HB 1302

Trigger Time · Nov 28, 2018

Well if the individual poses an immediate and present danger to himself or others, then they should also confiscate his car, truck , hammer and screw driver, as well as just lock them up since they are such a threat.

rbird7282 · Nov 28, 2018

buellsfurn said:
I'm sorry but in his letter it says the person making the accusations can perjure themselves. But yet (D) A PETITIONER WHO, IN GOOD FAITH, FILES A PETITION UNDER THIS
SUBTITLE IS NOT CIVILLY OR CRIMINALLY LIABLE FOR FILING THE PETITION..

If you’re filing in good faith you’re not perjuring yourself

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Threeband · Nov 28, 2018

rbird7282 said:
If you’re filing in good faith you’re not perjuring yourself

Unless Mueller's team wants you to "compose" a story about Trump's high crimes and misdemeanors.

buellsfurn · Nov 28, 2018

rbird7282 said:
If you’re filing in good faith you’re not perjuring yourself

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

so how do they perjure themselves ? per his letter they can :shrug:

ComeGet · Nov 28, 2018

Doctor_M said:
Me as well... all it did was piss me off even more.

Same here.

Sounds like talking points that Frosh could have written.

:mad54:

zoostation · Nov 28, 2018

buellsfurn said:
I'm sorry but in his letter it says the person making the accusations can perjure themselves. But yet (D) A PETITIONER WHO, IN GOOD FAITH, FILES A PETITION UNDER THIS
SUBTITLE IS NOT CIVILLY OR CRIMINALLY LIABLE FOR FILING THE PETITION..

Which goes with what I was saying, it's practically impossible to prove it wasn't in good faith unless the person admits it in a provable manner. For all intents and purposes, the filer is virtually immune.

Odarlin1 · Nov 30, 2018

SCV/SAR Patriot said:
The POS owns it as far as I'm concerned.

He indeed owns it. And I know I may sound very cynical but it is my humble opinion, this is just another slap in the face to the gun owners. I mean why send a response out at all now - the damage is done. He's lame duck. So I suggest the only reason is to give a double face slap to the 2A community. "Here ya go suckers! This is why I signed it. And what's more, I'm gonna sign more anti gun legislation before i'm through and you all helped to re elect me."

Thank you, sir. May I have another?

RoadDawg · Nov 30, 2018

SCV/SAR Patriot said:
The POS owns it as far as I'm concerned.

He owns the part of it where he insisted on protection of due process.

Brown NEVER would have done so...

AND ANY one would have been allowed to apply...

Would you rather have Governor Brown?

One of these days folks are going to get what they asked for... and then they will be lamenting what they lost in the process.

Odarlin1 · Nov 30, 2018

RoadDawg said:
He owns the part of it where he insisted on protection of due process.

Brown NEVER would have done so...

AND ANY one would have been allowed to apply...

Would you rather have Governor Brown?

One of these days folks are going to get what they asked for... and then they will be lamenting what they lost in the process.

Oh for sure. Those who voted for Hogan this election surely got what they asked for. No doubt.

zoostation · Nov 30, 2018

Odarlin1 said:
He indeed owns it. And I know I may sound very cynical but it is my humble opinion, this is just another slap in the face to the gun owners. I mean why send a response out at all now - the damage is done. He's lame duck. So I suggest the only reason is to give a double face slap to the 2A community. "Here ya go suckers! This is why I signed it. And what's more, I'm gonna sign more anti gun legislation before i'm through and you all helped to re elect me."

Thank you, sir. May I have another?

I'm not sure how lame that duck is. I have a feeling he may gravitate towards Congress after his second term. And he'll carry the same wishy-washy platform onward in order to win there.

SCV/SAR Patriot · Nov 30, 2018

RoadDawg said:
He owns the part of it where he insisted on protection of due process.

Brown NEVER would have done so...

AND ANY one would have been allowed to apply...

Would you rather have Governor Brown?

One of these days folks are going to get what they asked for... and then they will be lamenting what they lost in the process.

No, he owns it because it crossed his desk and signed it.

Are we rehashing this debate again are we?

Odarlin1 · Nov 30, 2018

zoostation said:
I'm not sure how lame that duck is. I have a feeling he may gravitate towards Congress after his second term. And he'll carry the same wishy-washy platform onward in order to win there.

Only if the 2A community helps and votes for him.

Bob A · Dec 1, 2018

Trigger Tuner said:
Well if the individual poses an immediate and present danger to himself or others, then they should . . . just lock them up since they are such a threat.

This.

Removing the scary tool while leaving the scary individual is peculiarly MD General Assembly stupidity. Apparently the only thing that scares the GA is a firearm. What can an aggressive insane individual do with knives, hammers, vehicles, cans of gasoline, or rocks?

Even words can be scary to Marylanders. Talking trash to his sister-in-law is what earned Mr Willis a death sentence. So, let's add "words" to the list. No guns, no scary talk. That takes care of the 1st & 2nd Amendments. Your elected officials are working on the rest of the list.

magwell · Dec 1, 2018

Got the same letter. As said the governor owns it. With all the due process protections they gave us it will probably work as well as the FISA court does.

pcfixer · Dec 2, 2018

rbird7282 said:
If you’re filing in good faith you’re not perjuring yourself

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe. How about a petitioner filing in 'good faith' who is mentally defective with PTSD or Bipolar disorder?

https://psychcentral.com/disorders/

buellsfurn · Dec 31, 2018

https://youtu.be/bfFG1D8V2Pc just watched sorry if it's a dup

platoonDaddy · Jan 1, 2019

Think about this: if a student threatens to shoot up the school. his/her parents weapons & ammo will be confiscated along with any of his/her acquaintances who have firearms in their house.

Far fetched, nope.

Rab1515 · Jan 1, 2019

platoonDaddy said:
Think about this: if a student threatens to shoot up the school. his/her parents weapons & ammo will be confiscated along with any of his/her acquaintances who have firearms in their house.

Far fetched, nope.

Has happened. To an FFL. Except the kids were talking about a videogame map run through, but this was before 1302 was in full force. Now that it is, the schools (school psychologists) are very much aware of thier power.

IDFInfantry · Jan 6, 2019

[YT]7TQBtdnbSpw[/YT]

Threeband · Jan 6, 2019

That guy in the video is incredibly long winded, but I got the point (fast forward to 3:00 - 3:30, then bail out).

It's exactly what I said in another post: dumb kid says, "I can get a gun from my uncle," and the uncle gets ERPO'd

HB 1302

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Amazed

Ultimate Member

The M1 Does My Talking

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

, ,

Ultimate Member

Nos nostraque Deo

Ultimate Member

, ,

UNRECONSTRUCTED

Ultimate Member

όυ φροντισ

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Banned

The M1 Does My Talking

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics