20190314 - HB786 JUD Amendments

F5guy · Mar 15, 2019

At the risk of getting flamed- why not give individuals access to run NICS check for private transfers. This way it would become a personal responsibility to stay within the law in order to complete a personal transfer. The way it’s setup now are we going to have to give an ffl possession and let them do the transfer. Understanding how this will work is hurting my brain.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bertfish · Mar 15, 2019

F5guy said:
At the risk of getting flamed- why not give individuals access to run NICS check for private transfers. This way it would become a personal responsibility to stay within the law in order to complete a personal transfer. The way it’s setup now are we going to have to give an ffl possession and let them do the transfer. Understanding how this will work is hurting my brain.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes it should be open for public use. No details just pass or dont.

F5guy · Mar 15, 2019

Bertfish said:
Yes it should be open for public use. No details just pass or dont.

Or delayed right. If other states go in this direction could keep gun shows alive. Then again they wouldn’t want that.....

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

dist1646 · Mar 16, 2019

F5guy said:
At the risk of getting flamed- why not give individuals access to run NICS check for private transfers. This way it would become a personal responsibility to stay within the law in order to complete a personal transfer. The way it’s setup now are we going to have to give an ffl possession and let them do the transfer. Understanding how this will work is hurting my brain.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just imagine if the Crown had put that system in place prior to 1776! :sad20:

dblas · Mar 16, 2019

F5guy said:
At the risk of getting flamed- why not give individuals access to run NICS check for private transfers. This way it would become a personal responsibility to stay within the law in order to complete a personal transfer. The way it’s setup now are we going to have to give an ffl possession and let them do the transfer. Understanding how this will work is hurting my brain.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't understand why MSP doesn't do it for free just live VA SP?

Allen65 · Mar 16, 2019

dblas said:
I don't understand why MSP doesn't do it for free just live VA SP?

Because that would make it convenient for gun owners, which runs opposite to MGA's & MSP's intent.

fabsroman · Mar 16, 2019

Allen65 said:
Because that would make it convenient for gun owners, which runs opposite to MGA's & MSP's intent.

It is ALWAYS about them hating us, but not really. If they really hated us, we would be screwed over a lot more than we are.

Why did they do away with the shell casing requirement on handguns? Because it cost the State of Maryland money even with the $10 we paid per handgun and it was not yielding any results.

They are charging us for stuff, hold on a minute, because the state is BROKE. That means the State of Maryland is hurting for money. So, they have started charging the users of certain services. Heck, when I was living in MoCo, it cost $150 to rent a pavilion at a park to ensure we had it for an event for a couple of hours. WHAT? Don't I already pay taxes to support that park.

They are charging tolls on the ICC why? Oh, because they hate people that drive cars. Or, could it be that they are just charging the people that decide to use the road? Those that use government services should pay for them where possible.

Wish the government would pay for everything for me and tax everybody but me. lol Now I am really sounding like one of them.

lazarus · Mar 16, 2019

F5guy said:
At the risk of getting flamed- why not give individuals access to run NICS check for private transfers. This way it would become a personal responsibility to stay within the law in order to complete a personal transfer. The way it’s setup now are we going to have to give an ffl possession and let them do the transfer. Understanding how this will work is hurting my brain.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Several countries do this and I wish we would. I have no issue about manadatory background checks so long as registration isn’t part of it and there is an easy electronic system to use. I do with forcing individuals to have to pay an FFL to do it.

danb · Mar 18, 2019

Third Reading Passed (90-49)

~~Not quite veto proof majority.~~

MD is three-fifths not 2/3.

fidelity · Mar 18, 2019

danb said:
Third Reading Passed (90-49)

~~Not quite veto proof majority.~~

MD is three-fifths not 2/3.

Bummer. I'd say 50/50 that Hogan might veto it. Would guess higher if the Capital Gazette shooting wasn't part of the political justification for the legislation (even if the shooter went through a NICS check - so the primary effect of the law will be to make the used long gun rifle sales more expensive and more of a chore).

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Abacab · Mar 18, 2019

fidelity said:
Bummer. I'd say 50/50 that Hogan might veto it. Would guess higher if the Capital Gazette shooting wasn't part of the political justification for the legislation (even if the shooter went through a NICS check - so the primary effect of the law will be to make the used long gun rifle sales more expensive and more of a chore).

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

He'll sign it. Don't you worry about that. Might be some weakness with this bill since the Senate didn't move their version

buellsfurn · Mar 18, 2019

Abacab said:
He'll sign it. Don't you worry about that. Might be some weakness with this bill since the Senate didn't move their version

do tell

Bertfish · Mar 18, 2019

Abacab said:
He'll sign it. Don't you worry about that. Might be some weakness with this bill since the Senate didn't move their version

If anything it's easier. Now no need to work out the differences between two bills.

jefflac02 · Mar 18, 2019

Damn. I’m humbled. Thanks Mr Heller

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Beach Jumper · Mar 18, 2019

Its just more "Feel Good" Legislation that lets them (the MGA) say they did something even if it does nothing except further restrict legal firearms ownership and enjoyment here in the Peoples Republic of Maryland.

Adolph Oliver Bush · Mar 18, 2019

dblas said:
So....

How many people that have posted in this thread have started to contact their Delegate(s)?

How many have shared with on any social media platform at all to get their friends to do the same??

So far, I haven't seen one post saying "Done".

What I have seen, is a bunch of supposedly grown adults acting like kindergardeners. So let me ask, in mt best House Judiciary voice....ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR EVERLOVIN' FREAKIN MINDS. You ALL NEED A FREAKIN' TIME OUT. KNOCK IT OFF AND GET ON WITH THE BUSINESS OF MAKING THE DELEGATES IN ANNAPOLIS LIVES MISERABLE.

If you want to make each other miserable, then wait the frack until after the session is over and I will happily rent a tactical air sift location and you can take it out on each other until your hearts contenet. Until then, knock off the petty BS and get to work helping to work to prevent these bills from passing.

Done a while back....

danb · Mar 18, 2019

fidelity said:
Bummer. I'd say 50/50 that Hogan might veto it. Would guess higher if the Capital Gazette shooting wasn't part of the political justification for the legislation (even if the shooter went through a NICS check - so the primary effect of the law will be to make the used long gun rifle sales more expensive and more of a chore).

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

If Hogan is actually serious about a primary run, he'll veto it. I think he's unserious.

dblas · Mar 18, 2019

Bertfish said:
If anything it's easier. Now no need to work out the differences between two bills.

If the Senate amends the bill in any way, the House will either have to accept the amendments or it goes to joint committee to hammer out the details, and then both houses vote on it one last time.

So, no, not easier. If anything, we have cut into it on the first house, now we have to work to get the Senate to cut into it even more. We need to hit the Senate JPR with all of the facts that we have presented and more, and then hammer our respective Senators to oppose it.

This isn't over by a long shot, we still have day light.

Bertfish · Mar 18, 2019

dblas said:
If the Senate amends the bill in any way, the House will either have to accept the amendments or it goes to joint committee to hammer out the details, and then both houses vote on it one last time.

So, no, not easier. If anything, we have cut into it on the first house, now we have to work to get the Senate to cut into it even more. We need to hit the Senate JPR with all of the facts that we have presented and more, and then hammer our respective Senators to oppose it.

This isn't over by a long shot, we still have day light.

I'm glad you're optimistic. Seriously I am. Lot of doom and gloom around myself included. Seems like no matter how logical an argument we produce they hate us and that's all the reason they need to hose us. And smile all the while.

20190314 - HB786 JUD Amendments

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

AR-15 Savant

Active Member

Throw bread on me

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Past President, MSI

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

dont be a dumbass

piled higher and deeper

Member

Ultimate Member

Throw bread on me

Active Member

Member

Ultimate Member

dont be a dumbass

Past President, MSI

Throw bread on me

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics