will have no way of discerning.

    The gun owner / gun collector will find out about the matter when the deputies show up at his door to serve the order. If he does not surrender all firearms, and all ammunition (they added that), he moves from the civil realm into the criminal realm.

    The bill still provides no mechanism by which a gun owner (gun collector, retired LEO, permit holder, whoever) who has done nothing wrong, and who is certain that the ERPO that the deputy hands him is based on petition information that was erroneous due to error, delusion, prejudice, malice, and/or mistaken identity, will nevertheless become a criminal if he does not surrender all firearms to the tender mercies of law enforcement. As the bill now stands, there is no route by which the targeted gun owner can present his evidence to a judge before the surrender order takes force -- the Senate committee rejected, on a party-line vote, an amendment offered by Sen. Bob Cassilly (R) to provide the targeted gun owner ("respondent") with the OPTION of submitting to confinement in the regional emergency-evaluation until for a few days, until he can appear in person (and with counsel) before a real judge to present evidence regarding his circumstances and dispositions, and regarding the sources and motivations for the misinformation on which the ill-founded petition was based (with the guns remaining undisturbed in the meantime). Some gun owners / collectors hit with ERPOs based on erroneous information would suffer far less harm by exercising such an option, inconvenient or burdensome though it may be.

    Why have proponents of HB 1302 so far opposed modifying the bill to allow a voluntary-confinement-until-hearing option? After all, a respondent who is under confinement in the secure psych ward (until a full hearing before a judge) is completely isolated from access to firearms, unlike the same person who has surrendered his personally owned firearms to law enforcement but might obtain another firearm in violation of the ERPO. The proponents' opposition to allowing a judge to hear evidence from both sides before deciding on confiscation, even when the gun owner himself is confined, does raise serious questions about the real priorities of some of the architects of this legislation.
     
    Last edited:

    Rack&Roll

    R.I.P
    Patriot Picket
    Jan 23, 2013
    22,304
    Bunkerville, MD
    I haven't followed as closely as I should have but I thought the Senate changed the House-passed bill. If so, would it not need to go back to the House for approval?

    The answer is yes, with qualifications.

    I was told in the hearing room yesterday that there is a sneaky pathway that can be taken in addition to the customary process of convening a House/Senate Reconciliation Committee when the Senate takes a House bill and changes it.

    That second pathway is that Sen. President Mike Miller and House Speaker Michael Busch instruct the House to just concur WITHOUT a conference when the legislative calendar tightens up with just days to go. Just a wave of the hand.

    In the past, tensions between House and Senate versions have been so fractious that a bill has simply died because big egos on either side would not give ground.

    This year, “the word on the street” (and on Mike Miller’s Facebook page is that this RED FLAG bill is gonna happen “no matter what”)
     

    frogman68

    товарищ плачевная
    Apr 7, 2013
    8,774
    Because a rabidly Left-leaning, repeal the 2A altogether, gun grabber would be better than Hogan?

    No difference. The only thing that saved us was the Patriots in Nap Town no politicians they all talked about supporting us but turned faster than a Tory on us. If Hogan had any balls he would of told them to give us a bread crumb or two
     

    Rack&Roll

    R.I.P
    Patriot Picket
    Jan 23, 2013
    22,304
    Bunkerville, MD
    In my rundown of amendments to the bill that I posted earlier, I went with a bullet point list of changes relying on my notes.

    But that was only half the story.

    All four Republicans on the Committee took turns offering a slew of amendments to narrow the scope of the process so that it better resembled Maryland’s established “Health General Title 10” codes that focus on petitions filed against mentally ill folks deemed dangerous.

    Surprise! Most were rejected because the Democrats have been threatened by Mike Miller to fashion a process to roll up as many firearm owners as possible that are NOT MENTALLY ILL!

    Fellow MDS member ddeanjohnson (who posted analysis above in list 1046) constructed language whereby a confronted firearm owner could volunteer to be evaluated in a psych ward (over several days if necessary) in return for having firearms in the home LEFT IN PLACE until the firearms owner could get in front of a judge with a diagnosis that he was sane.

    I told ddeanjohnson I disagreed with the ploy, telling him we should not be dickering with the Infringers to exchange heavy chains for lighter ones.

    To his credit, though, he lobbied for the “voluntary “detention/confinement” as preferable and it was officially submitted and voted on as a request to add this “path to the bill—but failed to get the votes.

    Our charge now is to overwhelm Gov. Hogan with messages and sign-waving outside The Mansion next to the Statehouse, imploring Hogan to REJECT this bill because of 4th Amendment violations of Due Process that are DELIBERATELY EMBEDDED IN THIS BILL BY THE DEMOCRATS!
     

    Biggfoot44

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 2, 2009
    32,881
    ( Having read the bootleg copy of the (4/3) draft, and attending the 4/3 SJPC session )

    During Court hours , is required to see Judge instead of Commissioner.

    Having a Petitioner go through a LEO or Judge or Commissioner instead of purely on their does provide a small measure of BS Filtration . Doesn't overcome the inherent flaws of Ex Parte, and doesn't make the whole mess acceptable , but is a measure of incrementally less suck . Very incremental .
     

    ironpony

    Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 8, 2013
    7,191
    Davidsonville
    Is it correct to believe that with the ammunition addition it would be a felony if a shell casing is found near one while under this red flag. ?
     

    Rack&Roll

    R.I.P
    Patriot Picket
    Jan 23, 2013
    22,304
    Bunkerville, MD
    Is it correct to believe that with the ammunition addition it would be a felony if a shell casing is found near one while under this red flag. ?

    As far as I can tell, there are no implications for non-prohibited people having ammo, or being in proximity to ammo, just that it would be confiscated as well.
     

    East2West

    Banned
    BANNED!!!
    Jul 20, 2013
    902
    Nomalley, Nobama
    No it wasn't him, it was a guy from Caroline county.
    I can't remember his name I was on 18 plus hours when I heard him speak.
    It'll come to me I'm still working.

    Should be Jeff Ghrist then. I was asked to leave him alone online because of how important it was to have a Caroline County voice in Annapolis. Apparently Smigiels son is running for that seat too and is causing some fear.
     

    smkranz

    Certified Caveman
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 21, 2013
    4,350
    Carroll County
    As far as I can tell, there are no implications for non-prohibited people having ammo, or being in proximity to ammo, just that it would be confiscated as well.

    I caught the additional requirement of inventorying of guns by make, model and serial number. Missed the part about whether, and how, confiscated ammo would be inventoried, transported, and stored. I'm sure there are a lot of gun owners whose ammo cache takes up at least as much, if not more, space and possible replacement value, as our guns.

    Looking around for a copy of the marked-up bill which now goes to the Senate. That should be made public by now, no?
     

    j_h_smith

    Ultimate Member
    Jul 28, 2007
    28,516
    What happens if the gun owner doesn't have enough gun cases for every firearm they own? I know I'm seriously lacking enough gun cases for all of my firearms. I doubt any collector would have a gun case for every firearm they own.
     

    daggo66

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 31, 2013
    1,992
    Glen Burnie
    What happens if the gun owner doesn't have enough gun cases for every firearm they own? I know I'm seriously lacking enough gun cases for all of my firearms. I doubt any collector would have a gun case for every firearm they own.

    Do you really think they will put your guns in cases? If you're lucky they will all get thrown in a duffle bag.
     

    daggo66

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 31, 2013
    1,992
    Glen Burnie
    I caught the additional requirement of inventorying of guns by make, model and serial number. Missed the part about whether, and how, confiscated ammo would be inventoried, transported, and stored. I'm sure there are a lot of gun owners whose ammo cache takes up at least as much, if not more, space and possible replacement value, as our guns.

    Looking around for a copy of the marked-up bill which now goes to the Senate. That should be made public by now, no?

    You don't get the ammo back.
     

    fred55

    Senior
    Aug 24, 2016
    1,772
    Spotsylvania Co. VA
    In my rundown of amendments to the bill that I posted earlier, I went with a bullet point list of changes relying on my notes.

    But that was only half the story.

    All four Republicans on the Committee took turns offering a slew of amendments to narrow the scope of the process so that it better resembled Maryland’s established “Health General Title 10” codes that focus on petitions filed against mentally ill folks deemed dangerous.

    Surprise! Most were rejected because the Democrats have been threatened by Mike Miller to fashion a process to roll up as many firearm owners as possible that are NOT MENTALLY ILL!

    Fellow MDS member ddeanjohnson (who posted analysis above in list 1046) constructed language whereby a confronted firearm owner could volunteer to be evaluated in a psych ward (over several days if necessary) in return for having firearms in the home LEFT IN PLACE until the firearms owner could get in front of a judge with a diagnosis that he was sane.

    I told ddeanjohnson I disagreed with the ploy, telling him we should not be dickering with the Infringers to exchange heavy chains for lighter ones.

    To his credit, though, he lobbied for the “voluntary “detention/confinement” as preferable and it was officially submitted and voted on as a request to add this “path to the bill—but failed to get the votes.

    Our charge now is to overwhelm Gov. Hogan with messages and sign-waving outside The Mansion next to the Statehouse, imploring Hogan to REJECT this bill because of 4th Amendment violations of Due Process that are DELIBERATELY EMBEDDED IN THIS BILL BY THE DEMOCRATS!

    If the underlined can be shown to be true, Rack I have no reason to doubt you, Mike Miller should be brought before an ethics panel - that is completely illegal! Fred55
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,926
    Messages
    7,259,325
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom