More LD Shenanigans - Investigator at Westminster Barracks

BeoBill · Aug 9, 2017

Adolph Oliver Bush said:
Amen to that. l've been thinking lately, even though I don't have what the LD of the People's Republic of Maryland would call a "good and substantial reason" to carry a firearm, that I might go ahead and apply just so that I would add to the number of folks who applied to exercise their rights, but were denied by the state. I found myself at the MSP website, where I read this:

Where are Firearms Prohibited?

Restriction on the wear, carry and transport of handguns and firearms in certain places appear throughout Maryland law and regulations. *Below are statutes and regulations detailing the handgun and firearm restrictions. *This list should not be considered all-inclusive.**
1. On school property (CR 4-102)
2. Within 1,000 feet of a demonstration in a public place (CR 4-208)
(and more)

This last part is bulls hit. Go read 4-208. It does not say that you can't carry within 1000 feet of a demonstration, it says:

(b)*Prohibited. --

***(1)*This subsection does not apply to a law enforcement officer.

***(2)*A person may not have a firearm in the person's possession or on or about the person at a demonstration in a public place or in a vehicle that is within 1,000 feet of a demonstration in a public place after:

******(i)*the person has been advised by a law enforcement officer that a demonstration is occurring at the public place; and

******(ii)*the person has been ordered by the law enforcement officer to leave the area of the demonstration until the person disposes of the firearm.

which means that you can certainly carry a firearm at demonstration. The LD posts information that they want you to believe, hoping that you won't notice that it is incorrect. Hats off to the cop on the beat, but the asshats that write this policy shitt need a lesson on the Constitution.

Apparently reading comprehension is not part of the Academy curriculum. :rolleyes:

CypherPunk · Aug 9, 2017

Under prohibited places, the MSP website also lists highway rest stops.
Now, go read the actual law.

You have to verify absolutely everything they say.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

WhyIsMDTheWayItIs · Aug 9, 2017

I had a state trooper almost pull right out in front of me on Englar Rd from Chik-Fil-A in Westminster the other day. Only reason I didn't broadside him is because I knew he didn't see me and slowed down until he looked back up from probably dipping his French fry in his Chik-Fil-A sauce. In hindsight should have not slowed down, tapped him, milked my "injury" and called the City PD for an official police accident report, and then leveraged dismissal of subsequent lawsuit in exchange for an unrestricted life time carry permit. Not that I truly believe that possible and also fact that I saw that he didn't see me and car is paid off are primary reasons I slowed down...thought relevant enough to share and hopefully get a few smirks.

Rab1515 · Aug 9, 2017

WhyIsMDTheWayItIs said:
I had a state trooper almost pull right out in front of me on Englar Rd from Chik-Fil-A in Westminster the other day. Only reason I didn't broadside him is because I knew he didn't see me and slowed down until he looked back up from probably dipping his French fry in his Chik-Fil-A sauce. In hindsight should have not slowed down, tapped him, milked my "injury" and called the City PD for an official police accident report, and then leveraged dismissal of subsequent lawsuit in exchange for an unrestricted life time carry permit. Not that I truly believe that possible and also fact that I saw that he didn't see me and car is paid off are primary reasons I slowed down...thought relevant enough to share and hopefully get a few smirks.

It's never worth it. Ever. Coming from the person who just got rear ended, for the second time in a month, with my temp tags still on my new car, and still recovering from the first concussion.

motorcoachdoug · Aug 10, 2017

Hmmm if that is the case about a demonstration i would carry a copy of the MD Law and if a peace officer tried to tell me the law and shall we say "misquoted" the law to me, then I would show them the copy of the law. Make a couple of copys so you can let them have a copy as well.

Raineman · Aug 10, 2017

Adolph Oliver Bush said:
l've been thinking lately, even though I don't have what the LD of the People's Republic of Maryland would call a "good and substantial reason" to carry a firearm, that I might go ahead and apply just so that I would add to the number of folks who applied to exercise their rights, but were denied by the state.

I have been pondering this also.

daggo66 · Aug 10, 2017

Not for nothing, but I authorize all of you to make deposits into my account!

dblas · Aug 10, 2017

Jaybeez said:
There are always things on the application that arent in the law or comar. Some of them are pretty major.

Yes, there are, and they need to be challenged.

dblas · Aug 10, 2017

ras_oscar said:
I assume if you provide incorrect information on the form (or if you lie) you automatically get disapproved?

As evidenced at the last HPRB meeting, yes.

markgrutz · Sep 11, 2017

Magnumst said:
The old W&C app asked if all business taxes where paid and current.

My interview (at westminster) officer told me that bringing my bank statements would help my G&S case. When I redacted some of the info from the statement he told me he could not except it. If I where in the position to make waves I would not have complied. I know I became part of the problem when I did.

