SB1 (2023) - Criminal Law - Wearing, Carrying, or Transporting Firearms - Restrictions (Gun Safety Act of 2023)

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Rickman

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 31, 2012
    10,604
    Port Deposit, MD
    I hate this state! As a transplant from New Jersey, when I moved to the “free state” 30 years ago I was hoping it would be better. Unfortunately it’s just New Jersey south with the same BS. I really thought it couldn’t get worse than the O’Malley years but every year it gets worse. Maybe I just have BGOS, but unless this BS gets stuck down I’m gonna have to move. This is 2013 all over again.
    I thought that too, but it totally surprised me that there are more dimm/progs here than in Jersey. One reason I settled on Ceciltucky.
     

    Tower43

    USMC - 0311
    Jul 6, 2010
    4,043
    Lusby, MD
    Has Waldstriecher realized that if some nut case came into a place of business where he and his family were that it's possible that a wear and carry permit holder just might save his life.
    Frankly? If I was in the same place as him? I'd leave. Only way I'd be interfering is a threat to a child or my family. Not my problem if he choses not to carry.
     
    Agree. Though restricting carry in public areas flies in the face of Bruen. The 2A could care less if Waldstreicher gets Koro from wondering if the guy next to his family at a restaurant has a gun….because THAT guy has a right to defend HIS family. Bruen said as much. They can’t pass anything that isn’t repugnant to the Constitution.

    Koro is my favorite psychiatric disorder….
    Who wants to start a band with me? I have a great name picked out.
     

    MJD438

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 28, 2012
    5,854
    Somewhere in MD
    See if this works..
    https://www.marylandshallissue.org/jmain/documents?task=download.send&id=419&catid=4&m=0
    This bill has not been updated on the MGA website. Or look at the attached file.
    The bill will not be updated from its original form unless and until the committee votes to accept the sponsor, and any voting session, amendments. At this point, we hope it dies a disdainful and miserable death in Chairman Smith's desk drawer.

    Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk
     

    Some Guy

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Oct 26, 2017
    1,020
    The bill will not be updated from its original form unless and until the committee votes to accept the sponsor, and any voting session, amendments. At this point, we hope it dies a disdainful and miserable death in Chairman Smith's desk drawer.

    Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk
    This is excellent information. I have no idea how this process works.

    I think we got rolled on Tuesday because practically all testimony rendered was about the first reading/draft, except for the sponsor's testimony and the testimony received from the people that wrote the bill from Everytown and Giffords.

    In spite of this, the opposition experts did more than just hold their own. They are experts and we're lucky to have them advocating against this nonsense. Hats off to Mark Pennak, the MSI crew and the other experts that did such a great job testifying in opposition without having weeks to prepare like the bill's authors did.

    Opposition voices from the general public were at a substantial disadvantage during the hearing because we were unfamiliar with the revised contents. Most of us had not seen the revisions, including the people from the Office of the Public defender. I think this was done by the sponsor's design, and I hope that some of the Committee members recognize we (and they) got rolled and see it the same way.

    I don't think this bill should proceed further without another public hearing and the hearing should not be held until the public has had a reasonable amount of time to read and analyze the amended proposal, and assess its full meaning and impact.

    But that said, I hope it dies in the desk drawer, though. No amount of lipstick is going to clean up this one.
     

    Middleman

    Active Member
    Sep 25, 2020
    151
    I think that vessel or vehicle licensed under MD DOT is in reference to needing to be registered as public transportation. Not in reference to private transportation.

    *EDIT* Oh. Nope. I went and looked at Section 13 of the transport law. No, that is ALL motor vehicles required to be registered to drive on public roads. So you can't be carrying your guns in any vehicle effectively. Even your own.

    My reading of the language of SB1, as newly revised said if you DO have a wear and carry permit, you can transport firearms unloaded and cased (but not wear or carry it). But if you do not have a permit, you may NOT transport firearms at all in your car or truck. Doesn't matter if they are unloaded.
    Well that goes right against federal law
     

    Middleman

    Active Member
    Sep 25, 2020
    151
    That holds with an audience paying attention. But in this case, probably not, given the average viewer has the attention span of a gnat and stopped hearing what's being said after the first five or six sentences.
    Was just getting to post something similar
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,561
    Messages
    7,286,507
    Members
    33,477
    Latest member
    adamc904

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom