HPRB bill best argument

F5guy · Mar 4, 2019

So in advance of preparing testimony what is the best position to take against repealing the board? My gut tells me to show MSP rulings are arbitrary and need oversight. I’m wondering if I should explain how restrictions don’t make sense and use my personal case or some other tact. Personally my issue is that MSP says you are good enough to carry but only under certain parameters but refuse to provide specifics regarding why exactly that mean. Stopping for groceries on the way home, going to gym before work etc... any input is appreciated for advice that night legislators actually think this through?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Stoveman · Mar 4, 2019

F5guy said:
So in advance of preparing testimony what is the best position to take against repealing the board? My gut tells me to show MSP rulings are arbitrary and need oversight. I’m wondering if I should explain how restrictions don’t make sense and use my personal case or some other tact. Personally my issue is that MSP says you are good enough to carry but only under certain parameters but refuse to provide specifics regarding why exactly that mean. Stopping for groceries on the way home, going to gym before work etc... any input is appreciated for advice that night legislators actually think this through?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Using your own personal situation for testimony is never a bad idea.

hodgepodge · Mar 4, 2019

Your personal example is great. How do the restrictions affect you? How will the police know if you are within arbitrary restrictions?

Occam · Mar 4, 2019

I could be wrong, but it seems like we should careful arguing that restrictions are bad and therefor the HPRB should be preserved. Not least because it’s only working out for us right now because it’s been Hogan appointees that previously past through the senate gauntlet - and they're now refusing the sort of people we'd want to see sitting on the board. But even with a board fillled with antis, I prefer that it exist as a check on the MSP’s capricious, no-standards process.

I think the argument works best when it’s about oversight, and about the MSP’s unwillingness to be consistent or to spell out the standards they supposedly use in weighing G&S. The board is a step back towards equal protection under the law, and a way for the common citizen to seek relief without expensive legal counsel before the OAH.

EdHershon · Mar 4, 2019

Occam said:
I could be wrong, but it seems like we should careful arguing that restrictions are bad and therefor the HPRB should be preserved. Not least because it’s only working out for us right now because it’s been Hogan appointees that madness it previously past the senate. But even with a board fillled with antis, I prefer that it exist as a check on the MSP’s capricious, no-standards process.

I think the argument works best when it’s about oversight, and about the MSP’s unwillingness to be consistent or to spell out the standards they supposedly use in weighing G&S. The board is a step back towards equal protection under the law, and a way for the common citizen to seek relief without expensive legal counsel before the OAH.

Unfortunately, even if we are able to defeat this bill, the OAH is still an option if the MSP choose to go that route.

Legislation needs to be introduced next year to abolish the OAH appeal route due to its high costs to both the state and the people appearing before it.

Allen65 · Mar 5, 2019

EdHershon said:
Legislation needs to be introduced next year to abolish the OAH appeal route due to its high costs to both the state and the people appearing before it.

For the antis, that added cost is a feature, not a bug. Yes, it should be introduced, like bills making self defense G&S, but there's little chance it would go anywhere.

Occam · Mar 5, 2019

EdHershon said:
Unfortunately, even if we are able to defeat this bill, the OAH is still an option if the MSP choose to go that route.

Legislation needs to be introduced next year to abolish the OAH appeal route due to its high costs to both the state and the people appearing before it.

I agree (about killing off the OAH appeal as essentially a defacto new path that the MSP will always take - seems like they should have to feel the pain of going right to a circuit court if they really feel the board done them wrong).

But we have to try to preserve the board right now. It's going to be a lot easier to try to kill off the OAH maneuver if the board still exists. Have been cobbling together something to send to all of the legiscreatures involved.

welder516 · Mar 5, 2019

Problem is with the MSP and it's appeals of the board they get another swing at the ball and it is me the tax-payer that helps pay those funds for them to challenge me once again . The HPRB may fall due to it's own success of citizen redress . The whole thing leads back to the legal proceedings at OAH or even further to Circuit Court . The HPRB is a way to lesson the cost or eliminate the cost .

Anytime you challenge the "KINGS" the kings change the rules , winning is a temporary state at best .

The cost of these hearings and proceeding are not for the faint of heart , i can only imagine what the next level is from the OAH to Circuit Court .

PowPow · Mar 5, 2019

When I think about SB-1000, I just keep thinking to myself, "Yes, get rid of the HPRB by making Maryland a constitutional carry or shall issue state already!" I don't have anything constructive to add beyond that.

Mike OTDP · Mar 5, 2019

The problem is that the "good and sufficient" wording is too vague. No two people are ever going to agree 100% on whether an applicant's has one. Relying on MSP LD to make that decision ensures an arbitrary decision. Especially since the fact that the HPRB proceedings show clearly that MSP LD is predisposed to deny, predisposed to impose excessive restrictions, and cannot describe any sort of objective policy regarding "good and sufficient".

Frankly, this is why I really think we need to make a push for Shall Issue next year. Take the offensive for once. It's not a social experiment any longer, we know what the results of a shall-issue policy will be. And the existing requirements for training are a reasonable guarantee that people are not applying unless they think they have a reason that warrants taking two entire days to get one.

BeoBill · Mar 5, 2019

It's getting exposure...

Maryland Handgun Permit Review Board Under Attack by Progressive Democrats
https://www.ammoland.com/2019/03/ma...-board-under-attack-by-progressive-democrats/

...Why do I write a historical precis? For purely partisan political reasons, the Maryland General Assembly has decided to attack, with the intention of disbanding, the Handgun Permit Review Board...

MJD438 · Mar 5, 2019

BeoBill said:
It's getting exposure...

Maryland Handgun Permit Review Board Under Attack by Progressive Democrats
https://www.ammoland.com/2019/03/ma...-board-under-attack-by-progressive-democrats/

Ammoland, apparently, has someone that is on my organization's email subscriber list...

EdHershon · Mar 5, 2019

Allen65 said:
For the antis, that added cost is a feature, not a bug. Yes, it should be introduced, like bills making self defense G&S, but there's little chance it would go anywhere.

There are enough legislators who would introduce the legislation, we just need to follow it up with a grass roots campaign in every district.

EdHershon · Mar 5, 2019

Occam said:
I agree (about killing off the OAH appeal as essentially a defacto new path that the MSP will always take - seems like they should have to feel the pain of going right to a circuit court if they really feel the board done them wrong).

But we have to try to preserve the board right now. It's going to be a lot easier to try to kill off the OAH maneuver if the board still exists. Have been cobbling together something to send to all of the legiscreatures involved.

I agree! We need to preserve the Board

marylandmark · Mar 5, 2019

XCheckR · Mar 5, 2019

If we are arguing for the HPRB, are we playing into their hands and providing ammunition (no pun intended) for keeping 'may issue'? Also, if they abolish it does it give us additional ammunition to fight for "Shall issue"?

jcutonilli · Mar 5, 2019

Is the HPRB a double edge sword? They are currently overturning MSP decisions with a Republican Governor, but what happens under a Democrat?

According to https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2...-permit-system-into-a-bureaucratic-nightmare/
FL elected an anti-gun ag commissioner (who runs the CCW program) and has begun to make having a CCW much more difficult.

PJDiesel · Mar 5, 2019

jcutonilli said:
Is the HPRB a double edge sword? They are currently overturning MSP decisions with a Republican Governor, but what happens under a Democrat?

What do you think happened under O'Malley? It was all but a rubber stamp the other direction.

jcutonilli · Mar 5, 2019

PJDiesel said:
What do you think happened under O'Malley? It was all but a rubber stamp the other direction.

Does it make sense to defend the HPRB or to propose something better? There seems to be a push to change it, why not take advantage of that?

welder516 · Mar 5, 2019

The board is the only answer , citizens need a citizens board to oversee this process .

HPRB bill best argument

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Active Member

TV Personality

Senior Member (Gold)

Not Even ONE Indictment

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Not Even ONE Indictment

Deplorable Welder

Where's the beef?

Ultimate Member

Crank in the Third Row

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Banned

Ultimate Member

Deplorable Welder

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics