Maryland to Target 110,000 Citizens With Gun Confiscation

[mxrider]

I think some people misunderstand something. There are two different issues being discussed here:

1. Legislative procedures
2. Electoral procedures

There are two completely different approaches involved in this. The legislative process only allows us to testify against/for the bills that are brought before the members of the committee. If we don't show up, then they have no reason to not to push their agenda. At least we can say that we showed up and voiced our views. Will that make a difference ? Who knows. But I can say that it won't make any difference at all if we don't do it.

Then there comes the electoral stuff. This is where we need to focus on areas to remove those from office. Just because someone does #1, doesn't mean they won't be focused on #2.

 

[dblas]

I agree with almost everything you wrote based on your underlying premise. However I have a completely different philosophy which shapes my outlook:

1. I believe they infringed upon my rights by passing that law. I also believe that law will lead to more innocent people being preyed upon by criminals. So the number of constituents supporting that law is irrelevant. It is a stupid law, filled with idiocy, and should have never been passed for any reason in its current form.

So then by your logic, the number of constituents that oppose the law (that would be you) is irrelevant. See how that logic works against us, as you can't have it both ways.

Yes, we agree that any law that is not right should be passed. Where we part ways, you choose to sit here and complain and do nothing to provide input on the bill and be reactive. Myself and others prefer to be proactive and provide our opinion on a given bill in hopes that my opinion (having now been heard) will have a greater affect than your non-opinion (having not even being registered) will have a greater effect.

2. I see no reason to engage in dialogue with them. I want them fired. There is no reason for me to write them, speak to them, or attempt to influence them in any way. SB281 proved that was fruitless (for whatever reason one wants to list). My only interaction with them I am interested in at this point, is finding a way for them to be voted out of office. There is no alternative.

So then you freely admit in the above statement that you do not want to actively engage in protecting your firearms rights? There is a reason to write to them, so your opinion is on the record with them. There is a reason for you to fax them, so your opinion is on the record with them. There is a reason to try and influence them, so you attempt to get the outcome you desire.

Doing all of the above doesn't change the fact that you can still work to remove them, but while they are in office and have the ability to affect your firearms rights, then you have a duty to your self at a minimum, to fight for those rights and take that fight to those that represent you. If you choose not to, then you have chosen not to be a part of the solution and sit on the sidelines and just comment and complain.

Hopefully that clearly illuminates our differences. We both want people who will represent our values. You believe in the system and the rational qualities of our representatives. I feel that they are corrupt and useless. Those two basic beliefs shape our actions. I think there is a place for both paths in this struggle for a better Maryland.

It certainly does illuminate our differences.

You believe in not voicing any opinion because you despise them so much, but will work to try and remove them.

I believe in at least voicing my opinion and being in their face as often as I can, both in session and out. I too will engage in trying to get them replaced, but I have an advantage you don't. I have talked to my Delegates and Senator, and have been engaged. That allows me to be a bigger pain in their ass as they have community meetings on what they have done and trying to get re-elected.

 

[ShallNotInfringe]

I think some people misunderstand something. There are two different issues being discussed here:

1. Legislative procedures
2. Electoral procedures

There are two completely different approaches involved in this. The legislative process only allows us to testify against/for the bills that are brought before the members of the committee. If we don't show up, then they have no reason to not to push their agenda. At least we can say that we showed up and voiced our views. Will that make a difference ? Who knows. But I can say that it won't make any difference at all if we don't do it.

Then there comes the electoral stuff. This is where we need to focus on areas to remove those from office. Just because someone does #1, doesn't mean they won't be focused on #2.

Thank you for putting it in such succinct terms.

Thus far, we have done quite a bit on #1 and now we are in a wait and see mode on the results there. We need to keep an eye out for what's happening and actively campaign to get the favorable bills out of committee and passed.

We also need to quickly reconfigure and get organized as a community to have an effect on #2 quickly. 3 months to the primary.
.

 

[dblas]

Threats from fellow legislators, backroom discussions, fudging numbers, yet some people still advocate playing nice.

It wasn't the legislators we were working with that cheated, it was the leadership. Big difference there. You can be a pain in their ass and still be nice and cordial. You can still call them on issues in public and be nice about it.

They have turned this into a brawl with no holds barred and in defense we are supposed to fight fair. Well gosh...what could go wrong?

We have never said fight fair, show me one post where anyone has ever said fight fair? What we ave said is be cordial when dealing with your Delegates and Senator, be factual, be compelling, and if you have a personal angle, use it.

What turns them off immediately is walking in a saying "If you vote for this bill, I won't ever support you again and you are an idiot." Nice idea, but what is the purpose?

You can say the same thing and keep their attention by presenting facts, they don't have to be all at once, it can be a couple at a time, just stay in their face.

Be nice and play nice are two entirely different things. We encourage you to call them out on an amendment vote, a committee, or even a floor vote, in a public forum of their making. For example, one of my delegates was on the joint committee for FSA2013 last year. She voted against the committee amendment to allow off duty officers to carry a firearm on school property. Guess how well that went over at the three or four public meeting she and the rest of the Delegates from my district went over with the crowd? Not very well, at all and it snowballed and splattered the other Delegates as well on their floor votes.

You can be nice while not playing nice.

 

[dblas]

I think the DINO movement is a good start. Now what we need to do is have people move into the districts where the election could be influenced in our favor.

If someone has a place in that area and can rent out a room then that should be enough to qualify as a resident. I'm sure a lot of people can be packed in a room too. I've seen outlandish numbers of 'new Americans' packed into the houses they rent. People can have more than one residence in this and/or other states but as long as they only vote in one election district then that is legal.

These people pushed these outlandish voting practices on us now it's time to use their processes against them.

The other way to help with this, is to stop telling people not to move to Maryland. We need more help, not less. We need more like minded people, not less. Instead of saying don't move here, encourage them, educate them on the laws and then help them get involved.

 

[dblas]

THEY AREN'T LISTENING ANYWAY! - See CSM's post. And the ones that may are going to be whipped in line by the leadership as we have seen.

They are listening, hence why the Speaker and the President have had to work harder to get the administration's agenda passed. The newer Dems are starting to have a mind of their own and not subscribe to the old party line.

Miller and Busch need to go. Those are the two districts that DINO's need to move to and kick those tyrants out.

ETA - IMHO The DINO movement needs to be blatant and in there face about why people are moving around within the state. What is the worst they could do, pass a law to make everyone verify their identity and legal residency for voting purposes?

On the above two points, I think we all agree.

 

[Not_an_outlaw]

Go to the Project Alamo threads.

There, you can find out how to pressure them at the funding sources.

Are the funding sources online?

 

[daggo66]

Let's not forget supporting those who have committed to making a difference. We can all talk the talk. It's time to walk the walk.

http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=147279

 

[dblas]

They placate you until after the election by making promises they know they won't keep. Zebras don't change their stripes.

Legislators need to be voted on based on their voting record NOT what they may promise ahead of time. If they are new or have a questionable voting record then they need to be notified that they will be watched.

Then set about removing the most visible and vulnerable incumbents so the message gets across.

Then start asking your Delegates for the numbers of their constituents that are for/against a given bill you care about. Then call them on it when they don't vote for the majority of their constituents, and get more people involved in your district to contact their Delegates so that your view is in the majority.

Remove the one rock they have to hide under. "The majority of my constituents want..." When they no longer have that rock to hide under or shadow to hide in, then they will be held accountable by more than just one issue voters.

 

[Second Amendment]

I'm not clear on this. So there are people who legally own guns and suddenly they won't because they will find something that didn't come up with the previous background check? I thought all data bases were searched during the initial background check for a registered firearm.

 

[dblas]

And what do politicians fear more than anything else....bad publicity & an angry voting populace???

All they care about is getting re-elected. We're going about this in the right manner. Bitching & cursing at them will do nothing more than make us look like the ignorant, backwoods bunch of losers they believe we are.

We beat them at their own game. We earn more sympathy from the public & the media. We change the minds of individual members of the GA. Easy to do, no, but it's worth doing. None of this change will take place overnight. It'll absolutely be like eating that proverbial elephant one bite at a time.

This is exactly the point, nice post.

 

[daNattyFatty]

I'm not clear on this. So there are people who legally own guns and suddenly they won't because they will find something that didn't come up with the previous background check? I thought all data bases were searched during the initial background check for a registered firearm.

It sounds like what he wants to do is go back and check to see who has become prohibited AFTER purchasing firearms, then go and confiscate and charge.

 

[dblas]

I'm liking this.

Some way to track each bill, each critter's position, and take that pulse a couple times a week (holding on to the snapshots in time), to see the evolution of their positions as pressure is mounted.

But, for it to really take hold, there needs to be a way to get it into the public view, and get the broader community to participate.

I have an easy answer to that as well, The Patch online papers. They let anyone start a blog and they loop the blogs into the daily list of things to read.

The issue is getting people to write an impartial, factual blog with no spin. Just the fact ma'am, just the facts....

 

[ShallNotInfringe]

I'm not clear on this. So there are people who legally own guns and suddenly they won't because they will find something that didn't come up with the previous background check? I thought all data bases were searched during the initial background check for a registered firearm.

Sb 281 created a new class of prohibited persons with the addition of the PBJ clause. He wants to scrub the firearm registry using the new factor the way I read it.

Maybe Simmons pulled a number out of his arse, or maybe he got an estimate of the number of PBJ's (he IS an Criminal Defense Lawyer when not in Annapolis after all, and probably uses the option all the time) and used some ratio he pulled out of his arse to forecast the number of potentially new prohibited persons he singlehanded ly created as part of his effort to reduce firearm ownership in Maryland.

 

[Kinetic]

I'm not clear on this. So there are people who legally own guns and suddenly they won't because they will find something that didn't come up with the previous background check? I thought all data bases were searched during the initial background check for a registered firearm.

It appears that essentially they want to put everyone who currently owns a (legal) firearm through the background wringer on a regular basis (annually? biannually?)

So if firearm owner John Q. Public is convicted of one of the disqualifying crimes/actions, he will be pegged via the database crosscheck and will be required to dispose of his firearms.

Or maybe I am misreading this.

 

[Second Amendment]

It sounds like what he wants to do is go back and check to see who has become prohibited AFTER purchasing firearms, then go and confiscate and charge.

I thought that if one was charged and convicted of a disqualifying offense, that firearms would be lost anyway?

 

[highfructosecornsyrup]

I have an easy answer to that as well, The Patch online papers. They let anyone start a blog and they loop the blogs into the daily list of things to read.

The issue is getting people to write an impartial, factual blog with no spin. Just the fact ma'am, just the facts....

This is a good start. This whole thing concerns me because I had expired milk in my fridge last year and I don't want my rights revoked because of it...

 

[Indiana Jones]

READ ABOUT THE AUTHOR: hint...... Infowars. Bam. All credibility lost. Might as well read fairy tales and post about things turning into pumpkins and mermaids growing legs.


Sent from Free America

 

[dblas]

wrt the OP... "It's for the children.." and it only cost ~330K to implement..

The only way ANYTHING is going to change is for Good Men and Women to stand up and work to get real representation elected.

My biggest concerns:

1) Do We (the collective) care enough to do something, anything positive?
2) Are there enough that want limited government intervention?

Primaries are in ~90 Days...

I fear the answer to both is No.

My wife and I had a brief talk with Steve Schuh (Delegate Running for A.A.C. Executive) last night. One of the things I got from our conversation was at the State level there is little hope for significant change in our, our children, there children children life time.

My question, which I did not ask... "Why are you really moving from state representation to county"? Is it to truly help the situation at the state level by county level representation, or is it simply a power grab.

He seems a nice enough guy, and has all the right answers.....

It took 45 years for this to finally come to a head and for the 2nd Amendment community in Maryland to really become active. It will take just as long to get it all back. I have said it before, and I know I am preaching to the choir with you, but for those in the cheap seats and the new folks, this is not a sprint, this is a distance race, and if you are in this for instant gratification of your 2A rights, then you will sorely disappointed.

I don't promise anyone unicorns and rainbows, or even unicorns on rainbows, and I never will. It will take a lot of hard work and long hours from a lot of people. The more people actively involved at any level, the better the results, and hopefully the shorter the time curve to get our rights back.

 

[dblas]

Earlier in the thread there was talk of strong arm tactics to get the SB281 passed and removing bad politicians from office. How can we hit them in their wallets (figuratively and materially) as another push to keep them from falling in line on bad bills or at least make them weaker come election time?

Do we have a list of where they work or what they do to make the money to stay in office? If so, I've never noticed it.

I understand the uberwealthy are not going to care but surely there are enough fringe democrats that can be nudged by us taking our business elsewhere.

Start here: http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=113241

and here: http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=146826