MSP meeting

Bikebreath said:

Two things are apparent to me; 1) They don't know the current law and how it applies now, in order to amend/add new provisions, 2) The do not know the subject matter they are writing the laws for. All the know is guns = scary. It's so sad...

Click to expand...

Precisely. Anyone who was involved in Annapolis, or even paid attention who is even somewhat informed on the issues at hand knows that the legislators generally have NO IDEA what they're doing, aside from "doing SOMETHING" "for our kids".

I wish I could hold a job where all I had to do is show up, not know anything about any subject I have to deal with, make piss-poor decisions (and ignore constituents who try to inform me) that affect millions of people and never have to take accountability for my actions. Meanwhile I can get exemptions and favors pulled for the people/organizations that help keep me and my party in power.

We're living under soft tyranny and it SUCKS.



Si vis pacem para bellum

follow me @DiscipleofJMB

smores said:

Precisely. Anyone who was involved in Annapolis, or even paid attention who is even somewhat informed on the issues at hand knows that the legislators generally have NO IDEA what they're doing, aside from "doing SOMETHING" "for our kids".

I wish I could hold a job where all I had to do is show up, not know anything about any subject I have to deal with, make piss-poor decisions (and ignore constituents who try to inform me) that affect millions of people and never have to take accountability for my actions. Meanwhile I can get exemptions and favors pulled for the people/organizations that help keep me and my party in power.

We're living under soft tyranny and it SUCKS.


Si vis pacem para bellum

follow me @DiscipleofJMB

Click to expand...

The problem nowadays is that things are just too complicated overall versus how it was 100+ years ago. How many people know everything about guns? Heck, I don't even know everything about guns.

Throw in everything else that the legislators have to makes laws on and it gets insane for them to understand everything. Sadly, they really should attempt to understand something before passing a law on it. Maybe, they could then pass fewer, more effective, laws versus the insane amount of regulations that we currently have on the books.

fabsroman said:

The problem nowadays is that things are just too complicated overall versus how it was 100+ years ago. How many people know everything about guns? Heck, I don't even know everything about guns.

Throw in everything else that the legislators have to makes laws on and it gets insane for them to understand everything. Sadly, they really should attempt to understand something before passing a law on it. Maybe, they could then pass fewer, more effective, laws versus the insane amount of regulations that we currently have on the books.

Click to expand...

Or, just enforce the laws on the books!

RRHemi said:

Or, just enforce the laws on the books!

Click to expand...

Yeah, that would be a good start. Thing is, they can hardly afford police in Baltimore City, much less a decent set of guards to guard the detention center. Don't think it is much better in PG County either.

fabsroman said:

The problem nowadays is that things are just too complicated overall versus how it was 100+ years ago. How many people know everything about guns? Heck, I don't even know everything about guns.

Throw in everything else that the legislators have to makes laws on and it gets insane for them to understand everything. Sadly, they really should attempt to understand something before passing a law on it. Maybe, they could then pass fewer, more effective, laws versus the insane amount of regulations that we currently have on the books.

Click to expand...

Easy answer: Don't pass laws that concern things that you are ignorant about.

fabsroman said:

Yeah, that would be a good start. Thing is, they can hardly afford police in Baltimore City, much less a decent set of guards to guard the detention center. Don't think it is much better in PG County either.

Click to expand...

Yep, meanwhile we are all worried that someone is going to come knocking on our door to see if all of our AR lowers are built by 10/1!

rseymorejr said:

Easy answer: Don't pass laws that concern things that you are ignorant about.

Click to expand...

I agree! Exactly what I told that half keg of a Mikulski after reading her ignorant response to my letter to her. "High powered magazines," idiot!

fabsroman said:

The problem nowadays is that things are just too complicated overall versus how it was 100+ years ago. How many people know everything about guns? Heck, I don't even know everything about guns.

Throw in everything else that the legislators have to makes laws on and it gets insane for them to understand everything. Sadly, they really should attempt to understand something before passing a law on it. Maybe, they could then pass fewer, more effective, laws versus the insane amount of regulations that we currently have on the books.

Click to expand...

Well, I guess I didn't point out the real crux of the issue:

You are either fundamentally SUPPORTIVE of the RKBA, or you ARE NOT.

