HB375/SB0184

PorP · Mar 16, 2016

I did a search and found nothing on this bill that was supposed to be heard yesterday. It basically add personal protection to G&S for CCWs. Does anyone know what the status is? Is it going to make it in for vote?

dblas · Mar 16, 2016

It was indeed heard yesterday in the House Judiciary, an testimony by several organizations and citizens was provided.

Raineman · Mar 16, 2016

Without an amendment that strikes the word "can" and the word "qualify" is changed to "qualifies", even if passed it will make no changes as to how the MSP Licensing Division interprets it.

If it passes as written, it will do nothing. In my opinion.

If you want to read the bill, just look in Vallario's desk drawer. I think the Democrats on the House Judiciary (including the Chair and Vice Chair) are too cowardly to put the bill to a full floor vote.

The bill needs to be amended and petitioned out of Committee for a full floor vote. If just a few Democrat Delegates grew an actual spine and cared about protecting their constituents, they would join in a petition out of Committee.

Mr H · Mar 16, 2016

It was confirmed for me yesterday (by a well-respected Delegate) that 'leadership' is putting extra boots on the necks of not only first termers, but others who dare breathe anything that looks remotely as if Hogan would like it.

daggo66 · Mar 16, 2016

Mr H said:
It was confirmed for me yesterday (by a well-respected Delegate) that 'leadership' is putting extra boots on the necks of not only first termers, but others who dare breathe anything that looks remotely as if Hogan would like it.

I know someone who would have fought tooth and nail, "leadership" be damned.

Mr H · Mar 16, 2016

daggo66 said:
I know someone who would have fought tooth and nail, "leadership" be damned.

I hearya!

Actually, there are a couple I can think of.

BeoBill · Mar 16, 2016

Mr H said:
It was confirmed for me yesterday (by a well-respected Delegate) that 'leadership' is putting extra boots on the necks of not only first termers, but others who dare breathe anything that looks remotely as if Hogan would like it.

Then it's time to get even MORE PERSONAL with them. Anyone on the bricks tomorrow?

shootin the breeze · Mar 16, 2016

Mr H said:
It was confirmed for me yesterday (by a well-respected Delegate) that 'leadership' is putting extra boots on the necks of not only first termers, but others who dare breathe anything that looks remotely as if Hogan would like it.

What, exactly, are they doing to the juniors?

Mr H · Mar 16, 2016

I didn't want to push the Delegate, but the usual (as I understand it) would be privileges, Committee assignments, and such.

Maybe even limited wine rations.

PorP · Mar 17, 2016

Raineman said:
Without an amendment that strikes the word "can" and the word "qualify" is changed to "qualifies", even if passed it will make no changes as to how the MSP Licensing Division interprets it.

If it passes as written, it will do nothing. In my opinion.

If you want to read the bill, just look in Vallario's desk drawer. I think the Democrats on the House Judiciary (including the Chair and Vice Chair) are too cowardly to put the bill to a full floor vote.

The bill needs to be amended and petitioned out of Committee for a full floor vote. If just a few Democrat Delegates grew an actual spine and cared about protecting their constituents, they would join in a petition out of Committee.

Thanks for the info Raineman.

I hear what you are saying. In this very austere environment for 2A though, even something as small as adding protection to CCW wording would be a small win in my eyes. If we can set precedence for modifying CCW regulations, it could set the stage for future modification.

Jim12 · Mar 17, 2016

Mr H said:
It was confirmed for me yesterday (by a well-respected Delegate) that 'leadership' is putting extra boots on the necks of not only first termers, but others who dare breathe anything that looks remotely as if Hogan would like it.

First-termers ought to be reminded that they got their "jobs" because people wanted change.

"Leadership" doesn't represent change.

Hope the young'n's have the cajones to resist tyranny.

Jim12 · Mar 17, 2016

Mr H said:
I didn't want to push the Delegate, but the usual (as I understand it) would be privileges, Committee assignments, and such.

Maybe even limited wine rations.

If they're on the "outs" with leadership, it's much easier to make a public stink about it and demand change. Look at us. :innocent0

danb · Mar 17, 2016

This is an anti-establishment year. People will be rewarded accordingly.

Mr H · Mar 17, 2016

Jim12 said:
If they're on the "outs" with leadership, it's much easier to make a public stink about it and demand change. Look at us.

It's all the more reason that House seats should be up every 2 years, 3 terms max.

At this point, we just need to make folks' lives miserable until 2018

zoostation · Mar 17, 2016

Mr H said:
It was confirmed for me yesterday (by a well-respected Delegate) that 'leadership' is putting extra boots on the necks of not only first termers, but others who dare breathe anything that looks remotely as if Hogan would like it.

I have no doubt. Don't forget these are the same two assholes who were willing to hold up the state's casino money for four years just so Ehrlich couldn't get slots and had a tougher time with the budget. Apparently "for the children" only matters when there is a (D) in office.

Raineman · Mar 17, 2016

PorP said:
I hear what you are saying. In this very austere environment for 2A though, even something as small as adding protection to CCW wording would be a small win in my eyes. If we can set precedence for modifying CCW regulations, it could set the stage for future modification.

I have been suggesting the amendment in both the Senate and the House since the bill was proposed (last year as well), and have spoken to many elected officials 'til I am blue in the face.

Nobody is listening. Not even the Republicans or the bill sponsors(s).

PorP · Mar 17, 2016

Raineman said:
I have been suggesting the amendment in both the Senate and the House since the bill was proposed (last year as well), and have spoken to many elected officials 'til I am blue in the face.

Nobody is listening. Not even the Republicans or the bill sponsors(s).

I sure did not intend to say anyone was not doing there due diligence. I used to volunteer for Mike Smiegal, especially during the 2013 gun grab. Too bad Smiegal is not there anymore, he was one of the good guys, I thought.

BeoBill · Mar 17, 2016

Jim12 said:
First-termers ought to be reminded that they got their "jobs" because people wanted change.

"Leadership" doesn't represent change.

Darn right!!!

CrazyIvan · Mar 20, 2016

Jim12 said:
First-termers ought to be reminded that they got their "jobs" because people wanted change.

"Leadership" doesn't represent change.

Hope the young'n's have the cajones to resist tyranny.

I don't like using the term "Leadership" as it implies that they are, indeed, our leaders. They are OUR representatives. They represent us, not the other way around. They need to be reminded of that.

Mr H · Mar 20, 2016

I believe he--as I--put leadership in quotes to indicate how it is lacking.

HB375/SB0184

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Active Member

Past President, MSI

On the 3rd box

Banana'd

Ultimate Member

Banana'd

Crank in the Third Row

Missed it by that much

Banana'd

Active Member

Let Freedom Ring

Let Freedom Ring

dont be a dumbass

Banana'd

, ,

On the 3rd box

Active Member

Crank in the Third Row

Crazy Ivan

Banana'd

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics