Go Back   Maryland Shooters > Gun Rights and Legislation > Maryland 2A Issues
Don't Have An Account? Register Here

Join MD Shooters

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old January 11th, 2018, 08:25 PM #61
lazarus lazarus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,507
lazarus lazarus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,507
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucca1 View Post
So Zirkin believes that you should lose your ability to own firearms if you are convicted of seriously annoyingly another person? Am I reading this correctly?

SB0123
http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmga/fr...b=01&ys=2018RS

I didn't even know that this was a law.

񗮦03
http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmga/fr...S&tab=subject5
I have to ask, why? I mean, I get it, to disarm us. But it抯 a maximum of 90 days. That is about as low as you can go in Maryland and still have prison as a possible result. And there you抎 probably need to be doing something REAL bad to get it, have a bunch of priors or it抯 your 4th time in front of the judge for it.

Screw Zirkin. Only violent offenses (I抎 consider domestic abuse violent) should ever result in losing your right to bear arms. Harassment isn抰 violent and if it is, it is assault or battery, not harassment.
lazarus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 11th, 2018, 11:03 PM #62
Stoveman's Avatar
Stoveman Stoveman is offline
TV Personality
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Cuba on the Chesapeake
Posts: 12,018
Stoveman Stoveman is offline
TV Personality
Stoveman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Cuba on the Chesapeake
Posts: 12,018
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucca1 View Post
So Zirkin believes that you should lose your ability to own firearms if you are convicted of seriously annoyingly another person? Am I reading this correctly?

SB0123
http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmga/fr...b=01&ys=2018RS

I didn't even know that this was a law.

񗮦03
http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmga/fr...S&tab=subject5
Paintrd a sign for the good Senator tonight.



Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
__________________
_______________
Proud CCW Cultist
Stoveman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2018, 05:27 AM #63
pcfixer's Avatar
pcfixer pcfixer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Marylandstan
Posts: 4,227
pcfixer pcfixer is offline
Senior Member
pcfixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Marylandstan
Posts: 4,227
The democratic left wing progressives in GA all fit the description. Will MSI file charges??

Quote:
3–803.
(a) A person may not follow another in or about a public place or maliciously engage in a course of conduct that alarms or seriously annoys the other:
(1) with the intent to harass, alarm, or annoy the other;
(2) after receiving a reasonable warning or request to stop by or on behalf of the other; and
(3) without a legal purpose.
__________________
Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government.

揃y the way I call it "moral obedience" rather than "civil disobedience" because compiling with God's law can never be "disobedient". Those who try to promote un-natural laws on us are committing moral disobedience. It is our duty to resist immoral laws and actions. By Richard Fry.
pcfixer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2018, 06:47 AM #64
eruby's Avatar
eruby eruby is offline
Confederate Jew
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Carroll County, People's Republic of Maryland
Posts: 17,326
eruby eruby is offline
Confederate Jew
eruby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Carroll County, People's Republic of Maryland
Posts: 17,326
I will annoy you.

If that does not work, I will seriously annoy you. Seriously!!
__________________
Beat your ploughshares into swords, and your pruning-hooks into spears; let the weakling say, 慖 am strong. Joel 3 : 10
eruby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2018, 08:46 AM #65
cantstop's Avatar
cantstop cantstop is offline
...
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: HoCo
Posts: 3,596
cantstop cantstop is offline
...
cantstop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: HoCo
Posts: 3,596
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abacab View Post
They cancelled the hearing for the bump stock bill. Hm.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob A View Post
Someone probably realised it was a stupid unenforceable nightmare of a bill, that they'd be made to look like fools over. Showboat bills that make the legislators look bad are not beloved by the powers that be.

We can probably attribute some of their reluctance to our annual testimony on Gun Bill Day. It's always fun to bring a ray of sunshine into the dark chambers of the General Assembly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC-W View Post
Make no mistake: expect it to come back. If the bill were dead, it would have been labeled as "withdrawn". That hasn't happened.
My fear is that it will show up as an 11th hour amendment to a totally unrelated budget bill.
cantstop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2018, 09:01 AM #66
Schipperke Schipperke is offline
.
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 14,456
Schipperke Schipperke is offline
.
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 14,456
Quote:
񗮦03.
(a) A person may not follow another in or about a public place or maliciously engage in a course of conduct that alarms or seriously annoys the other:
(1) with the intent to harass, alarm, or annoy the other;
(2) after receiving a reasonable warning or request to stop by or on behalf of the other; and
(3) without a legal purpose
I assume the carve out at the end is so the Press can dog people? Carry a Press Pass..
Schipperke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2018, 09:19 AM #67
DC-W's Avatar
DC-W DC-W is offline
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ 痋_(ツ)_/
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 20,821
DC-W DC-W is offline
༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ 痋_(ツ)_/
DC-W's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 20,821
Quote:
Originally Posted by cantstop View Post
My fear is that it will show up as an 11th hour amendment to a totally unrelated budget bill.
MD Constitution, Article III, Section 29
http://msa.maryland.gov/msa/mdmanual...ml/03art3.html
Quote:
The style of all Laws of this State shall be, "Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Maryland:" and all Laws shall be passed by original bill; and every Law enacted by the General Assembly shall embrace but one subject, and that shall be described in its title; and no Law, nor section of Law, shall be revived, or amended by reference to its title, or section only; nor shall any Law be construed by reason of its title, to grant powers, or confer rights which are not expressly contained in the body of the Act; and it shall be the duty of the General Assembly, in amending any article, or section of the Code of Laws of this State, to enact the same, as the said article, or section would read when amended. And whenever the General Assembly shall enact any Public General Law, not amendatory of any section, or article in the said Code, it shall be the duty of the General Assembly to enact the same, in articles and sections, in the same manner, as the Code is arranged, and to provide for the publication of all additions and alterations, which may be made to the said Code.
Emphasis mine
DC-W is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2018, 06:33 PM #68
Allen65 Allen65 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Anne Arundel County
Posts: 582
Allen65 Allen65 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Anne Arundel County
Posts: 582
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC-W View Post
MD Constitution, Article III, Section 29
http://msa.maryland.gov/msa/mdmanual...ml/03art3.html


Emphasis mine
It's a right w/o redress for us. The MGA is expected to police itself and adhere to this, and punish themselves if they don't. If there's no mechanism to adjudicate and nullify a bill post-passage (as if the MGA leadership would rule it out of order before it passes), the rules aren't worth the paper they're written on.
Anyone here think the Maryland Court of Appeals would actually nullify a law passed by the MGA that contained multiple, unrelated issues? Really?
Allen65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2018, 07:06 PM #69
lazarus lazarus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,507
lazarus lazarus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,507
Quote:
Originally Posted by Allen65 View Post
It's a right w/o redress for us. The MGA is expected to police itself and adhere to this, and punish themselves if they don't. If there's no mechanism to adjudicate and nullify a bill post-passage (as if the MGA leadership would rule it out of order before it passes), the rules aren't worth the paper they're written on.
Anyone here think the Maryland Court of Appeals would actually nullify a law passed by the MGA that contained multiple, unrelated issues? Really?
Yes. It has happened before.

Like, as in it the most commonly litigated section of the MD constitution before MD courts.
https://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/c...7&context=ublr

I抎 assume since it is the most common, that people are successful in their suits from time to time.

Many states have similar language (federal does not). Same deal.

Also see the section on mandatory 3 readings. That said, on the later requirement, they absolutely DO cram in the required readings at the 11th hour sometimes. Which is also sometimes why a law fails to pass because they don抰 get the readings done in time before Sine Die.
lazarus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2018, 08:37 PM #70
Mark75H's Avatar
Mark75H Mark75H is offline
Outboard boat racing guy
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Outside the Gates
Posts: 10,290
Send a message via AIM to Mark75H
Mark75H Mark75H is offline
Outboard boat racing guy
Mark75H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Outside the Gates
Posts: 10,290
Send a message via AIM to Mark75H
Quote:
Originally Posted by Allen65 View Post
It's a right w/o redress for us. The MGA is expected to police itself and adhere to this, and punish themselves if they don't. If there's no mechanism to adjudicate and nullify a bill post-passage (as if the MGA leadership would rule it out of order before it passes), the rules aren't worth the paper they're written on.
Anyone here think the Maryland Court of Appeals would actually nullify a law passed by the MGA that contained multiple, unrelated issues? Really?
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazarus View Post
Yes. It has happened before.

Like, as in it the most commonly litigated section of the MD constitution before MD courts.
https://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/c...7&context=ublr

I抎 assume since it is the most common, that people are successful in their suits from time to time.

Many states have similar language (federal does not). Same deal.

Also see the section on mandatory 3 readings. That said, on the later requirement, they absolutely DO cram in the required readings at the 11th hour sometimes. Which is also sometimes why a law fails to pass because they don抰 get the readings done in time before Sine Die.
The MGA is about the most lawless legislature of the 51, a decided penchant for not following either constitution.
__________________
2A ... Federal Preemption

Thus, the only inquiry that this Court should conduct is to determine whether the firearms prohibited by the Act are protected by the Second Amendment. Because they are, the Act is simply unconstitutional.
Mark75H is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  Home Page > Forum List > Gun Rights and Legislation > Maryland 2A Issues


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
2018, Congregate Media, LP Privacy Policy Terms of Service