MSI fighting G&S circa 1973.

dblas · Jun 25, 2017

So, the 2A community had the initiative from reading all of the above. Vinnie took the initiative in 1986 and by all accounts, has kept it since then, and it would appear that his hand picked replacements are growing the organization and making more "local" and truly grass roots. When will the 2A community take it back? When will the 2A community actually wake up and embrace the true grass roots actions that need to be done to take the initiative back? A few have started, and in various ways, but there is still no appetite to go full on, grass roots, Saul Alinsky style work, against all of the opponents of the 2A in MD.

Sad...really sad.

SPQM · Jun 27, 2017

Courtesy of a little birdie :innocent0

The Montgomery County Ruling:

Link

Reproduced in full as a PDF attached to this.

Deep Thought · Jul 15, 2017

SPQM said:
Courtesy of a little birdie

The Montgomery County Ruling:

Link

Reproduced in full as a PDF attached to this.

Good news but wow that is quite the quote: "An increase in the number of people killed or injured cannot be traceable to the use of unloaded handguns." Since when has an unloaded handgun injured anyone? HAH

Biggfoot44 · Jul 16, 2017

Plenty of times. Aka "Pistol Whipping" .

SPQM · May 20, 2018

From data.gov, the 2012-2013 Maryland Handgun Permit approval rates etc as a comma separated file.

To view, just rename from .txt to .csv.

SPQM · May 20, 2018

2012 Averages:
208.5 new permits to carry a gun a month.
248.3 renewal applications a month
163.1 new permits issued a month.
231.5 renewal permits issued a month
10.6 disapprovals a month
4.75 informal reviews a month
2.08 review board hearings a month average
14 firearm instructor approvals a month average

...and for 2012-2013 TOTAL:

0 Review board reversals.

That's why the libs hate the renewal board. We managed to challenge it enough to start getting reversals.

sgt23preston · May 20, 2018

Boondock Saint said:
This fight is much older than MSI. The licensing scheme came about in 1968, I believe. MSI wouldn't formally be organized for another 30+ years.

1968 - 2018 = Happy 50th Year Anniversary to the Merry-Land State Deniers...

Biggfoot44 · May 21, 2018

1966 - The 7 Day waiting period , and MSP pre-purchase investagation .

1972 - The creation of Wear & Carry Permit , issuence process thereof , transport restrictions , and prohibition of unlicensed Carry except for specifically defined situations.

( 1968 was a busy year at Federal level .)

SPQM · Sep 21, 2018

THE WASHINGTON POST
May 24, 1968
Page B4

April Gun Sales Up 44% in Md.

PIKESY1LLE, Md., May 23 (AP)—The sale of hand guns in Maryland increased 44 per cent in April, says a State police investigator.

Lt. Robert B. Morris, head of the investigation section, said yesterday that 4093 permits for handguns were issued last month, compared to 2850 in March.

“Most of the people who arm themselves now are concerned about the safety of their homes and families,” said Morris, who attributed much of the increase to the "general unrest" during April, when riots broke out in Baltimore and Washington.

"Many people who haven't owned a firearm are buying' them now." he said.

Nearly twice as many permits for pistols were issued in the first four months of 1968 than in 1967, said Morris, with heaviest increases recorded in Baltimore City, Baltimore County and Prince George's County.

State police issued 11,275 permits through April this year, compared to 5,791 during the first four months of 1967.

SPQM · Sep 21, 2018

The Washington Post
May 23, 1965
Page 41
Study of Md. Gun Sales Shows Arms Easily Reach Criminals, Psycopaths
By Willard Clopton
Washington Post Staff Writer
A 37-year-old Washington man walked into a suburban Maryland gun store not long ago and bought a pistol.

It was an unremarkable transaction except for one thing: the purchaser had a long police record in Washington that included arrests for rape, assault with a dangerous weapon, disorderly conduct, drunkenness and grand larceny.

A second Washington man, 46, armed himself with similar ease recently at another Maryland gun dealer's.

In this case, the buyer was a man who in 11 years had racked up 64 convictions, mostly for being drunk.

Neither sale violated any law, because there was no law to be broken.

Records Reviewed

Unlike Washington and Virginia, Maryland has taken no effective steps to keep handguns out of the grip of habitual criminals, drunks, psychopaths or other irresponsibles.

The two sales were among hundreds reviewed by Treasury Department investigators who, at the request of Sen. Thomas J. Dodd (D-Conn.), went over records of Apple Hardware Co., 5918 Riggs Rd., Chillum and Suitland Trading Co., 4650 Suitland Rd.

Dodd, chairman of the Senate Juvenile Delinquency Subcommittee, reported on the findings last week at the start on hearings on proposed legislation to curb the traffic of guns in this country.

The investigators found that, out of 213 firearms sold by the Chillum firm last, year and early this year, 126 were bought by persons having Washington addresses, Out of the 126 buyers, 58 (or 46 per cent) had Washington police records, they learned. During the same period, it was found, the Suitland com-pany sold 658 handguns, including 272 to District residents. Out of the 272, sixty-four purchasers (23 per cent) had criminal records.

Of those with records, about one-third of each group were persons involved in felonies, including yoke robbery, holdup, housebreaking and assault, Dodd contended that many Washington purchasers traveled to the Maryland stores to avoid the city's requirement that the seller wait 48 hours before delivering a handgun, so police can cheek on the buyer. Maryland has no waiting period.

Northern Virginia communities have waiting periods ranging from 48 hours to ten days.

A gun buyer in Maryland need only show proof of his identity and sign an affidavit saying he has never been convicted of a crime of violence, is not under criminal indictment and is not a fugitive.

Defends Practices

Milton Marlne, owner of Suitland Trading Post, had no comment on the disclosures, but Melvin Appelbaum, president of the Apple Hardware, defended his practices.

He said he doubted that even a 72-hour wailing period would be useful, because it would not give police time to make an adequate check on a buyer's character and record.

He also said that although he is not required to, he usually asks purchasers why they want a gun. "Most say they want them for home protection or target practice. But if I'm at all suspicious about their reasons, I won't make a sale. I turn down a couple of cases a month for this reason," he said.

He argued that if the courts would crack down harder on criminals who carry concealed weapons, many law-abiding persons would not feel the need to buy guns for self-defense.

Agrees to Some Curbs

Appelbaum, a member of the National Rifle Association, said he agreed with Dodd that some control of mail-order gun sale is needed. But he opposes another part of the legislation that would bar dealers from selling handguns to out-of-state customers.

He noted that the provision would cause him to lose half his business and added:

"It wouldn't solve anything. If a criminal in Washington wants a gun bad enough, he can go over to Georgia Avenue or 7th Street and buy one from some guy in an alley. There are plenty of hot guns in D.C."

He said he believed the reason so many Washington residents go to Maryland for guns is because they are frightened and want immediate protection.

"Suppose somebody breaks into your house. You don't want to wait 48 hours. You want that gun right now," he said.

DC-W · Sep 21, 2018

Ah man, you’re back! Love these posts!

SPQM · Sep 21, 2018

So this was two years after they passed the 1966 Handgun Registration bill of all dealer sales.

The Deputy AG was a proto-Frosh/Curran

--------------------------------

The Washington Post
Aug 26, 1968
Page A2

Official Asks Licensing All Guns in Md.

ANNAPOLIS, Aug. 25 (AP) —Extension of the Maryland law to licensing of all guns was advocated yesterday by the State Deputy Attorney General.

Robert F. Sweeney also told the convention of the Maryland Chiefs of Police Association that the Attorney General's office favors requiring would-be purchasers to wait 30 days after application before obtaining the weapons.

State law now requires buyers of handguns to wait seven days after application to a dealer while State Police investigate the background of the purchaser. The police can deny sale of a gun based on a past criminal record.

"We advocate the licensing for all gun sales within Maryland—long guns, short guns, guns of every description," Sweeney said. "We advocate such sales be made only by permit—regardless of whether the sale is made by licensed gun dealers or between private persons."

Sweeney said the broader gun law would "help to bring about the conviction of criminal persons who are unlawfully in possession of weapons."

SPQM · Sep 21, 2018

Washington Post
Mar 31, 1993
Page C1

Maryland Gun Bill Advances
Senate, House Back Identical Versions

By Charles Babington
Washington Post Staff Writer

ANNAPOLIS, March 30—The Maryland General Assembly handed Gov. William Donald Schaefer a victory today on limiting weapon sales at gun shows, but only after concessions were made to gun dealers.

The compromise was emblematic of this year's legislative session, in which Schaefer's successes have been hard-won and some of his major proposals, including a ban on some assault pistols, have been rejected.

The state Senate and House of Delegates voted today to pass identical versions of a Schaefer-backed bill to require some private citizens who sell firearms at gun shows to abide by rules that apply to licensed dealers. The rules include requiring buyers to wait seven days and undergo background checks by police.

Legislators expect to give the legislation final approval and send it to Schaefer for his signature.

In a concession to gun dealers, the law would apply only to private citizens who set up tables at gun shows and not to those who sell weapons simply by going to such events. Unlike Schaefer's original proposal, it would leave gun show promoters with no liability for illegal sales by vendors.

Officials say large gun shows in Maryland attract up to 400 vendors, nearly all of them professional, licensed dealers who must follow the same laws whether they sell guns from their stores or at gun shows.

David S. Iannucci, Schaefer's chief lobbyist, hailed today's votes despite the compromise. "None of us are saying this is a revolutionary bill that's going to keep every gun out of the hands of criminals," he said. "It closes a loophole. It's an important step."

Vincent DeMarco, director of Marylanders Against Handgun Abuse, agreed. "It's a very significant law because it will help prevent Maryland from being a place where gunrunners will go," DeMarco said. "Now that Virginia has made it difficult to buy a lot of guns at one time, we don't want people coming to Maryland gun shows."

The Virginia General Assembly recently limited residents to one handgun purchase a month.

Maryland gun enthusiasts dismissed the gun show legislation as virtually meaningless. "It's reduced to feel-good legislation," said Bob McMurray, vice president of the Maryland State Rifle and Pistol Association. "It will not stop gun shows. It will not affect more than three or four people in the state."

The original version, which would have made gun show promoters liable for illegal actions by vendors, "would have shut down gun shows," McMurray said.

In other legislative action today, the senators who represent Montgomery County voted to weaken a proposed fee for new water and sewer hookups in Montgomery and Prince George's counties.

The senators voted 4 to 3 to phase in the proposed fee over the next three years, rather than two years, as House members want to do. The vote came about 2 a.m., after a long debate and a regular Monday night session of the full Senate.

It was unclear how the senators' action would affect the proposed fee, which would add several thousand dollars to the cost of new homes. The measure has yet to be considered by Prince George's senators, who are thought to support a stiffer version of the developer fee.

The fee is being pushed by the water utility for the two counties, the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission. WSSC officials say existing ratepayers should not have to foot the costs of providing water and sewer service to new developments. Commission lobbyist Linda Schmidt said commission officials hope House and Senate members ultimately will agree on a quicker implementation of the fee.

SPQM · Sep 21, 2018

Washington Post
Mar 19, 1996
Page B1

Md. Handgun Bill Gets Crucial Push From Committee
Scaled-Back Legislation Retains One-a-Month Limit on Purchases

By Jon Jeter
Washington Post Staff Writer

ANNAPOLIS, March 18—Maryland Gov. Parris N. Glendening's handgun control initiative cleared its most formidable hurdle tonight as a Senate committee approved the bill's strongest elements, including a one-gun-a-month limit on purchases by individuals.

The legislation, which faces votes in the full Senate and the House of Delegates, would give Maryland one of the toughest laws in the nation restricting access to handguns, gun control advocates say.

The favorable vote came in the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee, which in recent years has been the graveyard for many gun control proposals, largely because of its influential chairman, Sen. Walter M. Baker (D-Cecil).

But Baker and Glendening (D) managed to agree on a scaled-back version of the administration's original plan, and the committee's 6 to 5 vote gives the governor's bill a crucial push on its way to votes by the House and Senate.

If the law is enacted, Maryland will join Virginia and South Carolina as the only states with one-a-month limits on handgun purchases by individuals. The measure also would require a seven-day waiting period and criminal background checks for both retail and private, or "secondary," sales, now required in fewer than two dozen states. Glendening said the law would reduce the supply of guns into the illegal market.

"This is not a win for Parris Glendening; this is a win for the people of Maryland," Glendening told reporters shortly after the committee's vote. "If [the bill] can pass in conservative Virginia and South Carolina, there is no reason it can't pass in progressive Maryland."

Glendening's original proposal included a licensing provision that would have required gun buyers to be fingerprinted and take firearm safety training. As a concession to Baker, Glendening agreed to remove those provisions.

Baker said he told the governor "that I don't want any ornaments to this bill, and the governor has given me his assurances that if the bill is changed, he will veto it. With that, I am convinced that this bill will reduce crime, and that's something that everyone wants to see."

Glendening confirmed that he gave such assurance.

An attempt to modify the bill came in the committee when Sen. Larry E. Haines (R-Carroll) introduced a "sunset" amendment that would kill the administration's bill two years after its enactment if there was no demonstrable drop in the state's crime rate. The amendment failed.

Haines's efforts reflect objections of many gun control opponents who contend that handgun legislation has no proven effect on crime. They say such laws only make it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to buy a gun.

"I just think this is a terrible bill," said Sen. Timothy R. Ferguson (R-Carroll and Frederick). "The criminals will still get guns because they don't obey laws."

Proponents point to the experience in Virginia, which-adopted a one-gun-a-month law in 1993. Since then, Maryland has supplanted Virginia as the primary supplier of guns used to commit violent crimes in the District of Columbia, according to a recent study by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.

The bill approved by the Senate committee also would prohibit the sale of handguns to a buyer who is the subject of a protective order in a domestic violence case.

In the General Assembly, a split on gun control legislation lies largely along geographic lines. While lawmakers from urban and suburban districts in Baltimore and in Prince George's and Montgomery counties tend to support handgun control, legislators, from rural districts, where gun violence is much less prevalent, tend to oppose it.

'This is about liberty, plain and simple," said John Sullivan, a Howard County resident who attended the committee hearing today and opposes gun control laws. "What is the government going to take away from us next year?"

-----------

This is why no quarter needs to be given. It only took them 17 more years to obtain that goal in bold. Why do we never get any victories on that scale or scope?

SPQM · Sep 21, 2018

The 1996 Bill was

http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmga/frmMain.aspx?ys=1996rs/billfile/sb0215.htm
and
http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmga/frmMain.aspx?ys=1996rs/billfile/hb0297.htm

as

Maryland Gun Violence Act of 1996

Here's the original senate bill text:

http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/1996rs/bills/sb/sb0215f.PDF

(B) A PERSON MAY ONLY PURCHASE OR RECEIVE A REGULATED FIREARM IF
6 THE PERSON:
7 (1) POSSESSES A VALID MARYLAND DRIVER'S LICENSE OR
8 PHOTOGRAPHIC IDENTIFICATION CARD WITH APPROVED FIREARMS PURCHASE
9 DESIGNATION ISSUED TO THE PERSON BY THE MOTOR VEHICLE ADMINISTRATION;
10 AND
11 (2) COMPLIES WITH THE REQUIREMENTS AND IS NOT PROHIBITED
12 UNDER THIS SUBHEADING.
13 (C) THE MOTOR VEHICLE ADMINISTRATION SHALL ISSUE A DRIVER'S
14 LICENSE WITH APPROVED FIREARMS PURCHASE DESIGNATION OR PHOTOGRAPHIC
15 IDENTIFICATION CARD WITH APPROVED FIREARMS PURCHASE DESIGNATION UPON
16 CERTIFICATION BY THE SECRETARY THAT THE APPLICANT:
17 (1) IS AT LEAST 21 YEARS OLD;
18 (2) IS A RESIDENT OF THE STATE;
19 (3) HAS DEMONSTRATED SATISFACTORY COMPLETION OF A FIREARMS
20 SAFETY TRAINING COURSE APPROVED BY THE SECRETARY; AND
21 (4) BASED ON A COMPUTER AND FINGERPRINT BACKGROUND CHECK:
22 (I) IS NOT PROHIBITED BY FEDERAL OR STATE LAW FROM
23 PURCHASING OR POSSESSING A REGULATED FIREARM; AND
24 (II) HAS NOT EXHIBITED A PROPENSITY FOR VIOLENCE OR
25 INSTABILITY THAT MAY REASONABLY RENDER THE APPLICANT'S POSSESSION OF A
26 REGULATED FIREARM AS A DANGER TO THE APPLICANT OR TO OTHERS.
27 (D) IN ORDER TO OBTAIN A FIREARMS PURCHASE APPROVAL DESIGNATION
28 ON THE APPLICANT'S MARYLAND DRIVER'S LICENSE OR PHOTOGRAPHIC
29 IDENTIFICATION CARD, AN APPLICANT MUST SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING TO THE
30 SECRETARY:
31 (1) A COMPLETED APPLICATION ON A FORM PROVIDED BY THE
32 SECRETARY;
33 (2) A NONREFUNDABLE FEE SET BY THE SECRETARY AT AN AMOUNT
34 SUFFICIENT TO COVER THE COST OF PROCESSING THE APPLICATION, THE
35 PROCEEDS OF WHICH SHALL BE CREDITED TO A SPECIAL FUND FOR THE ACCOUNT
36 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE POLICE;
37 (3) PROOF OF SATISFACTORY COMPLETION OF A FIREARM SAFETY
38 TRAINING COURSE APPROVED BY THE SECRETARY;
SENATE BILL 215
17
1 (4) A COMPLETE SET OF THE APPLICANT'S LEGIBLE FINGERPRINTS TO
2 BE TAKEN BY A DESIGNATED LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY;
3 (5) ANY OTHER IDENTIFYING INFORMATION OR DOCUMENTATION
4 REQUIRED BY THE SECRETARY; AND
5 (6) A STATEMENT MADE BY THE APPLICANT UNDER THE PENALTY OF
6 PERJURY THAT THE APPLICANT IS NOT PROHIBITED UNDER FEDERAL OR STATE
7 LAW FROM POSSESSING A REGULATED FIREARM.
8 (E) WITHIN 21 DAYS OF RECEIVING A PROPERLY COMPLETED APPLICATION,
9 THE SECRETARY SHALL:
10 (1) ISSUE TO THE MOTOR VEHICLE ADMINISTRATION A CERTIFICATION
11 FOR A FIREARMS PURCHASE APPROVAL DESIGNATION FOR THE APPLICANT; OR
12 (2) ISSUE TO THE APPLICANT A WRITTEN DENIAL OF THE APPLICATION
13 THAT CONTAINS A STATEMENT OF THE APPLICANT'S APPEAL RIGHTS UNDER
14 SUBSECTION (H) OF THIS SECTION.
15 (F) (1) A FIREARMS PURCHASE APPROVAL DESIGNATION ISSUED UNDER
16 THIS SECTION SHALL EXPIRE ON THE DATE THE MARYLAND DRIVER'S LICENSE OR
17 PHOTOGRAPHIC IDENTIFICATION CARD EXPIRES.
18 (2) THE FIREARMS PURCHASE APPROVAL DESIGNATION MAY BE
19 RENEWED EACH TIME THE MARYLAND DRIVER'S LICENSE OR PHOTOGRAPHIC
20 IDENTIFICATION CARD IS RENEWED ON APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF A
21 RENEWAL FEE SET BY THE SECRETARY AT AN AMOUNT SUFFICIENT TO COVER THE
22 COSTS OF PROCESSING THE RENEWAL APPLICATION, THE PROCEEDS OF WHICH
23 SHALL BE CREDITED TO A SPECIAL FUND FOR THE ACCOUNT OF THE DEPARTMENT
24 OF STATE POLICE.
25 (3) THE SECRETARY SHALL RENEW THE FIREARMS PURCHASE
26 APPROVAL DESIGNATION IF, THE SECRETARY DETERMINES, BASED ON A
27 COMPUTER BACKGROUND CHECK, THAT, AT THE TIME OF THE APPLICATION, THE
28 APPLICANT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF PARAGRAPHS (1), (2), (4) (I) AND (II) OF
29 SUBSECTION (C) OF THIS SECTION.
30 (4) THE SECRETARY MAY NOT REQUIRE, AS A CONDITION OF
31 RENEWAL, THE APPLICANT TO RETAKE THE FIREARMS SAFETY TRAINING COURSE
32 DESCRIBED IN SUBSECTION (C)(3) OF THIS SECTION OR RESUBMIT A SET OF
33 FINGERPRINTS.
34 (G) (1) THE SECRETARY MAY REVOKE THE FIREARMS PURCHASE
35 APPROVAL DESIGNATION ISSUED OR RENEWED UNDER THIS SECTION ON A
36 FINDING THAT THE LICENSEE NO LONGER SATISFIES THE QUALIFICATIONS SET
37 FORTH IN SUBSECTION (C) OF THIS SECTION.
38 (2) A PERSON HOLDING A FIREARMS PURCHASE APPROVAL
39 DESIGNATION THAT HAS BEEN REVOKED BY THE SECRETARY SHALL RETURN THE
40 MARYLAND DRIVER'S LICENSE OR PHOTOGRAPHIC IDENTIFICATION CARD TO THE
SENATE BILL 215
18
1 SECRETARY WITHIN 45 DAYS AFTER THE RECEIPT OF THE NOTICE OF THE
2 REVOCATION.
3 (H) (1) A PERSON WHOSE APPLICATION FOR A FIREARMS PURCHASE
4 APPROVAL DESIGNATION OR RENEWAL OF A FIREARMS PURCHASE APPROVAL
5 DESIGNATION IS DISAPPROVED OR WHOSE FIREARMS PURCHASE APPROVAL
6 DESIGNATION HAS BEEN REVOKED MAY SUBMIT A WRITTEN REQUEST TO THE
7 SECRETARY FOR A HEARING WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE THE WRITTEN
8 NOTICE OF THE DENIAL OR REVOCATION WAS FORWARDED TO THE AGGRIEVED
9 PERSON.
10 (2) A HEARING SHALL BE GRANTED BY THE SECRETARY WITHIN 15
11 DAYS OF THE REQUEST.
12 (3) THE HEARING AND ANY SUBSEQUENT PROCEEDINGS OF JUDICIAL
13 REVIEW, IF ANY, SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF
14 THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT.
15 (4) THE HEARING SHALL BE HELD IN THE COUNTY OF THE LEGAL
16 RESIDENCE OF THE AGGRIEVED PERSON

SPQM · Sep 21, 2018

The Baltimore Sun
Jan 11, 1945
Pg. 12

The Need For A State-Wide Pistol-Buying Law

Mr. J. Bernard Wells, State's Attorney, is certainly a determined man in his efforts to have the General Assembly enact a Statewide law regulating the sale of firearms. And his determination on this point is in the interest of public safety. Indeed, it is difficult to understand why there should be any opposition to Mr. Wells's proposal by people who want firearms for legitimate purposes.

Baltimore has had an ordinance prohibiting their promiscuous sale since 1941. The degree to which it has curtailed crime is not measurable, but it is fair to assume that it has been substantial. The figures here are worth noting. Previous to the enactment of the ordinance the annual pistol sale in Baltimore was above 6,000. Since then it has dropped to 300 or below. And the restrictions leading to this drop are not so severe as to prevent any law-abiding citizen from buying a firearm within the City limits if he so desires.

Unfortunately, a local pistol-buying law does not keep a criminal without a gun from going out into Baltimore county, buying one and coming right back into the city to use it. It is for this reason that Mr. Wells wants the area covered by the present provisions to be extended to the State line. But the Legislature, for somewhat hazy reasons, has refused to go along with the Wells proposal, although it is only fair to note here that the original firearms bill considered by the legislators was far more drastic in its provisions than is the ordinance now in force in the city.

Surely it is not too much to hope that some measure with sensible and not too restrictive provisions will be passed at the present session in Annapolis. The goal here is not to keep pistols out of the hands of honest men but to raise barriers against their purchase for illegitimate use.

j_h_smith · Sep 21, 2018

Can anyone remember when the face to face mandate was changed for handguns?

GTOGUNNER · Sep 21, 2018

j_h_smith said:
Can anyone remember when the face to face mandate was changed for handguns?

When did you sell one that way?

j_h_smith · Sep 21, 2018

GTOGUNNER said:
When did you sell one that way?

Sell?

LCPIWB · Oct 9, 2018

j_h_smith said:
Can anyone remember when the face to face mandate was changed for handguns?

Or maybe you are thinking of the "voluntary" required registration. Which was 1986. (Unless I myself and confusing 1986 with something else)

MSI fighting G&S circa 1973.

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Past President, MSI

Active Member

Attachments

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Attachments

Active Member

USMC LLA. NRA Life Member

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

IANAL, PATRIOT PICKET!!

Ultimate Member

Needs an avatar

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics