SB346 (Loans): favorable with amendments

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • TexDefender

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 28, 2017
    1,572
    It goes to show, contrary to some members here who think those of us who testify are wasting our time, that there can be a difference made.

    This bill is the perfect example. I confronted Sen Ferguson on twitter and his indication was this bill was to stop straw gun purchase for prohibited persons. That is it the way the bill was written and Sen Hough even confronted him on the intent of the bill in session.

    Thanks to everyone who testified and especially to Mark and Mike and the others from Md 2A orgs who put hard facts on the table to show that this bill was egregious.

    No where close to the finish line, but one having one go down without infringements should encourage us to keep the push on our legislators that many other bills need killed or severely amended to stop punishing us, the non-criminal. Jeff


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Testifying is and has always been important. Showing up in numbers count, as well as massive letter campaigns. I said it before and I will say it again, there are lessons here were can learn from and use again in the future.
     

    jefflac02

    Active Member
    Dec 28, 2016
    547
    Testifying is and has always been important. Showing up in numbers count, as well as massive letter campaigns. I said it before and I will say it again, there are lessons here were can learn from and use again in the future.



    Absolutely agree! Sitting on the sidelines doesn’t result in any effective action. Well said.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     

    BeoBill

    Crank in the Third Row
    MDS Supporter
    Oct 3, 2013
    27,202
    南馬里蘭州鮑伊
    Doesn’t really matter what amendments there are, it’s just more unnecessary stupid sh*t by the MGA. You’d think they’d spend their time more wisely.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    If they spent their time wisely there would be very little if anything to do.

    ETA: Hats off to those who took the time to testify. Personally, I'm concerned that my temper would get the better of me, so I choose to hold my tongue in public.
     

    rbird7282

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 6, 2012
    18,733
    Columbia
    It makes loaning a regulated firearm to a prohibited person a crime, as long as the lender _knows_ or _has reason to believe_ that the other party is a prohibited person based on specified criteria.



    Loaning to a prohibited person is already a crime isn’t it?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     

    danb

    dont be a dumbass
    Feb 24, 2013
    22,704
    google is your friend, I am not.
    Sure, to go along with the plan, I will pretend that judges will actually hand out proper sentences to people convicted of loaning their drug dealer buddy a gun. But that is a different topic.
     

    rbird7282

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 6, 2012
    18,733
    Columbia
    Not expressly under state law



    So the only thing this does is make the person loaning the weapon able to be charged, correct?
    Obviously if you’re prohibited, it’s illegal for you to take possession of a firearm. (loan or otherwise)


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     

    Doobie

    Ultimate Member
    Jan 23, 2013
    1,777
    Earth
    Section E still seems over the top.

    (E) (1) A person may not sell, rent, or transfer:

    (i) ammunition solely designed for a regulated firearm to a person who is under the age of 21 years; or

    (ii) 1. a firearm other than a regulated firearm to a minor;
    2. ammunition for a firearm to a minor
    3. pepper mace, which is an aerosol propelled combination of highly disabling irritant based products and is also known as oleo–resin capsicum (O.C.) or
    4. another deadly weapon to a minor.

    Someone please clarify this for me: I have minor children who enjoy shooting with me. Does this literally mean that I can’t give them ammo for an AR, 9mm or 22LR handgun while at the range? Doesn’t that constitute a transfer? God I hate Maryland.
     

    fabsroman

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 14, 2009
    35,928
    Winfield/Taylorsville in Carroll
    Section E still seems over the top.

    (E) (1) A person may not sell, rent, or transfer:

    (i) ammunition solely designed for a regulated firearm to a person who is under the age of 21 years; or

    (ii) 1. a firearm other than a regulated firearm to a minor;
    2. ammunition for a firearm to a minor
    3. pepper mace, which is an aerosol propelled combination of highly disabling irritant based products and is also known as oleo–resin capsicum (O.C.) or
    4. another deadly weapon to a minor.

    Someone please clarify this for me: I have minor children who enjoy shooting with me. Does this literally mean that I can’t give them ammo for an AR, 9mm or 22LR handgun while at the range? Doesn’t that constitute a transfer? God I hate Maryland.


    Is the ammunition SOLELY designed for a regulated firearm? I know plenty of bolt action rifles that shoot .223. Not so versed on rifles that shoot 9mm, .40 S&W, or .38/.357.

    Then, there is Public Safety section 5-133

    (d) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection, a person who is under the age of 21 years may not possess a regulated firearm.

    (2) Unless a person is otherwise prohibited from possessing a regulated firearm, this subsection does not apply to:

    (i) the temporary transfer or possession of a regulated firearm if the person is:

    1. under the supervision of another who is at least 21 years old and who is not prohibited by State or federal law from possessing a firearm; and

    2. acting with the permission of the parent or legal guardian of the transferee or person in possession;


    (ii) the transfer by inheritance of title, and not of possession, of a regulated firearm;

    (iii) a member of the armed forces of the United States or the National Guard while performing official duties;

    (iv) the temporary transfer or possession of a regulated firearm if the person is:

    1. participating in marksmanship training of a recognized organization; and

    2. under the supervision of a qualified instructor;

    (v) a person who is required to possess a regulated firearm for employment and who holds a permit under Subtitle 3 of this title; or

    (vi) the possession of a firearm for self–defense or the defense of others against a trespasser into the residence of the person in possession or into a residence in which the person in possession is an invited guest.
     

    fidelity

    piled higher and deeper
    MDS Supporter
    Aug 15, 2012
    22,400
    Frederick County
    The same. We are fine with these amendments. And yes showing up and testifying made a big difference
    When the legislative session is over, we/MSI should put up a score sheet on what was proposed and what was passed, especially given the distinct disadvantage that 2A proponents have in the MGA. Every year we hear this refrain discouraging activism, discouraging contacting legislators, and discouraging going to Annapolis to testify - because the courts are apparently the only way to effect change. Obviously once a bill is law, it's much harder to reverse course, thus the invested time to stop the enactment has great value (although in some circumstances one could argue that a truly atrocious law may have utility - but why take the chance). I don't think that those that argue against most everything but investing in court cases are being defeatists or are not being rational in their reasoning, but I think they lack data points to draw on to further inform their positions.



    Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
     

    rockstarr

    Major Deplorable
    Feb 25, 2013
    4,592
    The Bolshevik Lands
    When the legislative session is over, we/MSI should put up a score sheet on what was proposed and what was passed, especially given the distinct disadvantage that 2A proponents have in the MGA. Every year we hear this refrain discouraging activism, discouraging contacting legislators, and discouraging going to Annapolis to testify - because the courts are apparently the only way to effect change. Obviously once a bill is law, it's much harder to reverse course, thus the invested time to stop the enactment has great value (although in some circumstances one could argue that a truly atrocious law may have utility - but why take the chance). I don't think that those that argue against most everything but investing in court cases are being defeatists or are not being rational in their reasoning, but I think they lack data points to draw on to further inform their positions.



    Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

    Eh, I think its more so people are just tired of getting ****ed, whether it be 2 minute tom or power hour willy. Whether it be in small increments or the whole damn shabang, people are just mentally done.

    The only good news we ever see is, Well we didn't get ****ed as long and hard as we thought we were going to.

    Everyone is supposed to run to the hills with shear joy over that year after year, but they still win some each year (Annapolis) for the most part and people are over it but angry because there isn't much they can do while here to stop it.

    Yes, I realize the better side of people making a difference but not outright winning sometimes can be very demoralizing is my point. That's what shows on these forums at times.

    Just my opinion, no disrespect meant.
     

    jefflac02

    Active Member
    Dec 28, 2016
    547
    Chin up everyone. Won one for the good guys today. Need to keep pounding the phones, keyboard and hitting the committee members to kill this stuff before it hits the floor.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     

    fabsroman

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 14, 2009
    35,928
    Winfield/Taylorsville in Carroll
    When the legislative session is over, we/MSI should put up a score sheet on what was proposed and what was passed, especially given the distinct disadvantage that 2A proponents have in the MGA. Every year we hear this refrain discouraging activism, discouraging contacting legislators, and discouraging going to Annapolis to testify - because the courts are apparently the only way to effect change. Obviously once a bill is law, it's much harder to reverse course, thus the invested time to stop the enactment has great value (although in some circumstances one could argue that a truly atrocious law may have utility - but why take the chance). I don't think that those that argue against most everything but investing in court cases are being defeatists or are not being rational in their reasoning, but I think they lack data points to draw on to further inform their positions.



    Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

    Score card is a wonderful idea, but you still have no idea what worked and what did not.

    Was it the white shirts with blue lettering that got them to change their minds, the deluge of e-mails and phone calls from all constituents, the deluge of e-mails and calls from registered Democrats, the testimony, some expert's opinions, the well couched opinion of reps from the NRA/MSI/MSRPA, or just sheet common sense after they thought long and hard about things?

    Maybe it was the guy pleading for them not to pass the law because he would not comply and thus they would be signing his death sentence. They all laughed after Zirkin said "Good luck with that", but after thinking long and hard about it, maybe that was the turning point.

    No doubt that something gets them thinking about all this stuff, but what exactly is it? Are they worried about losing in the primary?
     

    fidelity

    piled higher and deeper
    MDS Supporter
    Aug 15, 2012
    22,400
    Frederick County
    Score card is a wonderful idea, but you still have no idea what worked and what did not.
    ...

    As per your first comment, yes, I think it is useful to look each year at where we started and where we finished. I think it is reasonable to suggest that if there is no opposition, unless a bill fails for technical reasons, that something was effective - letter/email writing (lol, i think you might singularly be capable of making them relent with a few long form missives), a personal friend who reached out to them, testimony, etc. I also, because I still am somewhat of an idealist, would like to think that some of them are not purely politically driven and through independent consideration of facts that are presented to them make a decision on what they feel is lawful and in the best interests of the citizens of the state. Their values and decision making processes may be different from you or I, but at least they give it a fair hearing when considering different sides of an issue.

    Obviously, if something is brought up in testimony (like the gunsmith imparting information on home firearm construction) that they later cite or there is a suggested change by an expert witness on our side that they incorporate, we know with greater certainty some of the impetus for modifying or not passing the legislation.

    And while I think Mark does a terrific job (as do others that share the dias with him at times, including Mike from MDPRA, the NRA rep, DBlas, John J, and others) in articulating the legalistic and 2A issues when considering some of these bills, if there are withdrawals or modifications in language, of course MSI isn't the only entity to take credit - it's a large team effort that includes other groups and individuals - many citizens that have taken the time to write (like you and I have) or testify in person that may have helped make it happen. I think the end point is that all of what is proposed in January to March in the MGA on the antigun side is not guaranteed to pass and become law in April, and one important component in stopping or modifying this legislative effort is actively opposing it. Thus the comparison of before vs after can be informative.
     

    lazarus

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 23, 2015
    13,741
    The issue raised by the other side is that Chow v Maryland (https://caselaw.findlaw.com/md-court-of-appeals/1123356.html) was getting in the way of prosecutions of illegal possessors because their lawyers rely on the Chow decision and call the possession a "loan".

    The statute, as it stands today (Public Safety 5-134) penalizes transfers to prohibited persons; the Chow decision defines a "transfer" as a permanent transaction for compensation (paraphrasing heavily, since one needs to read the full decision to make sense of it). Therefore, the hole - a loan is neither for compensation, nor considered permanent.

    We lobbied heavily to get the bill changed to the way it stands now - which requires a mens rea (Mark can define better than me) test - IF the Loaner knows or has reason to believe that the Loanee is prohibited and still loans a regulated firearm, both the Loaner and Loanee can be pursued in court for criminal penalties.

    So if I am reading it correctly, that means a loan (temporary and without gratuitious exchange) of a regulated firearm to someone 21 and over is not illegal so long as the loaner does not have reason to believe the recipient of the loan is prohibited.

    (Loans to those under 21 so long as it is for instruction and supervised by an adult instructor is okay per relevant subsection)?
     

    esqappellate

    President, MSI
    Feb 12, 2012
    7,408
    So if I am reading it correctly, that means a loan (temporary and without gratuitious exchange) of a regulated firearm to someone 21 and over is not illegal so long as the loaner does not have reason to believe the recipient of the loan is prohibited.

    (Loans to those under 21 so long as it is for instruction and supervised by an adult instructor is okay per relevant subsection)?

    "person knows or has reasonable cause to believe" It is important to stick with the statutory language exactly. So the list is longer than "prohibited" (it includes for example a person who is presently impaired), but that is basically it.
     

    esqappellate

    President, MSI
    Feb 12, 2012
    7,408
    So the only thing this does is make the person loaning the weapon able to be charged, correct?
    Obviously if you’re prohibited, it’s illegal for you to take possession of a firearm. (loan or otherwise)


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Right. They want to get at the loaner, as well as the loanee.
     

    esqappellate

    President, MSI
    Feb 12, 2012
    7,408
    The issue raised by the other side is that Chow v Maryland (https://caselaw.findlaw.com/md-court-of-appeals/1123356.html) was getting in the way of prosecutions of illegal possessors because their lawyers rely on the Chow decision and call the possession a "loan".

    The statute, as it stands today (Public Safety 5-134) penalizes transfers to prohibited persons; the Chow decision defines a "transfer" as a permanent transaction for compensation (paraphrasing heavily, since one needs to read the full decision to make sense of it). Therefore, the hole - a loan is neither for compensation, nor considered permanent.

    We lobbied heavily to get the bill changed to the way it stands now - which requires a mens rea (Mark can define better than me) test - IF the Loaner knows or has reason to believe that the Loanee is prohibited and still loans a regulated firearm, both the Loaner and Loanee can be pursued in court for criminal penalties.

    This provision 5-134 already had a good mens rea test "person knows or has reasonable cause to believe" So that protects a person who simply didn't know or have reason to know that the loanee was a prohibited person. And if you did know, then I have no problem with person being charged. I am personally quite pleased that common sense prevailed here. The original version of the bill would have been a disaster.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,597
    Messages
    7,287,865
    Members
    33,482
    Latest member
    Claude

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom