linkstate
Ultimate Member
Done and a bump.
I'm going with no.
I've received nothing in the way of a response from Hogan's office.
Maybe a letter outlining campaign contributions from a wealthy Nigerian Prince would be read.
Then the letter could close with VETO HB1302.
I have updated my initial post with the information that as of this morning (April 19, 2018), House Bill 1302 has not yet been formally transmitted ("presented") to the governor's office. The legal deadline for "presentment" of bills is April 28.
Beginning at the time of presentment, the governor has up to 30 days to sign the bill or veto it, so May 28 is the last possible deadline for action by the governor. (If the presentment occurs before April 28, as seems likely, then the deadline for action by the governor will also be sooner.) If he takes no action, the bill becomes law without his signature.
The bottom line is that the bill could be presented and then signed, or presented and then vetoed, anytime between now and May 28. Presentment and action by the governor could occur very close together, even on the same day, or as much as 30 days apart.
If the bill is not vetoed, it will take effect on October 1, 2018.
Any idea if this bill is with a group of other bills or is it hanging out there all by itself ?
Any idea if this bill is with a group of other bills or is it hanging out there all by itself ?
Is it within the bounds of possibility that the bill might not be "presented"? That could be the best of all possible worlds, relieving GA from the onus of passing a hideously unconstitutional bill, and taking the burden off the Governor's plate. Let them try to get it right next year, with a bill that would address the issues without dismantling due process over an enumerated right.Edit: this question is apparently being discussed in another thread as well.
Red flag laws let police confiscate guns without due process. Suspending the Constitution in a secret hearing is a Rubicon from which there is no return.
But this is exactly what is at stake with Gun Confiscation Orders — cynically disguised as "red flag laws."
Six states have enacted these laws. At their core, they allow the police to convene a Kafkaesque secret proceeding, in which an American can be stripped of his or her gun rights and Fourth Amendment rights, even though gun owners are barred from participating in the hearings or arguing their side of the dispute.
The first thing gun owners learn is when police knock on the door — ready to ransack their house and, if they resist, to arrest or even shoot them and their family.
The standard is not whether there is probable cause to believe that the gun owner has committed a crime, as the Constitution would seem to require. Rather, the standard is some subjective determination about whether the owner represents some "danger."
As in the film Minority Report, Americans are stripped of their fundamental constitutional rights based on the subjective possibility of a "future crime." And we know from our limited experience that many accusers lie or make mistakes — even more reach delusional conclusions — and the target is frequently an abused victim who is most in need of the wherewithal to protect against an abuser.