Agree. Even if totally watered down and tied to the fix NICS bill, and maybe a bump stock ban, this would be a huge step forward for 2A right in the country as whole, not to mention would be the largest win since the expiration of the AWB, and sadly probably the only legislative win for the foreseeable future.
Frosh Press Release on HR 38
.
I'm not holding my breath that this will get through the senate. Actually, I don't believe that it will get a single democrat vote unless it also combines the background check strengthening from the house and possibly a bump stock ban. I actually don't care about the background check change.
I'm still concerned that national reciprocity would cause MD to pass additional laws restricting where you can carry and possibly increasing or changing liability for carrying. Basically that could make it highly undesirable to carry in the state for everyone.
If they can get this passed, Frosh will try to sue everyone in Washington with our tax dollars. MSI and other groups should sue the state of MD for equal protection. We will be waiting a long time until it all gets sorted out.
This is already settled law. The SCOTUS ruled that states MUST recognize gay marriage per Federal law regardless of state laws to the contrary. Well, the same applies here. You can't have it both ways. Will it end up in court, yes it will. Will the Frosh sue the minute after Trump signs it, you bet. If you think they are going to give us our freedoms back without a fight you are sadly mistaken.
Need a bill board "Frosh makes up his shite as he goes along to keep you serfs as victims"
To liberals, killing babies and buttsex are holy grails. That's not true for gun rights.
Exactly!To liberals, killing babies and buttsex are holy grails. That's not true for gun rights.
I don't know about all that, but I DO know that Frosh the Coward will get a warm, fuzzy feeling and instantly hop right on to any Liberal state lawsuit that comes to his attention. Remember how quickly he churned through the mil-and-a-half that he didn't need for #MeToo lawsuits and Amicus Briefs against Trump?
Not so sure about that. Remember, any rules they put in place apply to the "special" people too.
I like it it. It means he is worried. But I'd still love to see his references for those bulsh*t statistics. Lawyers are supposed to cite their references. The absent of citation alone makes these statistical assertions questionable.
Found the study he's citing for the LEO homicide rates (attached.) It's a bad study. They "proxy" firearm ownership numbers using firearm-suicides as a percent of all suicides as an annual measure of firearm ownership rates. They have a divide-by-zero problem with Iowa, Maine, Vermont and Wyoming - these states have ZERO LEO homicides during the 15-year measurement window. (To counter this, they lump a bunch of states together so the group-denominator isn't zero.) And they come right out and say "Hey, not all states support a positive correlation between citizen firearm ownership and LEO homicides." Wyoming had the highest ownership rate (52%) and ZERO LEO homicides. DC, by comparison, has a 4.8% ownership rate and one of the highest LEO homicide rates. Amusingly, they lumped DC into the "low ownership" pool which skews the result toward the desired conclusion.
Finally, they admit that their study is "limited" (aka "severely flawed") right before proclaiming the conclusion "Officers in the high-gun states had 3 times the likelihood of being killed compared with low-gun states. Higher levels of civilian gun ownership appeared to be a significant risk factor for the homicide of LEOs."