HB 96, SB 346...

Delegate Robin Grammer · Mar 27, 2019

Judiciary just moved HB 96 and SB 346.

Occam · Mar 27, 2019

How about just sentence or two mentioning what those are, what it means that they’ve moved, and what theg mean generally to the audience here.

Allen65 · Mar 27, 2019

The amended version of SB0346 that passed the Senate on Third Reader appears to be relatively innocuous in reversing the Chow decision for regulated firearms.
http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2019RS/bills/sb/sb0346t.pdf

I don't see text up yet for HB0096 as of Second Reader.

danb · Mar 27, 2019

Thanks for the update!

Hb 96: regulated firearms transfer.
http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmga/frmMain.aspx?pid=billpage&tab=subject3&id=hb0096&stab=01&ys=2019RS

Hb346: Public Safety – Regulated Firearms – Sell, Rent, Transfer, or Loan
http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmga/frmMain.aspx?pid=billpage&tab=subject3&id=sb0346&stab=01&ys=2019RS

ETA: documents for HB96 are dated "3/28/2019" - tomorrow! Can I get Powerball #s to, to move out of this state? Lol

zoostation · Mar 27, 2019

SB346 appears very bad. If I'm reading it correctly it reinstates the entire old pre-FSA 2013 section requiring need for most people to do the free MPCTC course to do any kind of a regulated firearm transfer, and that course no longer exists. In effect if it passed the way it is written it would, from my reading, make it impossible for many people who never did the old video course to do a transfer. The only way around would be for them to do an entire wear carry class.

danb · Mar 27, 2019

Third reader for SB346, which passed 47-0 in Senate:
http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2019RS/bills/sb/sb0346t.pdf

Which line is for " pre-FSA 2013 section requiring need to do the free MPCTC"

zoostation · Mar 27, 2019

danb said:
Third reader for SB346, which passed 47-0 in Senate:
http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2019RS/bills/sb/sb0346t.pdf

Which line is for " pre-FSA 2013 section requiring need to do the free MPCTC"

page 4 line 15, the course they refer to is the "free of charge" MPCTC one mentioned in b(14). That was the old online video course for those who remember. And I was wrong about the entire wear/carry class would also meet the requirement. It would have to be a police academy firearms certification under 3-207.

It looks like someone literally resurrected pages from the old pre-FSA 2013 law and then wrote the loan language into them. I really wonder if whoever wrote the senate version didn't realize they were working off of material that contained old repealed law.

lazarus · Mar 27, 2019

danb said:
Third reader for SB346, which passed 47-0 in Senate:
http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2019RS/bills/sb/sb0346t.pdf

Which line is for " pre-FSA 2013 section requiring need to do the free MPCTC"

Yeah it looks like it reads that the recipient does not require a training class.

rseymorejr · Mar 27, 2019

zoostation said:
page 4 line 15, the course they refer to is the "free of charge" MPCTC one mentioned in b(14). That was the old online video course for those who remember. And I was wrong about the entire wear/carry class would also meet the requirement. It would have to be a police academy firearms certification under 3-207.

It looks like someone literally resurrected pages from the old pre-FSA 2013 law and then wrote the loan language into them. I really wonder if whoever wrote the senate version didn't realize they were working off of old repealed law.

Whoever writes these bills should go back and watch Animal House

"Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life"

danb · Mar 27, 2019

I think that's just the current statute. It has to be read in the whole context of the entire code. Only the bold caps words are new.

Here is current statute:

https://codes.findlaw.com/md/public-safety/md-code-public-safety-sect-5-134.html

danb · Mar 27, 2019

Here is link to other thread for SB 346:

esqappellate said:
The same. We are fine with these amendments. And yes showing up and testifying made a big difference

I did not see an objection to the third reader for SB346 from MSI and it passed 47-0. All this does is make loaning a gun to someone whom you know to be prohibited a crime.

Texas2012 · Mar 27, 2019

What about the section at the end that says a "person may not sell, rent, or transfer....2. ammunition for a firearm to a minor...or 4. another deadly weapon to a minor."

I think I understand the intent, but could the common interpretation of the word "transfer" catch someone who simply hands ammunition to their child at the range. Also, it doesn't appear that a deadly weapon is defined in this section and that can be a broad term. Loaning your car (which can be a deadly weapon) to your 16 year old son could potentially count? Perhaps it's defined elsewhere?

zoostation · Mar 27, 2019

danb said:
Here is link to other thread for SB 346:

I did not see an objection to the third reader for SB346 from MSI and it passed 47-0. All this does is make loaning a gun to someone whom you know to be prohibited a crime.

I see what you mean now. Still makes me uncomfortable. But yeah, doesn't sound quite as disastrous now.

Bertfish · Mar 27, 2019

So it sounds like we have a serious disagreement in versions of the transfer bill between the two houses?

mac1_131 · Mar 28, 2019

Texas2012 said:
What about the section at the end that says a "person may not sell, rent, or transfer....2. ammunition for a firearm to a minor...or 4. another deadly weapon to a minor."

I think I understand the intent, but could the common interpretation of the word "transfer" catch someone who simply hands ammunition to their child at the range. Also, it doesn't appear that a deadly weapon is defined in this section and that can be a broad term. Loaning your car (which can be a deadly weapon) to your 16 year old son could potentially count? Perhaps it's defined elsewhere?

I think that is pre-existing stuff from FSA2013 and not new.

lazarus · Mar 28, 2019

Texas2012 said:
What about the section at the end that says a "person may not sell, rent, or transfer....2. ammunition for a firearm to a minor...or 4. another deadly weapon to a minor."

I think I understand the intent, but could the common interpretation of the word "transfer" catch someone who simply hands ammunition to their child at the range. Also, it doesn't appear that a deadly weapon is defined in this section and that can be a broad term. Loaning your car (which can be a deadly weapon) to your 16 year old son could potentially count? Perhaps it's defined elsewhere?

There is already an exception in law about instruction of a youth.

A car obviously doesn’t fall in to that category.

As it stands, and this law doesn’t change it, there is a training/instruction exemption in the law (different section) that allows someone under 21 to be loaned a regulated firearm so long as the person loaning it is present.

So taking your kid to the range and letting them shoot your handgun continues to be perfectly legal. You could not give your Glock to your 18 year old and let them take it to the range without you being present (nor could you if they were 17 for that matter).

Same deal with handgun ammo. I don’t think you are going to get yourself in to trouble if your 17 year old is taking your Ruger PCC hunting and has 9mm on them.

But you know, they probably shouldn’t just be driving around with boxes of “handgun” ammo unless they have a long gun it would go with.

rockstarr · Mar 28, 2019

here we go again

DivingDriver · Mar 28, 2019

One important thing to remember is that if this law is passed it will go into effect immediately. Not only do they knock you down but then kick you just for good measure.

Malleovic · Mar 28, 2019

DivingDriver said:
One important thing to remember is that if this law is passed it will go into effect immediately. Not only do they knock you down but then kick you just for good measure.

Which bill are you talking about?

Both HB96 and SB346 would go into effect October 1st 2019 in their current state.

KevinK · Mar 28, 2019

DivingDriver said:
One important thing to remember is that if this law is passed it will go into effect immediately. Not only do they knock you down but then kick you just for good measure.

SB1000 (HPRB) was deemed 'emergency' and takes effect (if passed) immediately.

HB 96, SB 346...

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

State Lawmaker

Not Even ONE Indictment

Ultimate Member

dont be a dumbass

, ,

dont be a dumbass

, ,

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

dont be a dumbass

dont be a dumbass

Active Member

, ,

Throw bread on me

MSI Executive Member

Ultimate Member

Major Deplorable

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics