HB 28 - Vehicle Laws - Hidden Compartments - Prohibition and Penalties

K31 said:

Ask her if they also worked in "for the children".

"If everyone's allowed to have custom compartments then the terrorists win!"

Click to expand...

Since you have time to type the above, you have time to call her and ask. She is currently sitting at her desk awaiting your phone call.

MJD438 said:

Does anyone know what Del. McDermott is going after here? I can see some negatives in this restriction that would potentially impact this community, despite what I can only assume are well-intentioned thoughts.

If I get a chance, I plan on stopping in to Annapolis soon and will stop in to his office to talk about this, but he is not my Delegate and I don't know how receptive he, or his staff, will be to talking to someone outside of his district with questions/concerns.



PDF Text is available here - http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2014RS/bills/hb/hb0028f.pdf.

Click to expand...

The "free" State of Tennessee has this already.

K31 said:

Someone should point out that hidden compartments are often used to smuggle illegals. Then this bill would have zero chance of passing in this state.

Click to expand...

No need to smuggle illegals here. We just call them undocumented, give them a driver's license, and that way they can drive in themselves!

I call total BS on this. If I have to call the Delegate's office and ask what he is trying to accomplish then the Bill is already a big problem. And no one should feel obligated to be deferential just because he is a "good guy." He like the rest of us deserves to be called out when he seems to be over-reaching. The Preamble to the Bill uses the word "certain" 9 times, and without a clear definition of what that means in the text of the proposed statute itself. It may have well-intended consequences, but it will be abused. I have a Fort Knox pistol safe thru-bolted to the floor of my truck just in front of the back seat. It was "added and attached" to the vehicle. The rear windows are tinted so the safe is concealed. In addition, when we travel, the dog's bedding sits on top of the safe completely concealing it. I do that on purpose. So when we travel the safe is definitely "concealed" from view. I am guilty, and can have the truck impounded and forfeited - along with the "non-contraband" inside. Not because of the non-contraband, but because I added a "secret compartment" to hold it safely. If the Bill is geared toward the hiding of illicit drugs and future Democrats for what purpose? If I put dope in my Fort Knox I am guilty. If there are no drugs and no future Democrats in the vehicle, are we still going to impound the vehicle and arrest the driver simply because it has a secret compartment that might be used for something illicit? What about the hidden compartment for my sunglasses? What about the after-market long gun containers that mount under the rear seats of trucks? If a drug trafficker hides his dope in an extra spare tire is that a secret compartment installed in the vehicle? Who cares if you find the dope. This is asinine! This is verging on "Dept. of Pre-Crime" crap. Please, please just stop trying to legislate everything to the 100th degree. And no, creating specific exemptions doesn't solve the problem a/l/a regulated weapons exemptions. You'd just wind up with more sausage. This is a cure without a problem. Just leave this alone - it is not needed.

Gryphon said:

I call total BS on this. If I have to call the Delegate's office and ask what he is trying to accomplish then the Bill is already a big problem. And no one should feel obligated to be deferential just because he is a "good guy." He like the rest of us deserves to be called out when he seems to be over-reaching. The Preamble to the Bill uses the word "certain" 9 times, and without a clear definition of what that means in the text of the proposed statute itself. It may have well-intended consequences, but it will be abused. I have a Fort Knox pistol safe thru-bolted to the floor of my truck just in front of the back seat. It was "added and attached" to the vehicle. The rear windows are tinted so the safe is concealed. In addition, when we travel, the dog's bedding sits on top of the safe completely concealing it. I do that on purpose. So when we travel the safe is definitely "concealed" from view. I am guilty, and can have the truck impounded and forfeited - along with the "non-contraband" inside. Not because of the non-contraband, but because I added a "secret compartment" to hold it safely. If the Bill is geared toward the hiding of illicit drugs and future Democrats for what purpose? If I put dope in my Fort Knox I am guilty. If there are no drugs and no future Democrats in the vehicle, are we still going to impound the vehicle and arrest the driver simply because it has a secret compartment that might be used for something illicit? What about the hidden compartment for my sunglasses? What about the after-market long gun containers that mount under the rear seats of trucks? If a drug trafficker hides his dope in an extra spare tire is that a secret compartment installed in the vehicle? Who cares if you find the dope. This is asinine! This is verging on "Dept. of Pre-Crime" crap. Please, please just stop trying to legislate everything to the 100th degree. And no, creating specific exemptions doesn't solve the problem a/l/a regulated weapons exemptions. You'd just wind up with more sausage. This is a cure without a problem. Just leave this alone - it is not needed.

Click to expand...

+1

This bill will be couched as "well if you don't have anything to hide it shouldn't bother you."

I have a Honda CRV. Is it legal in Maryland?

It has several "hidden" compartments, one of which contains a picnic table. The other a simple first aid kit.

Do I have to register it with the state and/or apply for some type of license to have this?

Are fingerprints required?

Any help appreciated.

CypherPunk said:

I have a Honda CRV. Is it legal in Maryland?

It has several "hidden" compartments, one of which contains a picnic table. The other a simple first aid kit.

Do I have to register it with the state and/or apply for some type of license to have this?

Are fingerprints required?

Any help appreciated.

Click to expand...

It's fine as long as you don't put more than 10 gallons of gas in it.

How hidden is hidden? My spare tire is in a "hidden" compartment.

We gotta get them evil moonshiners and bootleggers!

My Subaru wagon has a false floor in the back. I installed an aftermarket "trunk" in my Jeep ('cuz there wasn't any secure storage when the top was down.) Both would probably provide "resonable suspicion" justification.

I find this ironic, as recently I passed a MSP signboard advocating "Lock It or Lose It! / Keep Valuables Out Of Sight". So the State Police are advocating that I hide my stuff; this legislation would make the ability to do so a crime. Nice.

Mooseman said:

How hidden is hidden? My spare tire is in a "hidden" compartment.

Click to expand...

Do you see what applying rational basis thinking does? Hell, I ain' no lawyer, but I can see that other folks see thru the smoke and mirrors... MSP will COMAR this thing in any which direction they want to spin it... or is my on too tight?

First let me start off by saying that Sheriff Mike Lewis of Wicomico County (Retired MD State Police P.A.C.E. Team Sgt.) has been pushing for this bill for years and has even testified to it. He is also the same sheriff that everyone praised in Annapolis last year when he testified "against" SB281. This bill is proposed to make it easier to seize vehicles that are used in the transporting of illegal contraband (drugs, illegal weapons, etc). The compartments that are the focus of bills of this nature involve re-configuring the vehicle to have compartments or commonly called "traps" that will most of the time escape detection of most law enforcement officers. Many LEO's that have specialized training in the area of criminal smuggling have been trained to look further for these contraband compartments. This bill would be a huge plus in taking a tool away from criminal enterprises that smuggle contaraband over the roads and highways and continue to spike crime numbers. It will allow a law enforcement department to seize the vehicle as contraband with certain articulable facts as to its link to criminal activity even if the "trap" is empty
Before anyone gets their panties in a bunch and starts yelling and screaming that their gun is an illegal gun under SB281 due to the inconsistent language in the law, they should realize that any bill or law that is passed will get abused by an over zealous LEO. Unfortunately they exist in all departments. The LEO's with common sense, yes they do exist for all the LEO haters, can tell the difference between an aftermarket compartment build into the vehicle for contraband smuggling and a OEM compartment used by legitimate everyday citizens. So don't get worried about you transporting a legally owned fired arm in a factory compartment as long as its being transported per the law. As an example a Dodge Caravan has a stow n go compartment. Could the vehicle be seized for having it in general. No. Could the vehicle be seized for transporting illegal goods and contraband in th compartmenrt. Yes. The vehicle would be subject to seizure with contraband present with or without a compartment.

Isn't it already illegal to transport drugs? And won't you'r car get impounded if found as evidence anyway?

How about including a stiffer penalty if one is used in the commission of a crime (i.e. drug trafficking etc) rather criminalizing something that has perfectly legit uses.

I guess similar to the steel core ammo thing, perfectly legal, but will bring stiffer penalties if used illegally.

highwayheat, did you just say that we should ignore the vagueness of the proposed law because the police MIGHT NOT abuse it? What if I want to make my own hidden compartment to hide jewelry or other valuables or something and not an OEM compartment? Laws should only be made to solve a problem, not a potential problem. As has been pointed out, you're already getting your car impounded if you transport illegal items, why do the police need another law helping them do that? Especially one that could EASILY be used against law-abiding citizens? I know there are good cops, but I don't generally trust the police to be looking out for my best interests.

highwayheat said:

First let me start off by saying that Sheriff Mike Lewis of Wicomico County (Retired MD State Police P.A.C.E. Team Sgt.) has been pushing for this bill for years and has even testified to it. He is also the same sheriff that everyone praised in Annapolis last year when he testified "against" SB281. This bill is proposed to make it easier to seize vehicles that are used in the transporting of illegal contraband (drugs, illegal weapons, etc). The compartments that are the focus of bills of this nature involve re-configuring the vehicle to have compartments or commonly called "traps" that will most of the time escape detection of most law enforcement officers. Many LEO's that have specialized training in the area of criminal smuggling have been trained to look further for these contraband compartments. This bill would be a huge plus in taking a tool away from criminal enterprises that smuggle contaraband over the roads and highways and continue to spike crime numbers. It will allow a law enforcement department to seize the vehicle as contraband with certain articulable facts as to its link to criminal activity even if the "trap" is empty
Before anyone gets their panties in a bunch and starts yelling and screaming that their gun is an illegal gun under SB281 due to the inconsistent language in the law, they should realize that any bill or law that is passed will get abused by an over zealous LEO. Unfortunately they exist in all departments. The LEO's with common sense, yes they do exist for all the LEO haters, can tell the difference between an aftermarket compartment build into the vehicle for contraband smuggling and a OEM compartment used by legitimate everyday citizens. So don't get worried about you transporting a legally owned fired arm in a factory compartment as long as its being transported per the law. As an example a Dodge Caravan has a stow n go compartment. Could the vehicle be seized for having it in general. No. Could the vehicle be seized for transporting illegal goods and contraband in th compartmenrt. Yes. The vehicle would be subject to seizure with contraband present with or without a compartment.