Here is the difference:

- When you are fundamentally supportive of RKBA, it matters not what type of "arm" one chooses to "keep." Be it a sword, a bow, a pike, a spear, a rifle, a machine gun, a handgun or whatever. Any infringement, regulation, restriction or burden upon that right, is just that.

One does not need to own a printing press or build a church to excercise his or her first amendment right. One does not (well, should not these days) need to stay in a government-approved to be safe from unreasonable search and seizure. The right to bear arms is dead nuts simple.

- When you ARE NOT fundamentally supportive of RKBA, you will begin every e-mail or press conference on the issue with "I support the rights to keep and bear arms, but _________." You will use terms like "commonsense regulations" or "assault weapon" or "gun-free zone". You will slice and dice and pander your words to suit whichever group you are addressing so they'll believe your BS.

However, you firmly believe that by regulating the types of firearms, accessories or ammunition a person can have, you'll have an impact on whatever crime/tragedy du jour is being discussed on Capitol Hill and in the news media. You support a "death by one thousand cuts" approach to systematically restrict and hinder the path to gun ownership. The eventual goal IS total disarmament of law-abiding citizens.

It really doesn't matter what you know or don't know about the issues. Those truly on our side do not mince words, and argue for the ineffectiveness of the laws because they simply do not work. In a free society, men and women may be armed. Tyrants cannot operate with the masses in posession of arms. You're on one side or the other, plain and simple.

smores said:

Well, I guess I didn't point out the real crux of the issue:
...
- When you ARE NOT fundamentally supportive of RKBA, you will begin every e-mail or press conference on the issue with "I support the rights to keep and bear arms, but _________."
...

Click to expand...

Right. Someone told me that using "but" means someone is ignoring everything that preceeds it. She said, don't be a but-head

Why expect state legislators to know anything before passing "feel good" common sense legislation. The tools in DC certainly don't.

"We have to pass the bill so you can see what is in it"

Quite possibly the dumbest thing ever uttered by a member of the U.S.Congress.

Over all I'm not concerned about missing some obscure manusha in the law that was so complicated or contradictive to logic, since there is little chance I'll run in any LEO.

It's the carjacker, fender bender, or a car thief or burglar while I'm loading/unloading the car which will trigger the attention of the police and I end up being charged in a crime that is buttfvck stupid.

I sometimes feel like I'm in high school again, sneaking a smoke out behind the bleachers. I've paid my dues mother fvckin' MD, so leave me alone!

Ab_Normal said:

This pretty much sums up that receivers themselves are not copies of regulated firearms:



A stripped receiver is a component but does not function - a requirement for it to be considered a copy. Unable to function the receiver only bears a cosmetic resemblance to regulated firearms which is not enough to define it as a copy.

YMMV

Click to expand...

Conclusion

For the reasons set forth above, it is our opinion that the
reference to “copies” in PS §5-101(p)(2) does not extend the
regulated firearms law to weapons that bear a mere cosmetic
similarity to a listed weapon. Rather, in order for a firearm to be
considered a copy of a listed assault weapon, and therefore governed
by the regulated firearms law, there must be a similarity between the
internal components and function of the firearm in question and
those of one of the listed weapons. A determination as to whether
a particular firearm bears such similarity is a factual question
entrusted in the first instance to the Department of State Police.

Click to expand...

So any gun not on the list to be banned or not has to be brought in front of the MSP. So the RRA LAR-47 could be banned or not depending on the MSP

Brooklyn said:

but I am hoping they will be to busy taxiing rain,

Click to expand...

Why would rain want to ride in a taxi?

Inigoes said:

I do

The MSP is hanging on MSP Qualified Handgun Instructor applications since 6/8.

Click to expand...

But remember, a Hunter Safety Course is acceptable.

Should be plenty of those popping up due to hunting season coming.

CypherPunk said:

HQL Application available mid October.
Fingerprint code to Livescan end of October.
Training & instructors approved by March 2014
HQL approvals take 90+ "business days"(July 2014)
Buying a handgun with a HQL - another 110+ days for the already swamped, underfunded, inefficient MSP to process the non-denial (January of 2015)

Click to expand...

Since Hunter Safety Courses are sufficient according to the law, you can get the training NOW.