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

[shootin the breeze]

Under the proposed bill there would be new training content after 10/1/23. Hours stay the same. No fee changes at this time..

I read the darn thing at some point but can't remember. Will DD-214 no longer be an exemption? Not that it matters since the booze issue moots my permit for everywhere I go but the movies and grocery store.

**Sorry to those for whom military exemption doesn't apply.

 

[Raineman]

I’m not a formal teetotaler but I don’t drink at any place I have to drive to/from. And I carry at restaurants but don’t drink at them.

When I go to a restaurant and think I may have a beverage, I do not carry. When I don't plan on a beverage, I do carry. Its that simple. Anyone who has 2 brain cells and understands the responsibility and rules of the permit can put that together. You want a beverage? Leave it at home. How friggin' hard is that?

Art. 6. That all persons invested with the Legislative or Executive powers of Government are the Trustees of the Public, and, as such, accountable for their conduct: Wherefore, whenever the ends of Government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the People may, and of right ought, to reform the old, or establish a new Government; the doctrine of non-resistance against arbitrary power and oppression is absurd, slavish and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.

What? Can you translate that into "see spot run" terms for stupid people like me?

 

[BUFF7MM]

I read the darn thing at some point but can't remember. Will DD-214 no longer be an exemption? Not that it matters since the booze issue moots my permit for everywhere I go but the movies and grocery store.

**Sorry to those for whom military exemption doesn't apply.

I called my Senator about that the other day and was told he was looking into it. Seems I need to call in again.

 

[Bertfish]

I read the darn thing at some point but can't remember. Will DD-214 no longer be an exemption? Not that it matters since the booze issue moots my permit for everywhere I go but the movies and grocery store.

**Sorry to those for whom military exemption doesn't apply.

Only looks to me like it changed content. Nothing more.

 

[lazarus]

If you extract chain/franchise restaurants, so completely owned and operated locally establishments, like my own, the ratio of alcohol licensed restaurants is even greater.

In Easton, under that category, other than myself and the Amish Market, I can't think of any other restaurant that has dine-in accommodations, that doesn't sell alcohol. As the number of permit holders continues to increase, this becomes economically disparaging to restaurants that serve alcohol.

I doubt they would have changed their minds, but it's almost too bad that wasn't also used as an angle to argue FOR the amendment allowing carry in establishments serving alcohol or cannabis so long as the person carrying was not consuming.

Even in the urban parts of the state, this is going to be at least a small hit to those places. Most licensed carries live in the urban areas...just a much smaller percentage of the local populaces than the more freedom loving parts of the state.

 

[lazarus]

Only looks to me like it changed content. Nothing more.

The DD-214 exemption still applies. Plus anyone with a current permit is grandfathered anyway. Any new requirements will only apply to renewals and new permits. So if you are training exempt, you will remain training exempt.

Doesn't mean they can't change that at some future point, but right now the bill grandfathers and retains the DD-214 exemption.

I am not a fan of training mandated for a permit, but if MGA wants to tell MSP they need to come up with a real curriculum that all trainers need to adhere to, that feels like a win towards actually better training. Or at least bringing up the HGP trainers providing HQL plus training to a higher standard for better training. IMHO, MSP should be required to provide training and/or the HGP certification process is MSP provides a complete curriculum to trainers as well as walks them through the training process itself.

 

[USAF05]

If this abortion passes, and then, if I ever make it to your bagel Xanadu, I will be armed.

Of course no one will know, as concealed means concealed.

This is what i'm goin with...If i need it it'll be worth the trouble.

 

[Some Guy]

When I go to a restaurant and think I may have a beverage, I do not carry. When I don't plan on a beverage, I do carry. Its that simple. Anyone who has 2 brain cells and understands the responsibility and rules of the permit can put that together. You want a beverage? Leave it at home. How friggin' hard is that?

What? Can you translate that into "see spot run" terms for stupid people like me?

When I go to a restaurant and think I may have a beverage, I do not carry. When I don't plan on a beverage, I do carry. Its that simple. Anyone who has 2 brain cells and understands the responsibility and rules of the permit can put that together. You want a beverage? Leave it at home. How friggin' hard is that?

What? Can you translate that into "see spot run" terms for stupid people like me?

First, you are not stupid. The SB-1 sponsor is treating us like we are, but we're not. The problem we have is that we are thinking ethically. The SB-1 sponsor isn't. We would expect someone in a position of authority to behave ethically, and when they don't it forces us to try to square circles and to make sense of the senseless. This is not an intellectual problem, it's an ethical problem.

I'm a layman and not an expert. These are my observations about the conduct of the SB-1 sponsor and the process that he and the Committee followed in advancing the legislation. This is why I think Article 6 is is relevant to this discussion:

Art. 6. That all persons invested with the Legislative or Executive powers of Government are the Trustees of the Public, and, as such, accountable for their conduct:...

This is an important part of Article 6 as related to what we are witnessing regarding SB-1 and other similar bills. The bills were written by people paid by a billionaire venture capitalist, not by elected officials or Senate staff, and not in full cooperation and dialogue with the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee members, and not with input from the Public. And, the process the sponsor followed kept the language undisclosed to the Public and all members of the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee. The Public and Committee members did not have sufficient access and time to consider the proposed legislation, therefore they could not sufficiently contribute to its development. And, they did not have adequate time to prepare testimony about it. Hundreds of people showed up to testify in opposition to the original SB-1 draft, but what was discussed in Committee was an entirely different bill. Many working people and business owners took time away from work to participate in a farcical process that was corrupted from the start. This was done by design. There is no ethical reason for the sponsor to have kept the intended draft of the legislation away from the Committee and the Public. He could have had stored the draft version on a public drive, and provided the Committee members and the Public with reading access to it, as well as regular updates about changes. He did not do this. This was intentional.

Further, it is obvious that these regulations were written in an attempt to subvert established law, as noted in the sponsor's public statements, and other Committee member public statements.

There are other issues related to Articles 6 & 7. In my opinion the sponsors of this legislation, and the Committee Chair, behaved unethically and continue to behave unethically with regard to SB-1 and other related proposed legislation.

When legal cases are brought against these bills it is my hope that violations of the Maryland Declaration of Rights, in particular Articles 6 & 7, are included in the cases. The process behind their enactment, and the parties involved, may then be explored through discovery.

I believe the sponsors of this legislation have violated the Public trust, and that they should be held accountable for such violations in court, and also via the ballot. These legislators have great power. If this power is being abused on this issue, on what other issues is it also being abused? It is disturbing.

 

[NatBoh]

I was waiting on the initial flood of W&C applicants to subside, and was just about ready to apply. However with this thing looking more and more likely to get jammed through in some form, I’m not even gonna bother.

In addition to all of these new sensitive places, I also need to worry about the existing ones. Here in Baltimore we have a school every few blocks, so that’s problematic.

I would be so worried about where I can/cannot carry that I would probably just default to not carrying.

This is what they want of course.

 

[Bertfish]

I was waiting on the initial flood of W&C applicants to subside, and was just about ready to apply. However with this thing looking more and more likely to get jammed through in some form, I’m not even gonna bother.

In addition to all of these new sensitive places, I also need to worry about the existing ones. Here in Baltimore we have a school every few blocks, so that’s problematic.

I would be so worried about where I can/cannot carry that I would probably just default to not carrying.

This is what they want of course.

Apply now. It won't get any easier and may get harder somehow with time.

 

[vanquish1]

Apply now. It won't get any easier and may get harder somehow with time.

Seconded

 

[NatBoh]

Apply now. It won't get any easier and may get harder somehow with time.

Not if this thing passes, and for the reasons outlined in my post.

 

[River02]

Seconded

Thirded--- and ultimately...we will win, you'll be miles ahead in the process

 

[Bertfish]

Not if this thing passes, and for the reasons outlined in my post.

You need to read the updated bill I think. The 100 ft buffer thing is gone so who cares about the schools just don't go in them.

 

[lazarus]

Apply now. It won't get any easier and may get harder somehow with time.

This. In the medium term, much of SB1 is likely to get turned over. Things like stricter permitting or more hoops are less likely to be turned over. Or turned over quickly.

Having a permit also exempts you from gun free school zone federal law. Which can hem you up if you have any gun within 1,000ft of a school if you are not on your own property. That’s separate from what MD/Baltimore requires.

I don’t have the same issues in western Howard county. I’ve only carried a couple of times since I got my permit back in September. I didn’t get my permit because I wanted to carry all the time. I wanted it for the rare times I felt like I needed to where I was going. Plus other things like not having to deal with transport restrictions. If I go to the range, I don’t want to have to go directly there or home. It’s near our pool we use and my kids do swim team. It’s nice to be able to go to the range and then swing by and pick them up after practice. Or go to the range and then meet the family to cookout there for dinner. No go if I want to take a handgun to the range.

Some too in anticipation that licensing might get stricter before it gets better. And the hope that eventually where I can carry gets relaxed through lawsuits. Like camping in parks and forests owned by the state or counties.

Also several states will ONLY issue non-resident permits if you have a permit in your home state. Plus reciprocity for something like 6-8 other states that aren’t constitutional carry yet. And the gun free
School zone part even here in Maryland. State bans me from carrying on school property, but today the Feds can throw me in prison if I have a gun within 1000ft of a school. But not if I have a permit from the state I am in.

Or that small chance something goes to pot. If I need to leave my house, for example, flood, fire, fleeing unrest, legally I basically can’t take my handguns with me, without a handgun permit. Or what happens if something seems to be going south in my neighborhood? My only legal choice would be grab a long gun and be conspicuous if I want to step foot off my property. But with a handgun permit I can tuck a holster and pistol in my waistband and belt and pull my shirt over it and if the police show up and notice, I am not going to jail.

I don’t have an issue if someone wants to carry all the time. That’s just not my life. There have been a few times I wish I could have carried and I knew in advance I wish I could have carried. And they all turned out fine. But that doesn’t mean they will all continue turning out fine.

I wish we were constitutional carry. I’d carry more often if we were. Maybe half a dozen times a year instead of 2-3. But that’s fine.

Now if I did have to start going back to work in the office I’d probably carry 100% of those times and leave it locked in my vehicle in a lock box when going into the building (I work in a federal building. 0% chance that will ever become a non-sensitive place. But federal property might become non-sensitive). And it’s not in a great part of town as they put it.

 

[smokey]

My permit doesn't expire until jan 2025. Can I renew it now and switch over to the 3 year renewal schedule waaaaay ahead of the renewal deadline for the first issue permit?

 

[Bertfish]

My permit doesn't expire until jan 2025. Can I renew it now and switch over to the 3 year renewal schedule waaaaay ahead of the renewal deadline for the first issue permit?

Why would you want to? SB1 doesn't propose to change the renewal period

 

[NatBoh]

This. In the medium term, much of SB1 is likely to get turned over. Things like stricter permitting or more hoops are less likely to be turned over. Or turned over quickly.

Having a permit also exempts you from gun free school zone federal law. Which can hem you up if you have any gun within 1,000ft of a school if you are not on your own property. That’s separate from what MD/Baltimore requires.

I don’t have the same issues in western Howard county. I’ve only carried a couple of times since I got my permit back in September. I didn’t get my permit because I wanted to carry all the time. I wanted it for the rare times I felt like I needed to where I was going. Plus other things like not having to deal with transport restrictions. If I go to the range, I don’t want to have to go directly there or home. It’s near our pool we use and my kids do swim team. It’s nice to be able to go to the range and then swing by and pick them up after practice. Or go to the range and then meet the family to cookout there for dinner. No go if I want to take a handgun to the range.

Some too in anticipation that licensing might get stricter before it gets better. And the hope that eventually where I can carry gets relaxed through lawsuits. Like camping in parks and forests owned by the state or counties.

Also several states will ONLY issue non-resident permits if you have a permit in your home state. Plus reciprocity for something like 6-8 other states that aren’t constitutional carry yet. And the gun free
School zone part even here in Maryland. State bans me from carrying on school property, but today the Feds can throw me in prison if I have a gun within 1000ft of a school. But not if I have a permit from the state I am in.

Or that small chance something goes to pot. If I need to leave my house, for example, flood, fire, fleeing unrest, legally I basically can’t take my handguns with me, without a handgun permit. Or what happens if something seems to be going south in my neighborhood? My only legal choice would be grab a long gun and be conspicuous if I want to step foot off my property. But with a handgun permit I can tuck a holster and pistol in my waistband and belt and pull my shirt over it and if the police show up and notice, I am not going to jail.

I don’t have an issue if someone wants to carry all the time. That’s just not my life. There have been a few times I wish I could have carried and I knew in advance I wish I could have carried. And they all turned out fine. But that doesn’t mean they will all continue turning out fine.

I wish we were constitutional carry. I’d carry more often if we were. Maybe half a dozen times a year instead of 2-3. But that’s fine.

Now if I did have to start going back to work in the office I’d probably carry 100% of those times and leave it locked in my vehicle in a lock box when going into the building (I work in a federal building. 0% chance that will ever become a non-sensitive place. But federal property might become non-sensitive). And it’s not in a great part of town as they put it.

I didn’t realize the W&C exempted one from the 1000’ school rule, good to know.

As for this thing getting overturned in the medium term if it gets passed, that’s not a consideration as I’ll be long gone from the “Free State” by then.

 

[Mark75H]

I am not a fan of training mandated for a permit, but if MGA wants to tell MSP they need to come up with a real curriculum that all trainers need to adhere to, that feels like a win towards actually better training. Or at least bringing up the HGP trainers providing HQL plus training to a higher standard for better training. IMHO, MSP should be required to provide training and/or the HGP certification process is MSP provides a complete curriculum to trainers as well as walks them through the training process itself.

They aren’t telling MSP to come up with new curriculum. They are micromanage specifying it themselves.

And in my opinion, are going so far that it will diminish the quality of the very good classes that some instructors are giving.

 

[lazarus]

They aren’t telling MSP to come up with new curriculum. They are micromanage specifying it themselves.

And in my opinion, are going so far that it will diminish the quality of the very good classes that some instructors are giving.

The good instructors yes. The bad or mediocre ones, which is a very large portion (any is too many for bad instructors), probably improving it supposing they are adhering to it in the future.

Micromanaging by the legislature is bad. Then again, MSP's outline for the course is effective a single power point slide.