Click to expand...

We do realise this. We know that most cops are very fair. This is about the others.. its not statistical game. We want laws that do nort enable abuse. I am going to listen to the arguments in committee on this bill. With the right protections I may support it. But color be sceptical right now. You are right on point... thats why we are concerned. I will withhold judgement for now and think others should as well.... we should ask the delegate. .. and hear him out.

The purpose of this law is to seize vehicles used for smuggling contraband. Any law is subject to abuse. I have been working criminal interdiction for the past 9 years and have seen all types of aftermarket compartments both store bought and manufactured. The ones that were used for smuggling were usually seized or investigated more thoroughly. The average citizen was just allowed to go on their way. I've been doing this long enough to know when I have a smuggler or a legit citizen. The smugglers are the ones I'm trying to legally get in their vehicle. The bill as written is narrow and really does need further factors involved or further explanation. I personally would not worry about hiding legally owned items such as jewelry. Like I stated earlier I will not be surprised if Wicomico County Sheriff Mike Lewis testifies in favor of this bill. Hopefully you will get to hear his testimony. He is the man when it comes to smuggling and illegal hidden compartments

SWO Daddy said:

You have got to be kidding me, this is complete bull crap.

The thought police should ban vaginas next - they could be used for prostitution after all.

Click to expand...

I don't think anyone should be able to carry breasts concealed.....

highwayheat said:

I personally would not worry about hiding legally owned items such as jewelry.

Click to expand...

What is legal today, may not be tomorrow. I will use SB281 as an example.

highwayheat said:

First let me start off by saying that Sheriff Mike Lewis of Wicomico County (Retired MD State Police P.A.C.E. Team Sgt.) has been pushing for this bill for years and has even testified to it. He is also the same sheriff that everyone praised in Annapolis last year when he testified "against" SB281. This bill is proposed to make it easier to seize vehicles that are used in the transporting of illegal contraband (drugs, illegal weapons, etc). The compartments that are the focus of bills of this nature involve re-configuring the vehicle to have compartments or commonly called "traps" that will most of the time escape detection of most law enforcement officers. Many LEO's that have specialized training in the area of criminal smuggling have been trained to look further for these contraband compartments. This bill would be a huge plus in taking a tool away from criminal enterprises that smuggle contaraband over the roads and highways and continue to spike crime numbers. It will allow a law enforcement department to seize the vehicle as contraband with certain articulable facts as to its link to criminal activity even if the "trap" is empty
Before anyone gets their panties in a bunch and starts yelling and screaming that their gun is an illegal gun under SB281 due to the inconsistent language in the law, they should realize that any bill or law that is passed will get abused by an over zealous LEO. Unfortunately they exist in all departments. The LEO's with common sense, yes they do exist for all the LEO haters, can tell the difference between an aftermarket compartment build into the vehicle for contraband smuggling and a OEM compartment used by legitimate everyday citizens. So don't get worried about you transporting a legally owned fired arm in a factory compartment as long as its being transported per the law. As an example a Dodge Caravan has a stow n go compartment. Could the vehicle be seized for having it in general. No. Could the vehicle be seized for transporting illegal goods and contraband in th compartmenrt. Yes. The vehicle would be subject to seizure with contraband present with or without a compartment.

Click to expand...

It looks well-meaning, but what happens when a law-abiding vehicle owner wants to add a safe (or safe-type compartment) to the vehicle in a hidden location (whether in a trunk or in the passenger compartment)? Hiding the safe violates both restrictions in (B) since it could be used to hide "contraband"; therefore:

1. It becomes prima facie RAS evidence to search the entire vehicle; and,
2. Prima facie evidence to seize the vehicle and all contents pending charges/trial.

IANAL or LE, but this opens some dangerous doors for law-abiding folks in the name of well-meaning intentions. This could lead to arrests of law-abiding drivers with devastating consequences. For those of us with security clearances, an arrest would lead to, at a minimum, suspension of the clearance, with potential complete loss of job. Most private sector integration firms, for example, will fire first rather than wait for the investigation to be completed or the case to go to adjudication and a not guilty verdict returned; destruction of career assured...

With the overall political attitudes in this state, while the well-meaning LE may not do anything to otherwise law-abiding citizens, there may very well be heavy pressure from the political leaders to abuse this well-meaning legislation. Overall, I am skeptical...I can guess that this is well-intentioned based on the record of the Delegate in question, but this is ripe for abuse by the power-hungry political monster that is the MGA and Governor's Mansion.