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

[Allen65]

The problem is that Clippinger and Ferguson aren't going to decide "well I guess we'll do nothing because the science isn't on our side". I've talked to them personally more than a few times as their constituent and understand them too well. In their mind the gun is the problem. They have to do something because of NYSRPA v Bruen.

They will take Webster's position. They need to pass this now because CCW is evil, and they won't let "perfect be the enemy of good". They'll have to fix the problems that they create next year, which is perfect for them. They love to change the landscape for gun owners all the time: it's a feature - not a bug. BGOS++. Also an ever-changing legal landscape is even harder to legally challenge. Another feature!

I stand by my original conviction that was openly challenged: stop giving the antis ideas on how to make their laws more tolerable. The more tolerable they are, the harder they are to fight in court. I love Mark Pennak and how resourceful and well put together his work is - but I also see his legislative work as an impediment to our nonstop court battles with the antis.

These are not friendlies who we are compromising with. You don't tell your enemy how to attack you better, but we do that all the time. They are trying to make it more unlikely for gun owners to exist in Maryland and to randomly imprison those that stay. The more bad laws they make, the more likely more of us move, and the happier they will be in their monoculture of political beliefs. And fvck it - what they are doing is working: my eyes are on WV for the long haul.

I doubt anybody here is under the impression that MGA leadership can be talked out of their fundamental beliefs against private firearms ownership. But we can add friction and doubt to their process and cause the bill's advocates to waste time effort, and political capital to move bills most members are ambivalent about. Firearms legislation is a sideshow; the main effort for MGA members is bring home as much taxpayer bacon as possible to their districts.

We can only ultimately prevail in court, which will take years. If MSI and others can get the sharp edges of these bills sanded down so there's less harm to gun owners while the painfully slow court efforts grind their way forward, I see that as a positive. The core of SB1 isn't going to get amended away, and is still enough of an insult to Bruen and SCOTUS to be have a high chance of being beaten in court after appeals are exhausted.

 

[elwojo]

“Compromise” means the other side gives a concession. We need to stop using that word.

If you think I used that word in a way dealing with our reality, I think you missed my point. There is no compromise here.

As an analogy to two combating forces in war: We are literally showing them how to harden their defenses and how to attack our weak points. And even if we didn't tell them directly how to do this (with testimony, emails, and clear cut and amazingly produced legal drafts), this forum is effectively an open radio network that we use to coordinate attack positions and weaknesses in their strategies.

The only thing we have going for us is the Supreme Court, and I don't know how long that will last. Even "pro-gun" Republican presidents and federal legislatures are worthless when it comes to promoting gun ownership and self-defense.

 

[Allen65]

“Compromise” means the other side gives a concession. We need to stop using that word.

Actual compromise is also durable. The Antis continually grind away toward their ultimate goal of banning private firearms possession, so previous "compromises" had no durability. They never negotiated in good faith.

Sometimes we need do to fall back to more defensible positions, but that should be done for the purpose of preparing a counterattack to retake ground.

 

[elwojo]

I doubt anybody here is under the impression that MGA leadership can be talked out of their fundamental beliefs against private firearms ownership. But we can add friction and doubt to their process and cause the bill's advocates to waste time effort, and political capital to move bills most members are ambivalent about. Firearms legislation is a sideshow; the main effort for MGA members is bring home as much taxpayer bacon as possible to their districts.

We can only ultimately prevail in court, which will take years. If MSI and others can get the sharp edges of these bills sanded down so there's less harm to gun owners while the painfully slow court efforts grind their way forward, I see that as a positive. The core of SB1 isn't going away, and is still enough of an insult to Bruen and SCOTUS to be have a high chance of being beaten in court after appeals are exhausted.

I would say that a few years ago I would have been largely in agreement with your beliefs, and I spent days of time advocating under those same beliefs. I just don't see it anymore. Maybe erwos and the amazing-haired doctor are getting to me too much.

I will say though: I like that you are doing what you believe in and that you are putting yourself together well for that cause. I'm not telling you to stop by any means. I'm just giving what I believe is the context necessary to understand the lay of the land out there.

I don't think my beliefs are wrong, and I think they need to be considered when positioning ourselves, and that includes what we say here.

 

[Bob A]

I would say that a few years ago I would have been largely in agreement with your beliefs, and I spent days of time advocating under those same beliefs. I just don't see it anymore. Maybe erwos and the amazing-haired doctor are getting to me too much.

I will say though: I like that you are doing what you believe in and that you are putting yourself together well for that cause. I'm not telling you to stop by any means. I'm just giving what I believe is the context necessary to understand the lay of the land out there.

I don't think my beliefs are wrong, and I think they need to be considered when positioning ourselves, and that includes what we say here.

Behaving in a reasonable manner to conciliate unreasonable people will never result in a satisfactory compromise, because the unreasonable will refuse to abandon any part of their position.

Over the last 60+ years, I haven't seen any accommodation from those who would seize and destroy all privately owned firearms. They continue to force their will on the party of the Left, even as the people whom they purport to represent are growing ever less inclined to agree with this position; witness the constant motion toward Constitutional Carry across the nation.

It seems inevitable that their position will become untenable over time. Sadly, that period of time will leave most of the more ardent supporters of the 2nd Amendment in the grave before their rights are asserted in the most repressive of these United States.

 

[eruby]

Don't be so hard on Webster.

Yeah

 

[Mark75H]

I’ve had a moment of clarity. Compromise would include increasing mandatory penalties for crimes. We want to put criminals in jail and keep them there. They are unwilling to do so. This is evidence of their lack of willingness for compromise. They offer nothing they only want to take.

 

[ironpony]

SCT with their Bruen decision had to know that in states like ours that freedoms would become fewer. At least for 8 - 9 years … if they are still there …

No replies necessary, tick tock.

 

[esqappellate]

The problem is that Clippinger and Ferguson aren't going to decide "well I guess we'll do nothing because the science isn't on our side". I've talked to them personally more than a few times as their constituent and understand them too well. In their mind the gun is the problem. They have to do something because of NYSRPA v Bruen.

They will take Webster's position. They need to pass this now because CCW is evil, and they won't let "perfect be the enemy of good". They'll have to fix the problems that they create next year, which is perfect for them. They love to change the landscape for gun owners all the time: it's a feature - not a bug. BGOS++. Also an ever-changing legal landscape is even harder to legally challenge. Another feature!

I stand by my original conviction that was openly challenged: stop giving the antis ideas on how to make their laws more tolerable. The more tolerable they are, the harder they are to fight in court. I love Mark Pennak and how resourceful and well put together his work is - but I also see his legislative work as an impediment to our nonstop court battles with the antis.

These are not friendlies who we are compromising with. You don't tell your enemy how to attack you better, but we do that all the time. They are trying to make it more unlikely for gun owners to exist in Maryland and to randomly imprison those that stay. The more bad laws they make, the more likely more of us move, and the happier they will be in their monoculture of political beliefs. And fvck it - what they are doing is working: my eyes are on WV for the long haul.

Thanks for the compliment. Believe me, I am not compromising because I am not giving up anything. But, the legislative work helps because it means that while the cases are continuing, the restrictions are fewer, which means fewer people potentially going to jail for BS reasons. Cases take years. The HQL case was filed in 2016. I wrote the complaint. We just had oral argument in the 4th Cir. on merits this month. The suit against Mont. Co. has been pending since May of 2021. That case kept changing because the County amended the law and Bruen was decided. Our PI motion ON ONE COUNT of the Second Amended Complaint was heard at argument on Feb. 6, and still no decision. It will take years more to finally litigate that case to a final result. The legislative work gives us something now and we take the rest to court. Plus, the legislative work, often, results in death of a bad bill. It is truly amazing how much they don't know. Making them aware often persuades the Chair that the bill has so many problems that it can't be pursued. This Session is an example. SB118 banning possession of long guns by 18-20 years old. Desk drawered. The attack on the industry in the PLCAA bill. Desk drawered. The gun tracing bill in the House. Desk drawered. The Storage bill, vastly rewritten. The legislative work makes a difference in ways that you just don't see. That happens year after year.

 

[coinboy]

I stand by my original conviction that was openly challenged: stop giving the antis ideas on how to make their laws more tolerable. The more tolerable they are, the harder they are to fight in court. I love Mark Pennak and how resourceful and well put together his work is - but I also see his legislative work as an impediment to our nonstop court battles with the antis.

[In the tone of Joe]
Come on man.

Do you really think the antis would stop if Mark didn't go to court? We'd be in court anyway still fighting these endless battles.

But instead of arguing about sensitive areas, we'd be arguing about how you can't even take a gun home after you just bought it. Then we'd be stuck with it for a decade.

Are you really saying you'd rather have that? Because I wouldn't.

 

[BeoBill]

Face facts. We are dealing with Liberal fanatics. Whether paid or "true believers". There is one saying that encapsulates their position perfectly:

It is NEVER enough.

They view every compromise on our side as just another step down the road to their objective of abolishing private gun ownership. My position: NOT ONE MORE INCH!

 

[dblas]

Could the House actually be more responsible than the Senate? No movement since the hearing 5 days ago, 7 calendar days left, I'm not sure how many legislative days are left at this point, but somewhere between 5 and 10. So they could ram this through on the 10th during sine die.

 

[Bertfish]

Could the House actually be more responsible than the Senate? No movement since the hearing 5 days ago, 7 calendar days left, I'm not sure how many legislative days are left at this point, but somewhere between 5 and 10. So they could ram this through on the 10th during sine die.

MSI Discord is saying they scheduled a vote for HB824 tomorrow. I'm betting they add the SB1 language in to itn

 

[lazarus]

MSI Discord is saying they scheduled a vote for HB824 tomorrow. I'm betting they add the SB1 language in to itn

Probably. Also it sounded like they were going to write and adopt at least two amendments, and maybe more are being proposed. So the chair may be allowing the time to get that done. I highly suspect Clippinger wants this done right. He is not a rash individual from everything I’ve heard.

I suspect Clippinger is aware this may not pass. I suspect he is also aware that SB1 as written, even as it’ll be revised, is likely to be struck at least in part by the courts some day. I suspect he is not thrilled by this. He has never struck me as a frothing at the mouth type. I am positive he highly detests Bruen and I am positive he thinks SCOTUS is interpreting the constitution and how laws should be determined wrong. But he is very much as follow the law, including judicial precedent, type person. So he wants to stretch things as far as they can be stretched. And I’d bet he views SB1 is more than a stretch. So he’s going to make sure it’s at least right. Like not slamming people up with 4-203 violations (I can hope that also means OC doesn’t invoke 4-203 if you do have a permit, and only the lower SB1 penalties).

 

[Bertfish]

Probably. Also it sounded like they were going to write and adopt at least two amendments, and maybe more are being proposed. So the chair may be allowing the time to get that done. I highly suspect Clippinger wants this done right. He is not a rash individual from everything I’ve heard.

I suspect Clippinger is aware this may not pass. I suspect he is also aware that SB1 as written, even as it’ll be revised, is likely to be struck at least in part by the courts some day. I suspect he is not thrilled by this. He has never struck me as a frothing at the mouth type. I am positive he highly detests Bruen and I am positive he thinks SCOTUS is interpreting the constitution and how laws should be determined wrong. But he is very much as follow the law, including judicial precedent, type person. So he wants to stretch things as far as they can be stretched. And I’d bet he views SB1 is more than a stretch. So he’s going to make sure it’s at least right. Like not slamming people up with 4-203 violations (I can hope that also means OC doesn’t invoke 4-203 if you do have a permit, and only the lower SB1 penalties).

I don't know enough about Clippinger to agree or disagree

What I do know is those two amendments won't be sufficient to prevent a lawsuit

 

[Phoenix_1295]

Thanks for the compliment. Believe me, I am not compromising because I am not giving up anything. But, the legislative work helps because it means that while the cases are continuing, the restrictions are fewer, which means fewer people potentially going to jail for BS reasons. Cases take years. The HQL case was filed in 2016. I wrote the complaint. We just had oral argument in the 4th Cir. on merits this month. The suit against Mont. Co. has been pending since May of 2021. That case kept changing because the County amended the law and Bruen was decided. Our PI motion ON ONE COUNT of the Second Amended Complaint was heard at argument on Feb. 6, and still no decision. It will take years more to finally litigate that case to a final result. The legislative work gives us something now and we take the rest to court. Plus, the legislative work, often, results in death of a bad bill. It is truly amazing how much they don't know. Making them aware often persuades the Chair that the bill has so many problems that it can't be pursued. This Session is an example. SB118 banning possession of long guns by 18-20 years old. Desk drawered. The attack on the industry in the PLCAA bill. Desk drawered. The gun tracing bill in the House. Desk drawered. The Storage bill, vastly rewritten. The legislative work makes a difference in ways that you just don't see. That happens year after year.

Mark, you are doing a great job!

Keep doing what you are doing.

 

[MJD438]

Could the House actually be more responsible than the Senate? No movement since the hearing 5 days ago, 7 calendar days left, I'm not sure how many legislative days are left at this point, but somewhere between 5 and 10. So they could ram this through on the 10th during sine die.

House just gaveled in on Legislative Day 21MAR2023.
Senate will gavel in on the same Legislative Day when they finally get in tonight.

So, both Chambers are +10 days on the Legislative Calendar.

 

[Phoenix_1295]

House just gaveled in on Legislative Day 21MAR2023.
Senate will gavel in on the same Legislative Day when they finally get in tonight.

So, both Chambers are +10 days on the Legislative Calendar.

I never have liked that “legislative calendar”. I prefer a day is a day.

 

[MJD438]

I never have liked that “legislative calendar”. I prefer a day is a day.

Likewise, but it is why many of us say nothing is over until the gavels fall on Sine Die. This is one of the ways that gives the legislature the ability to potentially conduct a bill from origination through Sine Die all on one Calendar day.

 

[lazarus]

I don't know enough about Clippinger to agree or disagree

What I do know is those two amendments won't be sufficient to prevent a lawsuit

They won’t be. But for example, he heard clearly from the sponsor that the intent was not so that permit holders would run afoul of 4-203 and a 3 year prison sentence for carrying in these new prohibited places on top of the 90 day possible in SB1. Clippinger is not the type to let it move forward until that’s fixed. He has a concept of fair.

Beyond that, it’s an immediate and on the record defect in the law ripe for a judge to strike it down.