I just got told on Friday that the fact I redacted account numbers and non-business transactions required a re-submission of all bank statements and that I would need to provide deposit copies. Oh and she also told me it was my job to prove I was in an assumed risk position.

No correct me if I am wrong, but didn't Lazwick just testify on the 29th that Police, Judges, Prosecutors and politicians were the only assumed risk jobs?

Mark

redeemed.man · Sep 11, 2017

markgrutz said:
I just got told on Friday that the fact I redacted account numbers and non-business transactions required a re-submission of all bank statements and that I would need to provide deposit copies. Oh and she also told me it was my job to prove I was in an assumed risk position.

No correct me if I am wrong, but didn't Lazwick just testify on the 29th that Police, Judges, Prosecutors and politicians were the only assumed risk jobs?

Mark

I'd ignore the request. The investigator doesn't make the decision anyway. If they send you a shortage letter send the same redacted documents. You will win at the HPRB.

CypherPunk · Sep 11, 2017

With the MSP's history of incompetence, accidental exposure and comingled files, I'd tell them to pound sand and take your chances with the HPRB.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

markgrutz · Sep 11, 2017

boundlessdyad said:
I'd ignore the request. The investigator doesn't make the decision anyway. If they send you a shortage letter send the same redacted documents. You will win at the HPRB.

CypherPunk said:
With the MSP's history of incompetence, accidental exposure and comingled files, I'd tell them to pound sand and take your chances with the HPRB.

I printed out the 2015 SOP to take just in case, but I have no intention of providing any further information, as it is it was upwards of 6 months worth of statements with a few dozen deposits and far more expenses. Plus the plethora of other crap I included, I can't imagine there would be a shortage letter... but I am prepared to play chess while they are messing with the checkers.

Mark

Magnumst · Sep 11, 2017

markgrutz said:
I just got told on Friday that the fact I redacted account numbers and non-business transactions required a re-submission of all bank statements and that I would need to provide deposit copies. Oh and she also told me it was my job to prove I was in an assumed risk position.

No correct me if I am wrong, but didn't Lazwick just testify on the 29th that Police, Judges, Prosecutors and politicians were the only assumed risk jobs?

Mark

Lets not forget that the SOP doesnt say you need financial record's. But we all have are own best interest at hand and do what we feel is necessary.

markgrutz · Sep 11, 2017

Magnumst said:
Lets not forget that the SOP doesnt say you need financial record's. But we all have are own best interest at hand and do what we feel is necessary.

Yea, I probably should have read it before I prepared my application :innocent0

They really don't get anything from it anyway other than my printer, where I buy gear from, phone and web expenses. It looks like a DOD document with as much black is on it

Mark

CypherPunk · Sep 11, 2017

MSP's SOPs are not law, just their procedures, which are sometimes ruled unlawful.

My company has a SOP that we don't supply account numbers or students names.

Challenge EVERYTHING the MSP demands as ask what is your statutory authority to require that information?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Rab1515 · Sep 11, 2017

CypherPunk said:
MSP's SOPs are not law, just their procedures, which are sometimes ruled unlawful.

My company has a SOP that we don't supply account numbers or students names.

Challenge EVERYTHING the MSP demands as ask what is your statutory authority to require that information?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

ComeGet · Sep 12, 2017

You know, even if Hogan doesn't feel he can tell Pallozzi to make self defense good for G&S, he could do something to stop this nonsense without too much trouble.

Yeah, he's better than the alternative, but meh.

BeoBill · Sep 12, 2017

ComeGet said:
You know, even if Hogan doesn't feel he can tell Pallozzi to make self defense good for G&S, he could do something to stop this nonsense without too much trouble.

Yeah, he's better than the alternative, but meh.

I think that's more of an AG function, and you all know the chances of THAT happening. :sad20:

Schipperke · Sep 12, 2017

markgrutz said:
I just got told on Friday that the fact I redacted account numbers and non-business transactions required a re-submission of all bank statements and that I would need to provide deposit copies. Oh and she also told me it was my job to prove I was in an assumed risk position.

No correct me if I am wrong, but didn't Lazwick just testify on the 29th that Police, Judges, Prosecutors and politicians were the only assumed risk jobs?

Mark

I didn't redact anything, they just "forgot" to forward my deposit slips to investigator. She then told me to call Pikesville and ask them to forward them. My immediate thought was why me? Wouldn't the investigator get more attention and know who to call to get the missing items?

I didn't get the prove I was in assumed risk. They are getting really cranky it appears.

More LD Shenanigans - Investigator at Westminster Barracks

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Crank in the Third Row

Opinions Are My Own

Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

On the 3rd box

Ultimate Member

Past President, MSI

Past President, MSI

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Opinions Are My Own

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Opinions Are My Own

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Crank in the Third Row

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics