Montoya Hearing Deliberation Audio-Shocking!

THier · Oct 5, 2016

Ok something that really bothered me "give the right,,, permission to carry.." uhh, I didnt know anyone "gives me the right" to do anything.

Now, you surely don't believe they can hand out permits like candy do you? MSP would shut board down so fast, you wouldn't believe it.

clandestine · Oct 5, 2016

THier said:
Ok something that really bothered me "give the right,,, permission to carry.." uhh, I didnt know anyone "gives me the right" to do anything.

Now, you surely don't believe they can hand out permits like candy do you? MSP would shuttle board down so fast, you wouldn't believe it.

The MSP cant do that. The HPRB was supposed to be a check and balance system, not an echo chamber.

THier · Oct 5, 2016

clandestine said:
The MSP cant do that. The HPRB was supposed to be a check and balance system, not an echo chamber.

I agree,

BUT,

To an extent, their hands are tied.

There are people carrying around IDs and key cards, that if they fell into the wrong hands, a lot of damage could be done, VS, if someone gets possession of a docs RX pad, and forges scripts. Yet they stand NO chance of getting a permit.

This states gun laws SUCK!!!

Jaybeez · Oct 5, 2016

Their hands really arent tied.
They have a remarkable amount of discretion. Anyone saying differently doesnt understand, or doesnt want you to understand.

AntiGun · Oct 5, 2016

Jaybeez said:
Their hands really arent tied.
They have a remarkable amount of discretion. Anyone saying differently doesnt understand, or doesnt want you to understand.

montoya32 · Oct 5, 2016

POP57 said:
I would just like to know how many realtors meet their clients in a bar at 3am to discuss business. I think they were reaching.

It was a hypothetical. Jurgena was trying to make a point about how ridiculous the restrictions are.

THier · Oct 5, 2016

Jaybeez said:
Their hands really arent tied.
They have a remarkable amount of discretion. Anyone saying differently doesnt understand, or doesnt want you to understand.

So they can rule a box of tic tac in your pocket is G&S?

AntiGun · Oct 5, 2016

THier said:
So they can rule a box of tic tac in your pocket is G&S?

Discretion is not the same thing as arbitrary, although they seem to confuse the two.

Stoveman · Oct 5, 2016

THier said:
I agree,

BUT,

To an extent, their hands are tied.

There are people carrying around IDs and key cards, that if they fell into the wrong hands, a lot of damage could be done, VS, if someone gets possession of a docs RX pad, and forges scripts. Yet they stand NO chance of getting a permit.

This states gun laws SUCK!!!

THier said:
So they can rule a box of tic tac in your pocket is G&S?

I see you weren't kidding when you said you've done a lot of training with IOTA.... :sad20:

montoya32 · Oct 5, 2016

THier said:
So they can rule a box of tic tac in your pocket is G&S?

The HPRB can issue a permit to ANYONE, even a prohibited person, if they are so inclined. The only issue is that if they buck the current law, the AG will strike their decision down and they will likely be reprimanded. Obviously my example is a far fetched one, but they can go all the way up to that point.

THier · Oct 5, 2016

Stoveman said:
I see you weren't kidding when you said you've done a lot of training with IOTA....

Not defending them, just didn't know the HPRB had that much authority, power, whatever.

If they do, then why don't they approve more?

montoya32 · Oct 5, 2016

Norton said:
They are going to go on their own. Apparently they believe that we should not allow this discussion and as a result are going to sever their IP status.

Thank you for taking a stand on this. :thumbsup:

I'm surprised them hanging the IP fee over your head didn't sway you. LOL :sad20:

montoya32 · Oct 5, 2016

THier said:
Not defending them, just didn't know the HPRB had that much authority, power, whatever.

If they do, then why don't they approve more?

The board can only address what comes across their "desk".

I believe, like the two parties that were exposed in my audio, that the board is still unsure of itself or they are erroneously confident in what they are doing.

To say the HPRB meetings are not the place to set precedent is absurd. The MSP will even admit that HPRB decisions help shape their SOPs.

Also, to suggest I should "let a sleeping dog lie" is quite arrogant of someone.

Then to complain about an audio recording, ask to have it stealthily removed and not pipe up, just goes to show the attitude being brought to the HPRB each meeting.

I never got a call. I would imagine a call to me would have been appropriate before trying to intimidate Norton with their IP status(fee).

GTOGUNNER · Oct 5, 2016

Hogan could get rid of restrictions for everyone if he wished. Quietly of course.
Maryland law states that a permit shall be issued........ the secertary of MSP may place restrictions......
Seems the words Shall and May should be reversed!

Jaybeez · Oct 5, 2016

THier said:
So they can rule a box of tic tac in your pocket is G&S?

There exists judicial precedent, in Snowdon, Scherr, and Woollard (even though they refuse acknowledge that one).

These 3 cases were denials by MSP and the HPRB, that the applicants decided to challenge in court. All 3 ended at the 4th circuit court of appeals.

The question in all 3 cases was essentially 'does the board and MSP have grounds to deny this applicant'. In all 3 cases, it was ruled that they did. But in essence, this has only told the board and MSP how restrictive they can be. The issue of how permissive they can be has never been addressed. That particular board, or that particular Secretary of state police, can say that xxx is not a Good and Substantial reason. It doesnt prevent a new board or new Secretary from saying something else, or even xxx now is a Good and Substantial.

In addition, reasonable precaution against apprehended danger is a Good and Substantial reason. And it is subjective. That means this board and this secretary can examine it. And there is clear history, and precedent, that reasonable precaution against apprehended danger is, and has been, much less scrutinized in the past. Especially if you remove the scrutiny and bemchmarks that were "just made up", as stated in Scherr.

Schipperke · Oct 5, 2016

Jaybeez said:
Video of senate committee confirmations

Watch "Maryland Senate Executive Nominations Hearing of Governor Hogan's Appointees to the HPRB" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/dItIEVdIZzU

Raskin around the 8min mark makes very good observations. He is puzzled that new evidence is presented, which is absolutely understandable. I always perceived an appeal as arguing MSP has made a mistake with evidence already provided. Raskin is a bit puzzled that new evidence is introduced. I can understand MSP at a hearing getting pissed with people dropping NEW CLAIMS, and EVIDENCE, they did not have and oppurtunity to review when making the decision. Some people make the leap that an appeal is a venue to pile on more argument, when every appeal I've seen is basically argument the previous arbiter made a mistake or got something wrong on evidence and testimony already provided. One of the longest hearings where a member prevailed, they were arguing law. That is not the same as introducing new testimony, claims or evidence. When people come in with a bucket of more reasons they should get the permit, it is arguably a case where MSP should allow amended applications if denied before the appeal process.. then if denied again, all the cards are on the table at appeal.

Biggfoot44 · Oct 5, 2016

The entire reason to have an HPRB is to have a level of appeal that is independent from the MSP. The MSP can't ( legally) censure or direct the HPRB. The HPRB may do whatever they believe proper, within the actual Law.

The implied reality is that if within the actual Law, their actions sufficiently tick off the Forces of Evil the MGA can either aggressively make use their power of confirmation of apointees, and/ or pass bills changing the apointment of members.

Hypothetically the board members could play a tripple reverse deep strategy of guessing how far they could go how quickly without triggering the nucuelar option from the GA. But the recordings don't seem to support that. Either some picks weren't as wise as thought, or some members have been co-opted.

Muleskinner · Oct 5, 2016

These are Hogan appointees? enough said...

redeemed.man · Oct 5, 2016

THier said:
Not defending them, just didn't know the HPRB had that much authority, power, whatever.

If they do, then why don't they approve more?

Exactly, now you get it..... They should and they have failed the 2A by not doing so.

POP57 · Oct 5, 2016

Muleskinner said:
These are Hogan appointees? enough said...

I've read enough of your posts to wonder where your loyalties lie. You seem to have a huge disdain for Hogan although he is only been in office for a year or two. It's sad that you think politics is a one issue game. He wasn't elected on his lack of a 2A platform. He was elected because the people of Maryland thought he was the right guy for the job. Compared to those in the near past, I think he's doing a pretty good job. Sorry you don't feel that way.

If I'm way off base, than you are a Democrat shill.

Montoya Hearing Deliberation Audio-Shocking!

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

R.I.P.

AR-15 Savant

R.I.P.

Ultimate Member

.

Ultimate Member

R.I.P.

.

TV Personality

Ultimate Member

R.I.P.

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

IANAL, PATRIOT PICKET!!

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics