Lougotagun
Member
If Rs must lie to get elected how will we or anyone else know what they stand for? If Obama lied about "not coming for guns", why can't an R lie about being pro or anti guns? How do we know who is on our side?
Larry Hogan 2A
- Thread starter Knuckle66
- Start date
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!
Member Benefits:
If Rs must lie to get elected how will we or anyone else know what they stand for? If Obama lied about "not coming for guns", why can't an R lie about being pro or anti guns? How do we know who is on our side?
mxrider
Former MSI Treasurer
With regards to the Mandatory Minimum Sentencing, this was discussed in great detail last year during SB281. At first I thought it was a good idea, but as someone stated, the law of unintended consequence came into play. The MUCH better solution was proposed to enforce the sentence that is given with no "credits" given for good behavior etc. Once they are convicted and sentenced, MAKE THEM SERVE THEIR TIME! This still allowed prosecutors/judges/defense the ability to use some common sense in the leadup and sentencing.
So run and serve one term in MD as Governor, then run for President. Unless you're wearing a clown suit you should stand a chance.
And I think getting vilified by the Libs and Dems might be a good thing for a Republican candidate. Idiotic taxes hurt Libs and Dems too.
I am not buying it by one facebook blurb sorry, I have posed that very question several times to the site and tried to actually contact the office only to be told "i dont know its my first day and i will have some one call you back...."
i was never called back....
I dont buy it, dont trust any politician its that simple, we may as well bendover because no political figure will lie in our favor and ruin the rest of their power hungry politcal career i dont care what they say....
i was never called back....
I dont buy it, dont trust any politician its that simple, we may as well bendover because no political figure will lie in our favor and ruin the rest of their power hungry politcal career i dont care what they say....
andimorony
Ultimate Member
- Dec 29, 2009
- 1,207
I don't recall Ehrlich saying ANYTHING on 2A....what have I forgotten (and it's entirely possible that I have so don't jump on me, please, lol)
C.M. Beers
Member
Agreed.
From what I've seen of them, Craig/Haddaway strike me as the strongest 2A supporters (not just using it as a campaign talking point). I believe they've both made public statements about supporting repeal of 281, and I know Haddaway is *very* 2A-friendly. Voted against 281, submitted HB521 this session, speaks very credibly on the issue. I know I've seen a couple Craig/Haddaway "Repeal SB281" bumper stickers around town.
oupa
Active Member
- Apr 6, 2011
- 859
I used to be a great fan of "minimum sentences" and "no early release" laws, clauses and sentences. NO MORE!
Very simply, police, prosecutors, judges, community and corrections supervision staff, are all human beings. Human beings are subject to both mistake and outright wrong doing. Even conspiracy (though this is very rare even in our cjs). If a rule is in place to provide humane treatment or even civil rights to ANY prisoner, it should be available to EVERY prisoner - with application to be determined on an individual, case-by-case basis.
We all hate it when some scum bag gets away with something or at least a light sentence but to have it any other way only opens the door wide for those (so far rare) instances where an innocent truly has been wronged by the system. It's why the system was designed as it was.
Daily we hear of groups and persons being singled out by federal agencies, particularly IRS for what appears to be technically "legal" but very questionable reasons. Now imagine facing these things without the right to defend yourself or be penalized in accordance with the usual results for such actions. The original laws were written by the founders, who would be (the first to) administer them, and THEY sought to put such safeguards in place!
mxrider
Former MSI Treasurer
I used to be a great fan of "minimum sentences" and "no early release" laws, clauses and sentences. NO MORE!
Very simply, police, prosecutors, judges, community and corrections supervision staff, are all human beings. Human beings are subject to both mistake and outright wrong doing. Even conspiracy (though this is very rare even in our cjs). If a rule is in place to provide humane treatment or even civil rights to ANY prisoner, it should be available to EVERY prisoner - with application to be determined on an individual, case-by-case basis.
We all hate it when some scum bag gets away with something or at least a light sentence but to have it any other way only opens the door wide for those (so far rare) instances where an innocent truly has been wronged by the system. It's why the system was designed as it was.
Daily we hear of groups and persons being singled out by federal agencies, particularly IRS for what appears to be technically "legal" but very questionable reasons. Now imagine facing these things without the right to defend yourself or be penalized in accordance with the usual results for such actions. The original laws were written by the founders, who would be (the first to) administer them, and THEY sought to put such safeguards in place!
From what you are saying above, it is more about mistakes and injustices. What I'm describing is that if you are convicted and sentenced to 10 years of a crime of violence with a firearm, you must do the 10 years.
The largest problem is the revolving door of repeat offenders. If they can't get out of prison, they can't repeat. I believe (however not certain) that there are many punishments that do away with being able to get out early, parole etc. How would those be any different than this? We are making this a serious penalty for a serious crime which it should be, IMO.
Here's two letters from the Ehrlich days:
I also found this letter sent after the first of two AGC seminars regarding CCW:
Dear Colonel Hutchins –
Thank you for participating in the AGC CCW conference. Your remarks and those of Captain Herman were both informative and promising.
I was particularly impressed with your honestly and willingness to field tough questions.
Colonel, you are painfully aware of our frustration when it comes to self-defense. I think you would agree that Maryland residents are put into an untenable position when the courts hold that the police have no obligation to protect the individual and the State denies us the ability to protect ourselves.
Despite the foul weather and in many cases a long trek to AGC, you saw a building overflowing with passionate, law-a-biding folks. For every who showed up, there are hundreds who didn’t make the trip but feel as they do.
Here’s the bottom line: Maryland residents are able to obtain non-resident handgun permits which allow them to carry legally in other states, including those surrounding Maryland, but are thwarted by the MSP from doing so in their home state. These folks, including me, have been fingerprinted, passed background checks, forked over requisite fees and otherwise jumped through loops for that right.
While a supporter of “shall-issue,” I’m also a realist…small steps proceed a completed journey. Thus, the notion of expanding the “good and substantial” definition to include certified firearms instructors makes sense (I have been so certified for ten years).
I look forward to meeting with you again this summer at AGC.
Don Pollock
Dear Colonel Hutchins –
Thank you for participating in the AGC CCW conference. Your remarks and those of Captain Herman were both informative and promising.
I was particularly impressed with your honestly and willingness to field tough questions.
Colonel, you are painfully aware of our frustration when it comes to self-defense. I think you would agree that Maryland residents are put into an untenable position when the courts hold that the police have no obligation to protect the individual and the State denies us the ability to protect ourselves.
Despite the foul weather and in many cases a long trek to AGC, you saw a building overflowing with passionate, law-a-biding folks. For every who showed up, there are hundreds who didn’t make the trip but feel as they do.
Here’s the bottom line: Maryland residents are able to obtain non-resident handgun permits which allow them to carry legally in other states, including those surrounding Maryland, but are thwarted by the MSP from doing so in their home state. These folks, including me, have been fingerprinted, passed background checks, forked over requisite fees and otherwise jumped through loops for that right.
While a supporter of “shall-issue,” I’m also a realist…small steps proceed a completed journey. Thus, the notion of expanding the “good and substantial” definition to include certified firearms instructors makes sense (I have been so certified for ten years).
I look forward to meeting with you again this summer at AGC.
Don Pollock
- Mar 8, 2013
- 6,993
Straightshooter
Ultimate Member
Why would I jump on you? These conversation likely took place while you were in Elementary School.
I asked him face to face at a charity fundraiser he attended during his unsuccessful last run and he said his stance had not changed. His answer was something like this. If the GA sends a bill for relaxed carry to my desk, I will sign it without hesitation.
Thanks go to Rambling-one for having such an extensive archive.
Truth is Hutchins could have with Ehrlich's consent declared self defense to be a G&S reason. The Govenor failed us.
MadCat0911
Ultimate Member
He came out the other day saying he wants to make MD the next no income tax state. If he doesn't say anything as retarded as republicans kept saying last election (think magical anti-rape vagina elves for instance), he might stand a chance.
MadCat0911
Ultimate Member
Obama didn't lie about "not coming for guns." You have to understand the liberal mentality. Stopping you from buying more scary guns used in evil wars isn't coming for your guns. Outright confiscation is. Liberals don't tend to see the slippery slope where registration and whittling away what guns you can own turns into confiscation of the guns you do own.
oupa
Active Member
- Apr 6, 2011
- 859
No, it's about safeguards. Safeguards for YOU AND I.
All I'm saying is the framers put a radical, intricate system in place that gave us unheard of protections from abuse. We've been dismantling it for purely public-relations reasons.
Being a thug and even a prisoner has become stylish among certain (huge) groups of citizens. Figure out how to change that and you'll do more to stop crime than all the life sentences in the world.
Amid all the extraneous chin music, I've got to ask:
Were you able to ask?
Many thanks in advance.
Jim Sr
R.I.P.
SB-729 - Public Safety - Permit to Carry, Wear, or Transport a Handgun - Qualifications- This legislation will require the inclusion of "self defense" as a good and substantial reason to wear, carry, or transport a handgun for purposes of the issuance by the Secretary of State Police of a permit to carry, wear, or transport a handgun. The bill in its entirety can be read here.
Straightshooter
Ultimate Member
Too bad it doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of passing. That's why we need a commitment to issue a directive to the MSP. That would take less time than it took to type this response.
oupa
Active Member
- Apr 6, 2011
- 859
THAT is THE solution!
It'd be a lot easier to get ONE governor elected than to replace a couple dozen legislators!
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
(Duplicate - mods please close) MoCo trans student arrested for threatening school (12 Viewers)- Latest: Lafayette
-
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
-
(Duplicate - mods please close) MoCo trans student arrested for threatening school (12 Viewers)
- Started by Lafayette
- Replies: 2
-
-
-
-
-
OCMD Third Street Park; “It’s a beautiful park with an ugly name” (4 Viewers)- Started by RFBfromDE
- Replies: 5