Annapolis 1/28/14 - Bills of interest in HJC

[ShallNotInfringe]

Wanted to highlight that as of now, there are several bills planned for House Judiciary Committee hearings on 1/28. Folks may want to consider going down then.

These include:

HB 21 - FOR the purpose of prohibiting a person from willfully disobeying a lawful instruction from a 9–1–1 operator responding to the person’s call for emergency assistance if the person is capable of obeying the instruction, obeying the instruction would not place the person or another person in danger of physical harm, and the failure to obey the instruction directly leads to another’s bodily harm or property damage; establishing penalties for a violation of this Act; and generally relating to obeying instructions from a 9–1–1 operator.

HB 22 - (WITHDRAWN) - FOR the purpose of prohibiting Baltimore City from adopting an ordinance that eliminates or limits a certain common law requirement that a person retreat from an attack; and generally relating to Baltimore City and the duty to retreat.

HB 65 - FOR the purpose of increasing the penalty for a first and second or subsequent violation of the prohibition against harassment; clarifying that the prohibition against harassing another person applies to a member of a neighborhood watch organization; and generally relating to harassment.

HB 67 (WITHDRAWN) - FOR the purpose of establishing that a person charged with a crime may assert the defense of self–defense only under certain circumstances that negate the duty to attempt to retreat or escape the danger; and generally relating to the duty to retreat when attacked.

HB 116 - FOR the purpose of requiring a certain law enforcement officer to wear a video camera affixed to the law enforcement officer’s uniform while on duty; requiring that any interaction between a law enforcement officer and a member of the public be recorded; prohibiting a video camera from making an audio recording; requiring that a recording be preserved by a law enforcement agency for a certain period of time; requiring a law enforcement agency to develop certain policies and procedures; providing that this Act does not apply to a law enforcement officer who is on detective duty; defining certain terms; and generally relating to law enforcement officers and video cameras.

HB 214- FOR the purpose of establishing that an occupant of a dwelling is justified in using any degree of physical force, including deadly physical force, against another person when the other person has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, and when the occupant has a reasonable belief that the other person has committed a crime in the dwelling in addition to the unlawful entry, or is committing or intends to commit a crime against a person or property in addition to the unlawful entry, and when the occupant reasonably believes that the other person might use physical force, no matter how slight, against an occupant; providing that an occupant of a dwelling using physical force, including deadly physical force, in accordance with the provisions of this Act shall be immune from criminal prosecution for the use of force; providing for a certain exception to the provisions of this Act; and generally relating to the defense of self–defense.

And several others. The committee agenda is here:
http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmga/f...dpage&id=0&stab=03&tab=subject2&ys=2014RS#jud

There are discussion threads pertaining to several of these bills already established by Norton over in the Maryland 2A Subforum.

 

[MikeTF]

aka the Travon Martin bills, except for HB 116 which could be dubbed, 'We want to be like the UK Bill'.

 

[Name Taken]

HB21 is funny...what's a "lawful" order from a non "law enforcement" 911 operator?

 

[Mr H]

I would encourage anyone who can to be present any time they can, to make a consistent show in Annapolis.

I realize 2ATuesday is a huge commitment, and yes we'd like it to be a focal point... but it is also important to show on other days, and make yourselves known.

For those who can't make 2/4, maybe this is a more convenient opportunity for you.

Any presence is, as I like to say, "More than none."

 

[ShallNotInfringe]

I would encourage anyone who can to be present any time they can, to make a consistent show in Annapolis.

I realize 2ATuesday is a huge commitment, and yes we'd like it to be a focal point... but it is also important to show on other days, and make yourselves known.

For those who can't make 2/4, maybe this is a more convenient opportunity for you.

Any presence is, as I like to say, "More than none."

Well said!

 

[Seagrave1963]

I would encourage anyone who can to be present any time they can, to make a consistent show in Annapolis.

I realize 2ATuesday is a huge commitment, and yes we'd like it to be a focal point... but it is also important to show on other days, and make yourselves known.

For those who can't make 2/4, maybe this is a more convenient opportunity for you.

Any presence is, as I like to say, "More than none."

Amen!

 

[mike_in_md]

HB21 is funny...what's a "lawful" order from a non "law enforcement" 911 operator?

A recommendation. HB 21 is

 

[Vile Shadow]

Every time the General Asylum meets, more liberty is lost.

 

[good guy 176]

Plan your exit now guys...the freeking GA gets more insane with each passing. I'm outta here this year, after 30 years in Unsafe, 20769. I'm not living under these conditions any longer; not a happy camper here in Zululand, otherwise known as Laurel, MD.

Cheers,

Lew--Ranger63 & Good Guy 176 (our trusty deHavilland Beaver)

 

[Bolts Rock]

Every time the General Asylum meets, more liberty is lost.

Why you think I'm planning to skedaddle this year?

 

[mopar92]

Mopar has taken the day off.

 

[Mr H]

Vinny has soiled himself.

 

[Lou45]

Looks like sugar momma, mopar and I will be going..........together. Leaves room for one more.

 

[ShallNotInfringe]

Updated status in OP.

Lots of self defense bills on 1/28.

 

[Mr H]

HB 22 is withdrawn as well

I'm not sure how I missed seeing it, but HB65 is another knee-jerk Zimmerman case reaction!

 

[ShallNotInfringe]

HB 22 is withdrawn as well

I'm not sure how I missed seeing it, but HB65 is another knee-jerk Zimmerman case reaction!

Thanks, updated again.

Indeed.

 

[Mr H]

Sending to JUD...

Several bills that will be under consideration on January 28 appear to be distinct knee-jerk reactions to recent notorious court cases and/or news stories, and seem to attempt to create public discord and criminal behavior in what would otherwise be normal circumstances.


HB 0021 -- This bill gives the impression that a 9-1-1 operator's 'instructions' carry the force of law. Unless the operator is a sworn Peace Officer (and identifies his/herself as such), how could this possibly be true? If the intent of this bill is (as Del. Conaway has said in interviews) to prevent a Zimmerman-like situation, this will instead force individuals to act for their safety and in their own best interests first, only calling 9-1-1 after the fact.

HB 0065 -- One purpose of a "Neighborhood Watch" is to collect information regarding suspicious activity, should that information be needed later. Another is to be prepared to contact authorities with current information regarding possible incidents and perpetrators. Gutting the effectiveness of these volunteers does nothing to enhance community safety, and serves only to protect the [possible] criminal element. Again, this seems to be a post-Zimmerman reaction, and serves no helpful purpose.


Two other bills on the agenda have my attention as well, and seem to be in the category of, "Solution Looking for a Problem".

HB 0116 -- On the surface, this seems to be an innocuous bill, but it still raises concerns. Is this bill intended to protect the officer, or the "member of the public"? If the former, then including audio would make sense. If the latter, it seems to imply that the public is somehow in danger from an officer, and these encounters must be preserved to prove misconduct. My feeling is this bill is geared toward the latter.

HB 0214 -- The right of self-protection in the home (also known as "Castle Doctrine") is already well-established in Maryland, both on a Common-Law basis as well as in case law. Therefore, the attempt to codify the right is not only unnecessary, but allows for future restriction of the right. Additionally, "physical force" in the bill is left unclear. Adding to my concern is the last line of the new text, which reads to me as if it is a criminal protection bill (notably in cases of domestic violence).

Creating legislation that is "ripped from the headlines" is simply creating bad legislation. When it is done to (apparently) further undermine the rights of the public--whether it be privacy, safety or self-protection--the good of the citizens of Maryland is not served.
I encourage the Committee to vote down these bills, as they are not in the best interests of Marylanders.

 

[ShallNotInfringe]

Bump for the Mini contingency going tomorrow. Anyone else interested in joining us/connecting up?

 

[MJD438]

I would love to, if I did not already have travel planned. Good luck to all going, travel safe and I hope our "representative government" listens appropriately (written only slightly tongue-in-cheek).

 

[MJD438]

I actually like this bill. ALL encounters with LEOs SHOULD be recorded and saved.

It may seem big-brotherish, but this works to our advantage as well. In a case where a police officer acts inappropriately or illegally or otherwise infringes on your civil rights, it is your word against a cop's in court. If the camera is there, there is no doubt as to exactly what was said or done.

If you are acting as a PUBLIC officer in an official capacity, you have no "expectation of privacy".

A lot of LEOs will be against this, because it will severely limit their ability to "stretch the rules" to accommodate certain situations and subject them to additional civil liability as well. Some would argue that's a good thing. Others...not so much.

That is specifically excluded in HB116.