So much for the Frosh promise of no push for new gun laws

redeemed.man · Dec 20, 2013

http://www.gazette.net/article/20131219/NEWS/131219138/1022/recent-court-case-has-md-officials-calling-for-change-to-state-gun&template=gazette

Imagine and prepare for the amendments to this one. Is it likely to pass? I'd say so (after all it is for the "kids").

BUFF7MM · Dec 20, 2013

The link is telling me the article is no longer available.

-Z/28- · Dec 20, 2013

Buff7mm said:
The link is telling me the article is no longer available.

It's basically saying they want to expand gun free school zones to include private schools as well.

I guess they don't understand the word private.

BUFF7MM · Dec 20, 2013

-Z/28- said:
It's basically saying they want to expand gun free school zones to include private schools as well.

I guess they don't understand the word private.

Hell, it seems like the whole state is already a gun free zone anyhow.

trickg · Dec 20, 2013

The basic gist is that a building maintenance supervisor at a private school in Bethesda had a gun (revolver) at the school, supposedly because he was going to have some work done on it. A fellow employee took a pic of it on their phone and texted it to an administrator, who then called the police.

The thing is, the guy wasn't breaking the law - the law only pertains to public schools, not private schools, so now they want to change the law to cover ALL schools in the state.

Sportstud4891 · Dec 20, 2013

I thought Del. Kevin Kelly was on our side. Am I mistaken?

oldsarge · Dec 20, 2013

Changing the law to include private schools will open up a whole new can of worms. Knowing the ways MD legislators write laws, the interpretations could go through the ceiling. For example, are home schools private schools? Are private day cares? If my significant other runs a private daycare, can I not own guns in my own home? Can no one carry within the established distance around my home? These are just a few that come to mind. I'm sure there are a whole lot more.

EL1227 · Dec 20, 2013

Just closing a 'loophole' ...

However with Frosh, EVERYTHING regarding guns is a loophole.

Let's rename it for him. From now on call them 'Loopy Holes'.

Matlack · Dec 20, 2013

The D next to his name should explain the whole they are on your side until ....

redeemed.man · Dec 20, 2013

Buff7mm said:
The link is telling me the article is no longer available.

It just worked for me. Try copy and paste.

BUFF7MM · Dec 20, 2013

boundlessdyad said:
It just worked for me. Try copy and paste.

Probably because I'm on an iPad, I've pretty much got the idea of it from others posts. :thumbsup:

MadCat0911 · Dec 20, 2013

That's just dumb. If they can get away with that, what's to stop them from the precedent of passing a law saying we can't carry in stores because of mall shootings, or worse?

cryptoman · Dec 20, 2013

That's interesting considering a lot of the private schools have their own armed security

Traveler · Dec 20, 2013

Buff7mm said:
Hell, it seems like the whole state is already a gun free zone anyhow.

Except for the bay. I hope no divers are injured. :lol2:

abean4187 · Dec 20, 2013

Meh, this entire state is a gun free zone anyway. Although I would love to see how they word a bill to not allow guns on private property.

redeemed.man · Dec 20, 2013

MadCat0911 said:
That's just dumb. If they can get away with that, what's to stop them from the precedent of passing a law saying we can't carry in stores because of mall shootings, or worse?

Exactly! How about can't carry in residential neighborhoods with "Children at Play" signs. Or maybe no carry within 1000 feet of a firearms range (wait that makes no sense, oh yeah that is exactly why it might pass in MD). :sad20:

iH8DemLibz · Dec 20, 2013

Next we'll see restrictions on hunting.

You can't be within 300 yards of a deer while hunting deer.

You can't fire a shot into the air while hunting geese.

It's never going to end with these people.

Go DINO!!!

rbird7282 · Dec 20, 2013

As far as I can tell, it's private property and they would not have the jurisdiction to pass that. (Unless they say no guns outside the home at all, which of course will not end well in the courts for them)

campns · Dec 20, 2013

What about the bigger question, why was another school employee snooping around this guys office, and why wasnt he counter charged with attempted theft?

K31 · Dec 20, 2013

IIRC you need your employer's permission to carry on the job which it sounds like this guy didn't have. Also, school isn't one of the destinations where you can transport a handgun. Sounds like another instance of making a law when there are already ones on the books that cover the same thing.

So much for the Frosh promise of no push for new gun laws

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Ultimate Member

☠Buff➐㎣☠

I wanna go fast

☠Buff➐㎣☠

Guns 'n Drums

Resident SMIB

Old & Crusty

R.I.P.

Scribe

Ultimate Member

☠Buff➐㎣☠

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Lighten up Francis

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

When All Else Fails.

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

"Part of that Ultra MAGA Crowd"

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics