MSP Wear and Carry permit bulletin

BUFF7MM · Feb 23, 2015

RoadDawg said:
At least one step in the right direction...

As long as folks don't fall back on their BGOS and act like nothing good is possible.

Mr H said:
It's an example of the "little victories" we need.

This one came about, it seems, through proper diligence and non-confrontational public pressure. It's the way it's done best, and should be applied to the GA as well.

The more we hold them to account--in numbers, visibly--the more effective we'll be.

I'd like to know where you think this is a step in the right direction or a little victory, I see it as nothing more than nothing, you know 0+0 still equals 0.
All it is is a ******** letter that say type it or it gets slooooowed down.

Mr H · Feb 23, 2015

Buff7mm said:
I'd like to know where you think this is a step in the right direction or a little victory, I see it as nothing more than nothing, you know 0+0 still equals 0.
All it is is a ******** letter that say type it or it gets slooooowed down.

It's (in part) an acknowledgement of an issue brought to them by the public (the training). I'll agree they offset it a bit with the "typewritten" thing, but how many of us truly have legible handwriting?!!

Yeah, it's miniscule in the bigger scheme, but it's still 'more than none', and more responsiveness than other things that have had to go to court to fix.

BUFF7MM · Feb 23, 2015

Mr H said:
It's (in part) an acknowledgement of an issue brought to them by the public.

Yeah, it's miniscule in the bigger scheme, but it's still 'more than none', and more responsiveness than other things that have had to go to court to fix.

I still don't see where it a step in the right direction, when it starts to mention stuff about G&S then I might pay attention.
And just think the WVCDL email I just got says constitutional carry just cleared the judiciary committee today, and here we are talking about a ******** letter telling applicants to type it or else and make sure you've got the now required training. That's real progress right there. :sad20:

AntiGun · Feb 23, 2015

Stockholm syndrome.

BUFF7MM · Feb 23, 2015

AntiGun said:
Stockholm syndrome.

Ain't that the truth. :thumbsup:

navycraig · Feb 24, 2015

AntiGun said:
Stockholm syndrome.

Buff7mm said:
Ain't that the truth.

Indeed!

Mr H · Feb 24, 2015

AntiGun said:
Stockholm syndrome.

Because some of us refuse to be fatalists over it?

I think not, but that's your call...

Tomcat · Feb 24, 2015

Inigoes said:
I must have taken it the wrong way.

The letter states if the application isn't typed, it will be slow rolled.

Is the application a downlodable PDF, with fields that can be filled in?

Yes, see attached:

N3YMY · Feb 24, 2015

BeoBill said:
And "All applications must be typewritten"? Where outside of their offices do they think there are typewriters?

Indeed.

Reminds me of applying to schools in the late 1980s.

They too required typewritten applications.

Yet all of them except one managed to spell my last name correctly in their correspondence. :sad20:

The requirement should be "legible"; especially since I am sure more than one resident of PRMD can print legibly.

Of course their form may allow fill and print for all I know.

Until the requirement changes from G&S as defined by PRMD, I will not be able to complete the process :mad54:

Minuteman · Feb 24, 2015

hitwtom said:
Yes, see attached:

Thanks for posting the PDF form.

Hopefully this tiny update is the beginning of many that over time will improve processes.

No one is taking their eye off the ball. Even when "we" do have a more reasonable 'may issue' or better 'shall issue'; we will all need to remain vigilant. There are far too many people eager to surrender Liberty for the perception of security. And people willing to use the excuse that they are just 'doing their job'; while knowingly violating civil rights.

Thankfully good people around our beautiful nation are waking up, and the prospect here in Maryland has never been better.

navycraig · Feb 24, 2015

Mr H said:
Because some of us refuse to be fatalists over it?

I think not, but that's your call...

Wanting and expecting action to change things is not fatalism. Far from it. The fact that we want action and expect change is the exact opposite; we do not accept the fate that we seem to be being handed.

The pacifist here far outnumber the fatalist, IMO.

Docster · Feb 24, 2015

DaemonAssassin said:
Still shafting us. Still not Shall Issue, and won't accept self defense as G&S.

MSP are still law ENFORCEMENT, not law makers....

Even though I cannot get a permit at this time, I see this as a small victory for those that can, and a fresher approach by the MSP.

BUFF7MM · Feb 24, 2015

Docster said:
MSP are still law ENFORCEMENT, not law makers....

Even though I cannot get a permit at this time, I see this as a small victory for those that can, and a fresher approach by the MSP.

I'm still not seeing any victory for us in this bulletin, please point it out to me.

Gryphon · Feb 24, 2015

Buff7mm said:
I'm still not seeing any victory for us in this bulletin, please point it out to me.

MSP is going to provide greater customer service when denying your permit request :lol2:

Seriously, it was a subtle/inferred admission that MSP had a long standing error on their website and they fixed it. The licensing division's website has incorrectly stated for quite sometime that the training for the carry & wear application had to be completed no less than one year prior to the application date. In reality, the relevant statute places no expiration on the training. COMAR expressly says 2 years. So a couple of us banged our heads together here, and one of the other members (frankly I forget who) contacted MSP, and a day or so later they fixed the problem on the website and issued the bulletin. Not much more to it than that, but at least there wasn't a fight about it and the error was promptly corrected so all will have the correct info. Not really anything worth celebrating, just an example that MSP are people too and they corrected the problem once it was pointed out to them. :thumbsup:

Mooseman · Feb 24, 2015

The way I read the bulletin is, even if self defense is accepted as a G&S reason, so much time will have passed, that the original "365" will be denied because they have not had their training.

swinokur · Feb 24, 2015

IIRC, it was Straightshooter who contacted MSP about the error. As pointed out, they fixed it. So apparently in this case MSP was willing to admit they got it wrong. That's no predictor of future behavior. There was nothing in FSA2013 about a live fire requirement for the HQL. MSP stuck it in there anyway.

montoya32 · Feb 24, 2015

Did this bulletin say anything about fixing the site to allow Chrome and Firefox users to access it? This is unreal.

swinokur · Feb 24, 2015

I use Firefox, and even though they warn you to use IE, I've not had a problem. They will write code for the lowest common denominator and factory installed browser IMO.

IE isn't installed on MACS is it?

navycraig · Feb 24, 2015

Mooseman said:
The way I read the bulletin is, even if self defense is accepted as a G&S reason, so much time will have passed, that the original "365" will be denied because they have not had their training.

The "original 365" were denied long ago, very shortly after the 4th decided the Woollard case.

navycraig · Feb 24, 2015

Buff7mm said:
I'm still not seeing any victory for us in this bulletin, please point it out to me.

Stop it, now. We must give credit where credit is due. They fixed an error for us. Don't you think that's just about enough for this year?

MSP Wear and Carry permit bulletin

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

☠Buff➐㎣☠

Banana'd

☠Buff➐㎣☠

.

☠Buff➐㎣☠

Ultimate Member

Banana'd

Formerly Known As HITWTOM

Attachments

Ultimate Member

Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

☠Buff➐㎣☠

inveniam viam aut faciam

R.I.P.- Hooligan #4

In a State of Bliss

Ultimate Member

In a State of Bliss

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics