Special Session: SB21 Introduced

[DoormanTNT]

Looks like I'm way late to the party. Did this bill die today? Where do we stand?

 

[Garet Jax]

OK, as an update...

This bill is mostly dead right now. We need to watch it, and if it moves from the Rules Committee to Judiciary, we will need to (re)act.

I will warn that this bill has concepts we are going to have to face again. This isn't over, and next time won't be so easy.

Patrick,

Given that the anti's have shown us their hand for the next session, what can we do in the next 6 months to prepare to defeat the bill the next time it is presented?

How do we educate the senators and in fact all of MD to let them know how any why this bill is bad and what needs to change in order to make it acceptable?

 

[CypherPunk]

Better late than never. Sent to all my MD representatives.

--

SB21 (Public Safety - Handgun Permits - Requirements and Limitations) has been introduced as an emergency bill.

I am very concerned that this bill will further unlawfully and irrationally restrict the constitutional rights of Maryland residents to own guns and to possess them for lawful self defense.

By way of example, most gun thefts occur from vehicles. Requiring approved concealed carry holders to unholster in a parking lot adds unnecessary risk Leaving your firearms in a car, so that you can enjoy a NON ALCOHOLIC meal at the Olive Garden, DoubleT Diner or Uno's is rediculous.

And how will armed armored car drivers refill ATMs in licensed liquior establishments?

This is why many states have already abandoned stupid laws like this. Plus, it deprives many restaurants of food revenue.

In the last 20 years, every single multiple victim shooting (>3), except one, has occured in a so called 'gun free' zone.

I urge you to be aware of this bill and to oppose any further restrictions on Maryland residents.

 

[Tman68]

Funny how the 11 news mentions the gambling and pit bull bills but nothing about this!!! God bless you Patrick, you have my support!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Speaker2Wolves]

I will warn that this bill has concepts we are going to have to face again. This isn't over, and next time won't be so easy.

I'm not opposed to the training portions of the bill, but I would think you could get the MSP to quietly put a word in the ears of sponsors about unfunded mandates. I'm sure the MSP wouldn't want to have to staff up to administer something like that under their current budget.

On the topic of the list of banned areas, I would think that such a requirement could only be acceptable if the state would also impose a requirement on churches, schools, youth centers, etc., to the effect that they must provide a method by which said firearms can be safely secured. It's one thing to tell people to disarm before entering, it's quite another to ensure that they can do so safely and without putting the public at greater risk than they would otherwise be if said firearms were to remain under the direct control of a trained, CCW permit owner.

In other words, if the costs of implementing any number of these provisions in a reasonably safe and effective manner are prohibitive, then perhaps the alternative of leaving them to the discretion of a responsible CCW permit holder is the better alternative.

 

[ShortSight]

Patrick,

Given that the anti's have shown us their hand for the next session, what can we do in the next 6 months to prepare to defeat the bill the next time it is presented?

How do we educate the senators and in fact all of MD to let them know how any why this bill is bad and what needs to change in order to make it acceptable?

Perhaps it might be worthwhile to follow the example set by the young lady reporter in D.C. who invited the Deputy Mayor to go shooting. Maybe we could arrange to have a Maryland General Assembly day at one of the ranges, or perhaps spreading it over a few weekends to balance crowd size.

Let them come out to the range and spend the day learning what kinds of training are already given; then actually see, touch and use all of these guns they fear so much. You could cover all the basics and even why black rifles aren't assault rifles...

You might even invite the MSP leadership to take part.

At the very least, there is the chance of making some positive relationship contacts which would be longer term. There are probably some hardcore anti-gun people who you can't ever reach, but I would bet there is probably a fair number of people, holding relatively neutral positions, who haven't had the chance for this kind of experience.

It would give both sides a chance to meet, greet and schmooze in a way they normally wouldn't. The unknown enemy often isn't quite so evil once he is known.

On the other hand, if after such an experience they still try to stick it to the state's citizens, then perhaps hammers, tongs, fence rails, tar and feathers should all be heading their way at the next assembly.

 

[ezliving]

Didn't I read somewhere on MDS that the MSP wanted to get application processing time from 8+ hours down to under 2 hours? How do they get there with additional in-house training requirements?

Why haven't training requirements been needed for the last 40 years?

Minimal training standards to exercise a civil right? At the very least, NRA and other outside trainers should be acceptable.

 

[paulstitz]

Didn't I read somewhere on MDS that the MSP wanted to get application processing time from 8+ hours down to under 2 hours? How do they get there with additional in-house training requirements?

Why haven't training requirements been needed for the last 40 years?

Minimal training standards to exercise a civil right? At the very least, NRA and other outside trainers should be acceptable.

I'm sure the trainiing would need to be completed BEFORE you applied for a permit or a renewal. The only time it would add to the MSPs review is verification.

 

[Tomcat]

My reply in another thread was to the effect of "no cost training" is not no cost, your tax dollars will be paying for it. How many new MSP will be needed to provide training?

 

[Inigoes]

My reply in another thread was to the effect of "no cost training" is not no cost, your tax dollars will be paying for it. How many new MSP will be needed to provide training?

No cost training, got us www.mdgunsafety.com

If there is nothing in it for MD, they will just rubber stamp the credentials. Exactly like now, when people purchase regulated firearms.

 

[Mr H]

Funny how the 11 news mentions the gambling and pit bull bills but nothing about this!!! God bless you Patrick, you have my support!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This bill was in the Rules Committee, and doesn't really "exist" unless it goes further. We want it to die on the vine, at this point.

 

[rambling_one]

That's the way it should be. I don't drink, but I'll go out with family and friends to be social.

I like a social drink, but never carry when armed.

I can also tell you from experience (we're retired and travel a lot) that it becomes burdensome real fast when the only place you can eat in some states is the local McD type places.

Of course one has the option to disarm and leave the firearm in the vehicle.

 

[Mr H]

Agree...

I never drink while carrying, though to be restricted from even going to a nice restaurant because of these ovrrarching restrictions will be unpleasant.

 

[Smagel]

Agree...

I never drink while carrying, though to be restricted from even going to a nice restaurant because of these ovrrarching restrictions will be unpleasant.

Yes, and that's exactly their intention.

 

[dlmcbm]

No cost training, got us www.mdgunsafety.com

If there is nothing in it for MD, they will just rubber stamp the credentials. Exactly like now, when people purchase regulated firearms.

Thats what I was thinking. Seems it can't be to bad if they are not going to charge for it. If thats the case and they cut half the restricted places listed it might not be to bad of a bill.

 

[MJD438]

Thats what I was thinking. Seems it can't be to bad if they are not going to charge for it. If thats the case and they cut half the restricted places listed it might not be to bad of a bill.

There is a rather big "or" statement in that part of the proposed bill that allows the GA a very large out if they decide to start charging for training at a later date. It also does not specify any objective training criteria, which leaves too much wiggle room for the creation of onerous regulations based on nebulous statute guidance.

 

[CypherPunk]

I'm sure the trainiing would need to be completed BEFORE you applied for a permit or a renewal. The only time it would add to the MSPs review is verification.

Let's provide the training through the public school system, to every student, as part of the standard curriculum.

The same way it was done for decades before we were plagued with incidents like Columbine and Aurora.

 

[MJD438]

I'm sure the trainiing would need to be completed BEFORE you applied for a permit or a renewal. The only time it would add to the MSPs review is verification.

Specifically, the training in the bill needs to be completed in person, within the 6 months prior to any application (original or renewal), IIRC (don't have the bill text pulled up on the computer at the moment).

 

[6pack]

Let's provide the training through the public school system, to every student, as part of the standard curriculum.

This ^^

 

[pfrazier]

I have three greyhounds... Crap.

I have three greyhounds as well... they are REALLY dangerous, they might lick the MSP to death