They will be very unhappy once the LGQL gets shot down very quickly in the courts.
2A Maryland 2019 Session Information
- Thread starter 2A Maryland
- 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:
They will be very unhappy once the LGQL gets shot down very quickly in the courts.
An 80% built today is a legally acquired firearm. If the state can confiscate a legally owned firearm then are factory Glocks next year? Will the actions of the state create an incentive for more people to build 80%s ? The state could be promoting the behavior they want to eliminate.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Arguing they will proliferate is not gonna change their minds. They already know they are legal....thus the law. Yes, Glocks are next.
Much like how the Prohibition Era created Moonshiners and Rum Runners. History may be repeating itself.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Indeed.
Won’t happen. The HQL hasn’t been shot down and other states have FOID cards that have been found to be constitutional
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SCOTUS will need to take it up. They never have. Putting hurdles in front of a Right won’t fly.
Either appeal for a grandfather clause or an avenue for self serialization or both, just as a way of not punishing those of us who obeyed the law. Ultimately I think this bill will pass, it's a matter of mitigating the worst effects.
Maybe suggest that home builders be required to serialize according to existing ATF guidelines? It somewhat accomplishes what they claim to want (tracking firearms through existing systems).
Yep!!!
Mike OTDP
Ultimate Member
- Feb 12, 2008
- 3,324
1. It would be ineffective. There is nowhere in this state from which a state boundary cannot be reached in less than an hour. People will simply drive out of state.
2. It would encourage panic buying. We saw that in 2013. People who would not otherwise be interested will be picking up kits. The most effective way to put the brakes on 80% firearms is to not draw attention to them.
3. How many of these guns are seeing criminal use? The average criminal doesn't have the skill or the inclination to complete an 80% gun. And the ones who do can make something like a STEN with equal ease.
bitterkenny
Meh
Well, that's really the case for just about every proposed infringement, right? It's not like making a crime extra criminal because X was used. It's really all about "we're afraid X will be used in a crime, so let's ban X." And they can further justify it because in their eyes, there's no legitimate use for X. Imagine me taping everyone's mouths shut before a movie starts because I'm afraid they'll yell fire, and besides, there's no legitimate reason to use your mouth during a movie. It's about as silly as that. Anyways...a couple of strawmans:
You can argue the effectiveness of such a law. After all, this is nearly impossible to enforce at any reasonable scale. So it's going to be one of those crimes you get charged with if the police has you for something else. Sort of like finding any gun on you during a drug bust. At which case, what's really the point of this law? Even in its current legal state, a homemade gun being present during a crime means you are already in a big pile of poop. So is the cost of implementing this law really worth it? Of course, no. But in the GA's eyes, it's a win, even if it a only a symbolic win. MD is full of laws that are not actively enforced, but could be used against you. Did you know oral sex is illegal in MD?
You can argue there are legitimate uses for homemade guns. But I think this is very difficult. Given the availability and costs of factory guns, you can't really argue on those fronts. So we say it's because it's fun and we get to make exactly what we want. The GA argues that we want to make guns the government doesn't know about, and even prohibited people can make them. They could even be sold on the black market, and would be impossible to trace. So radical anti-government nut jobs or people wanting to sell to the black market want them. Doesn't matter if it's not happening now, it could happen, and that's enough. Feels like a lost argument.
I guess the true, but ineffective, slippery slope argument can be used. We all know the GA wants all the guns. And GA knows we know they want all the guns. But they'll lie and say they don't want them all. And some on our side will believe them or at least pretend to. And like the years before, this will pass and we'll be happy the others didn't and both sides claim a win.
I don't know man. I've been really racking my brain thinking about this. I hear MDA is all hot an bothered about this one, and I can't help thinking it's not because this is some urgent problem to be solved, but it's the one that has the best chance of passing. These groups operate on money, and money comes in from momentum.
To me, it's purely a 2A argument. And we sort of lost whenever serial numbers and background checks became the norm. It's hard to justify after those precedents. I can't help imagining some fella a 100 years ago seeing where things are now and asking how the heck did we let it slide this far...
So I'm back to not complying and not so patiently awaiting the courts to do their thing. And I hope smarter/wiser people can help us come up with arguments and strategies.
Ask for evidence there's an actual problem, point out the time and labor and expertise makes it actually less attractive to criminals than going through other, easier, more established methods for getting guns illegally.
At the very least, ask for some way for us to stay legal.
At the very least, ask for some way for us to stay legal.
I agree but I have little faith in the SCOTUS. I hope I’m wrong and they do the right thing
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SCOTUS has the potential to shift gun laws from intermediate scrutiny to strict scrutiny. If the laws are viewed under strict scrutiny you would potentially see rulings along the lines of "a right delayed is a right denied." I think lawmakers know that with more conservative justices on the bench (both SCOTUS and circuit courts), they're more likely to face challenges from the judicial branch.
What does everyone think would be the best time to call? So far I keep getting voicemail so I have to do my 15 second elevator speech about what bills I oppose and why.
What does everyone think would be the best time to call? So far I keep getting voicemail so I have to do my 15 second elevator speech about what bills I oppose and why.
- Dec 13, 2015
- 1,940
Stand across the street from the White House with a concealed gun = legal.
Stand across the street from your own house with a concealed gun = criminal.
How stupid is that? 42 states plus DC are shall issue or constitutional carry. Wake the **** up maryland. Your lawmakers brought you the highest per capita murder rate in the nation.
- Dec 13, 2015
- 1,940
I'll go: our very nation was founded by private individuals using unregistered unserialed untraceable firearms who overthrew what had become a tyrannical government.
Oh, wait. Might be true, but it might make them nervous....
Love it. Let’s make them nervous.
In the new proposed legislation, have they made an exemption for firearms manufactured and sold before commerical manufacturers started adding serial numbers?
Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
Users who are viewing this thread
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
-
-
-
Hair-trigger posting... please include more than just the "headline" (4 Viewers)- Started by Mr H
- Replies: 11
-
-
-
(Duplicate - mods please close) MoCo trans student arrested for threatening school (1 Viewer)- Started by Lafayette
- Replies: 2