Senate Gun Bill Day prep thread 3/12/15

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!
  • akadams2011

    Member
    Feb 17, 2015
    6
    Message to our Senators

    Hello new to the site. Have watched in on threads for a while, and had a though so finally decided to join.

    I know that it did not do to well with the last round of bills that were put into law, BUT was going to write Governor Hogan and our senators and let them know how I felt about our CCW laws.
    Hope I am not breaking any rules here by saying this( I know some forums are iffy about where you can talk) But with all this with the police being targets and now even music videos being made about killing cops. They are under attack. How can we protect ourselves in a time that the police officers have to watch their backs more than ever.
    My point is strength in numbers, thought it would be more effective than only me.:thumbsup:
     

    Mr H

    Banana'd
    Hello new to the site. Have watched in on threads for a while, and had a though so finally decided to join.

    I know that it did not do to well with the last round of bills that were put into law, BUT was going to write Governor Hogan and our senators and let them know how I felt about our CCW laws.
    Hope I am not breaking any rules here by saying this( I know some forums are iffy about where you can talk) But with all this with the police being targets and now even music videos being made about killing cops. They are under attack. How can we protect ourselves in a time that the police officers have to watch their backs more than ever.
    My point is strength in numbers, thought it would be more effective than only me.:thumbsup:

    Welcome aboard, and your last sentence is the whole point of these threads.

    We encourage everyone to make themselves heard, and to show up in the Committee room for hearings to testify. Written testimony is also encouraged, along with letters to the Committee and your legislators.
     

    fire_medic

    Active Member
    Nov 16, 2008
    246
    Calvert County
    I am planning on being at both testimony days. I plan on testifying for HB767 and prepared a written statement with follow up citations (not read but in the submitted testimony). How many copies need to be made and when do they need to be submitted. I am also planning on testifying with the same testimony on SB100 so I will cross file this in that thread as well.

    Thanks
    f_m
     

    Brooklyn

    I stand with John Locke.
    Jan 20, 2013
    13,095
    Plan D? Not worth the hassle.
    Updated for SB0530...

    Need someone more adept at scouring the Code, to see if the convictions listed in new sections 6-234 (B) and (C) would apply to offenses that were previously not disqualifying.

    If they would, than this is a definite Anti bill.

    Otherwise, it seems to provide for a way to get some firearms out of the hands of criminals.


    Personally, and speaking only for myself I will oppose any new restrictions that are not consistent with SS. This is one I will oppose.
    I require substantive due process, and until the right restoration aspects are resolved... I can't back any more new prohibited persons.. period.

    Of course some may feel otherwise..
     
    Last edited:

    Brooklyn

    I stand with John Locke.
    Jan 20, 2013
    13,095
    Plan D? Not worth the hassle.
    SB0530?

    On the surface, I agree.

    I'd still want someone with Code chops to pick it apart.

    Ah...this is a response to the problems of the pbj stuff in 2013..

    If not so warned..the state risks loosing the plea on appeal if they ever pull a stunt like that retroactive stuff again..

    And that goes for the 10 year misdemeanor nonseense..

    We should try and kill it..

    First its not needed.. a judge is required to ensure that a plea is vouluntary and knowing.. that means they must be warned..

    My bet is that they want warnings that are not required by current code so that they can tighten the noose later without risking loss on appeal.. I bet any such warning would be meaningless..

    And no one should ever accept a deal that can be changed at will by only on party.. any lawyer going for that is not protecting His / her client..

    I have got some reading to do on this as well.
     

    Mr H

    Banana'd
    From NRA-ILA...

    Members are strongly encouraged to attend these hearings and testify in support of the above described bills as well as oppose any anti-gun bills. If you are unable to attend but would still like to submit testimony, please keep it to a page in length and email it to marylandtestimony@nrahq.org and your NRA-ILA will compile and deliver it to the committees. Testimony should be submitted no later than midnight on March 8.
     

    LCPIWB

    Needs an avatar
    MDS Supporter
    Nov 17, 2011
    2,001
    Underneath the blimp, Md.
    Hope I am not breaking any rules here by saying this( I know some forums are iffy about where you can talk)

    Welcome. Don't ever be afraid to say what you are thinking here. Just grow thick skin fast. (half-joking, half-serious). Serious don't be afraid to speak your mind, there is guaranteed at least once person will not agree with you, and will let you know. keep to arguing the facts and no one respect you any less.
     

    LCPIWB

    Needs an avatar
    MDS Supporter
    Nov 17, 2011
    2,001
    Underneath the blimp, Md.
    SB0407 -- Neutral

    Removes ambiguity, requires approval/denial of carry permits if no MSP action in 120 days, requires explanations for denial. No substantive change to law.

    Fixed it for you.

    Support with only the following amendments. Permit SHALL be approved within 30days, unless applicant has been found to be a prohibited person.

    Time limits on anything are worthless unless it defaults to the benefit of the citizen for the state failing to provide a service within the time frame. How well did that 7day release work out for everyone in 2013?
     

    TopShelf

    @TopShelfJS
    Feb 26, 2012
    1,743
    SB0407 (MSP 120 days) - if this passes, does it pave the way for MSP to sit on applications for 120 days? Does it set expectations at a turn around time of 120 days?

    Edit: Either way, as was mentioned by someone else in another thread, 120 days is a long time! Way to long, IMO
     

    Mr H

    Banana'd
    SB0407 (MSP 120 days) - if this passes, does it pave the way for MSP to sit on applications for 120 days? Does it set expectations at a turn around time of 120 days?

    Edit: Either way, as was mentioned by someone else in another thread, 120 days is a long time! Way to long, IMO

    I've sent opposition to this bill as being unnecessary at this point.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,702
    Messages
    7,249,012
    Members
    33,310
    Latest member
    Skarface

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom