Montoya Hearing Results....

[dblas]

Maybe we should stop applying and just start carrying. I know 4 people that have made that decision already, 2 just since the San Bernardino shooting. If a person legally owns a handgun then they have passed a background check, twice. Next step is to start exercising the 2A. I know this is easier said then done but if and when that time comes for me I believe I will continue to carry.

Please do not be advocating illegal actions, for several reasons. 1) advocating illegal actions, activities is against MDS board rules, and 2) if caught, it paints the entire 2A community in a bad light if the action can be traced back to suggestions made here.

 

[dblas]

This is the nonsense that these board are suppose to eliminate, waiting so long. The excuse for many of these panels is to make it expedient and less cumbersome than circuit court. I see Circuit Court cases scheduled quicker than these things.

The chairman is working on this issue, which has been the results of the admin assistant acting on her own. The resultant fix will be the replacement of the admin assistant with at least one if not two admin assistants, that have some legal background.

 

[jeffie7]

SMH. As expected but still disappointed.

 

[dblas]

I agree, Hogan seems to be a good man, but he is still a politician. He played on the 2A rights voters to help get elected and then has done nothing to help 2A matters. His HPRB appointees are no better then MSP representatives. What good is a review board when they only allow MSP to be present but not the applicant to plead their case. How can that be a legal hearing?

Not once in any of the meetings I have attended or in any of the notes that I have read, has the MSP been allowed to state their case in person without the applicant being there.

All of the hearing have had the applicant and the MSP available to state both sides.

All reviews have had a letter or statement from both sides WITHOUT direct input from either side, and that includes MSP. Yes, MSP can be in the room for a review, but so can the applicant, as has been the case in several instances.

 

[MDFF2008]

Maybe we should stop applying and just start carrying. I know 4 people that have made that decision already, 2 just since the San Bernardino shooting. If a person legally owns a handgun then they have passed a background check, twice. Next step is to start exercising the 2A. I know this is easier said then done but if and when that time comes for me I believe I will continue to carry.

I second what Dan said, but also remember that you will have the book thrown at you, you will loose your right for life.

They won't plea bargain with you.

 

[Art3]

Please do not be advocating illegal actions, for several reasons. 1) advocating illegal actions, activities is against MDS board rules, and 2) if caught, it paints the entire 2A community in a bad light if the action can be traced back to suggestions made here.

 

[montoya32]

The problem about this process to date is that is has lacked the transparency it requires to be a trusted process. It has been inconsistent to date and decisions have varied.

I know it is the goal to revise the process, implement steadfast procedures and policies and to make it a much more predictable and consistent check of the MSP decisions.

Maybe something will happen to allow the facts and actual policy to dictate the outcome of the hearings and reviews. I think the biggest deterrent to this is that the board does not know their limits and boundaries and I do believe there has been intimidation/restriction from somewhere. Where, I do not know.

I personally see where the corrections need to be made and I have to believe that those involved know as well. If I, a very amateur spectator, know where and how corrections need to be made and how to address the "burden of proof" and how to address applicant/MSP issues, then something must be preventing those who dedicate much more time than I from implementing those corrections/changes.

That's just my opinion. For all I know I am dead wrong. As of now, those of us with a concern or interest in the process have made our voices hear or at least our voices are public enough to be heard by those who want to hear. At this point, personally, I cannot continue to sacrifice family time, work time and personal time much longer. Believe it or not, it has taken a toll and I'll begin to see substantial losses, not just financial, if I keep up this pace. I am absolutely astounded at the time and amount of effort some pour into this. Maybe I am assuming they do more than what I thought, but we do have some great fighters in our midst.

 

[Schipperke]

Carry a Utah Permit , then get yourself an attorney who can sell mens rea

 

[ShallNotInfringe]

Right. I have been. Why not just let MSP write a letter also? Seems both sides of a matter should be represented equally...

When I went, a representative from MSP was in the back during the closed session and then escorted us out and remained in the back are during the deliberations. Not sure what they were doing in there, but seems like they were at least privy to the board discussions - and perhaps, some unseen influence.

 

[montoya32]

When I went, a representative from MSP was in the back during the closed session and then escorted us out and remained in the back are during the deliberations. Not sure what they were doing in there, but seems like they were at least privy to the board discussions - and perhaps, some unseen influence.

Things have changed and are still changing. It has gotten better and still has a ways to go.

 

[HeatSeeker]

Please do not be advocating illegal actions, for several reasons. 1) advocating illegal actions, activities is against MDS board rules, and 2) if caught, it paints the entire 2A community in a bad light if the action can be traced back to suggestions made here.

I said maybe..., and my interpretation of the 2A makes me wonder.... is it illegal? Is it really?

 

[HeatSeeker]

Not once in any of the meetings I have attended or in any of the notes that I have read, has the MSP been allowed to state their case in person without the applicant being there.

All of the hearing have had the applicant and the MSP available to state both sides.

All reviews have had a letter or statement from both sides WITHOUT direct input from either side, and that includes MSP. Yes, MSP can be in the room for a review, but so can the applicant, as has been the case in several instances.

My mistake, the way I read the Op I was assuming he was not present, when he was denied on his appeal.

 

[dblas]

I said maybe..., and my interpretation of the 2A makes me wonder.... is it illegal? Is it really?

If after you are arrested you can prove that what you did isn't illegal, then you are good to go. But until you are proven innocent, enjoy your time with bubba and the loss of all of your firearms and the right even be in possession of one.

 

[HeatSeeker]

If after you are arrested you can prove that what you did isn't illegal, then you are good to go. But until you are proven innocent, enjoy your time with bubba and the loss of all of your firearms and the right even be in possession of one.

Ahhh, but we don't have to prove our innocence. No worries though, I am a strictly legit kind of guy. I don't like jail. I just have to question the enforcement of bogus laws that totally contradict the constitution of the US of A.

 

[protegeV]

Ahhh, but we don't have to prove our innocence. No worries though, I am a strictly legit kind of guy. I don't like jail. I just have to question the enforcement of bogus laws that totally contradict the constitution of the US of A.

Go check the law books. I'll bet you can find 1000s of those

 

[Schipperke]

Ahhh, but we don't have to prove our innocence. No worries though, I am a strictly legit kind of guy. I don't like jail. I just have to question the enforcement of bogus laws that totally contradict the constitution of the US of A.

Have you tried the Vichyssoise at USP Lewisburg ?

 

[Gryphon]

. . . shall not infringe . . ., yet as Protege5 points out tons of law doing just that to explain to what extent infringement is permissible. That's the slippery slope of tyranny. The only question is how much will we take. Sorry, but other than Nortons recent thread this is pretty damn depressing at Christmas.

Makes me wonder, hypothetically of course, if there was an uprising against and to over throw the Maryland state government, what would the federal governments position be? Imagine someone other than Owe in orifice.

 

[redeemed.man]

Not once in any of the meetings I have attended or in any of the notes that I have read, has the MSP been allowed to state their case in person without the applicant being there.

All of the hearing have had the applicant and the MSP available to state both sides.

All reviews have had a letter or statement from both sides WITHOUT direct input from either side, and that includes MSP. Yes, MSP can be in the room for a review, but so can the applicant, as has been the case in several instances.

Moved to another thread in water cooler.

 

[Schipperke]

. . . shall not infringe . . ., yet as Protege5 points out tons of law doing just that to explain to what extent infringement is permissible. That's the slippery slope of tyranny. The only question is how much will we take. Sorry, but other than Nortons recent thread this is pretty damn depressing at Christmas.

Makes me wonder, hypothetically of course, if there was an uprising against and to over throw the Maryland state government, what would the federal governments position be? Imagine someone other than Owe in orifice.

If I had an unrestricted permit, I'd give it to you. I'm way not that in to it to be depressed at Christmas.

 

[Gryphon]

If I had an unrestricted permit, I'd give it to you. I'm way not that in to it to be depressed at Christmas.

Haha. Thanks for sentiment. Believe me there are other reasons to be depressed but I don't let them get in the way. I have a lot to be thankful for as well. Now, off to fry a turkey! Merry Christmas to you and yours.