Special Session: SB21 Introduced

[browning guy]

e mail sent

 

[fightinbluhen51]

This bill has some potential, but it always has some potential for a bad mark up in committee.

Meaning, there is need for improvement.

 

[mdoffroad]

so... anywhere, the bill should just say "no guns anywhere"

 

[rambling_one]

E-mail to Ferguson and Miller sent.

 

[Skins_Brew]

yea that location restriction is bogus. I find it funny that they basically don't want you to take a CCW anywhere near children, yet little Johnny and Jennie turn on the television and absorb hours of gun violence courtesy of your favorite SoCal liberal actors and actresses.

Irony at it's finest.....

 

[aray]

"THAT MEETS THE STANDARDS THAT THE 19 POLICE TRAINING COMMISSION ESTABLISHES <future tense> UNDER § 3–207 OF THIS 20 ARTICLE"

Related problems with this, other than the standards are not spelled out in law, is that the Police Training Commission can change the requirements on a whim, whenever and/or as many times as they want, with no oversight from elected representatives, there are no standards set for what constitutes pass/fail, etc.

 

[T-Man]

HAS NOT EXHIBITED ANY CONDUCT THAT INDICATES 3 THE PERSON IS POTENTIALLY A DANGER TO THE PUBLIC IF ISSUED A PERMIT

.

Vagueness and MD Gov't do not go well together.

THAT THE POLICE TRAINING COMMISSION CONDUCTS

ditto.

8 (A) A PERSON WHO HOLDS A PERMIT MAY NOT WEAR, CARRY, OR 1 TRANSPORT A HANDGUN WHILE THE PERSON IS ON THE REAL PROPERTY OF:
(1) A CHURCH OR OTHER PLACE OF WORSHIP;
(2) AN ESTABLISHMENT LICENSED TO SERVE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES;
(3) A GOVERNMENT BUILDING;
(4) A PRIVATE SCHOOL, UNIVERSITY, OR COLLEGE;
(5) A PUBLIC SCHOOL, UNIVERSITY, OR COLLEGE;
(6) A PUBLIC LIBRARY;
(7) A THEATER OR MOVIE THEATER; OR
(8) A YOUTH CENTER.

You have to like the gov't dictating the decisions of private parties. Its a crime whether the church, private university etc agree or not.

 

[krucam]

Related problems with this, other than the standards are not spelled out in law, is that the Police Training Commission can change the requirements on a whim, whenever and/or as many times as they want, with no oversight from elected representatives, there are no standards set for what constitutes pass/fail, etc.

This is essentially what they tried at the 11th hour last Spring. An undefined MSP training program...

 

[Mr H]

Personal opinion only...

While there are good "nuggets" in there, on the whole I'm considering this bill too squishy, and with too many opportunities to be "Froshed".

It may be the basis for something good in the future, but at this point I think MD is better off taking its chances with CA4.

 

[Patrick]

If this is where the Maryland Gun Control crowd thinks they need to start, we could have a productive session in January.

That said, it is broken in many ways. Too arbitrary, and it locks out about every restaurant in the state. There is almost no adult recreational activity you could do that would allow carry. And heaven forbid you make a mistake: 1 year misdemeanor.

But again, it's an interesting bill for other reasons.

 

[jkray]

This is essentially what they tried at the 11th hour last Spring. An undefined MSP training program...

But But But, it says right there that it won't cost anything.......

and in case it't needed the above was said with a heavy dose of sarcasm

 

[Atlasarmory]

Looks like a trap to me. We'll remove G&S and replace it with something training related. We'll work out the details later trust us.

 

[Garet Jax]

yea that location restriction is bogus. I find it funny that they basically don't want you to take a CCW anywhere near children

I interpret it more to mean that you will not be able to provide self-defence to your children since all the restricted places are places I would go with my children.

All restaurants are out since they are licensed.
All professional or semi-professional sporting events are out since they are licensed.
All live entertainment is out (like Disney on ice or the Wiggles) since they are licensed and god knows I need a beer to get through the wiggles.

Those 10 items effectively remove 90% of the places I would ever take my kids any way. Maybe even 100% since parks and other playgrounds might actually fall under one of those places as well.

 

[fightinbluhen51]

Personal opinion only...

While there are good "nuggets" in there, on the whole I'm considering this bill too squishy, and with too many opportunities to be "Froshed".

It may be the basis for something good in the future, but at this point I think MD is better off taking its chances with CA4.

Agreed...the less we leave open to bureaucratic wiggle room (or political crony wiggle room) the better.

Now, if we get a better bill in the house...we should full court press that one out of the house and then full court press to bypass the Senate Judiciary committee by discharge petition.

 

[Mr H]

I interpret it more to mean that you will not be able to provide self-defence to your children since all the restricted places are places I would go with my children.

All restaurants are out since they are licensed.
All professional or semi-professional sporting events are out since they are licensed.
All live entertainment is out (like Disney on ice or the Wiggles) since they are licensed and god knows I need a beer to get through the wiggles.

Those 10 items effectively remove 90% of the places I would ever take my kids any way. Maybe even 100% since parks and other playgrounds might actually fall under one of those places as well.

Good points, all... It looked positive at first, but on further reading, it's nothing but smoke-and-mirrors, in its current form.

 

[vector03]

(1) A CHURCH OR OTHER PLACE OF WORSHIP; Sikh Shooting
(2) AN ESTABLISHMENT LICENSED TO SERVE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES; Luby's Massacre
(3) A GOVERNMENT BUILDING;
(4) A PRIVATE SCHOOL, UNIVERSITY, OR COLLEGE; Virginia Tech Shooting
(5) A PUBLIC SCHOOL, UNIVERSITY, OR COLLEGE; Columbine Shooting
(6) A PUBLIC LIBRARY;
(7) A THEATER OR MOVIE THEATER; OR Aurora Shooting
(8) A YOUTH CENTER. Norway Shooting


Did they google mass murder and add the locations to the prohibited list??
WTF?

 

[Patrick]

I interpret it more to mean that you will not be able to provide self-defence to your children since all the restricted places are places I would go with my children.

All restaurants are out since they are licensed.
All professional or semi-professional sporting events are out since they are licensed.
All live entertainment is out (like Disney on ice or the Wiggles) since they are licensed and god knows I need a beer to get through the wiggles.

Those 10 items effectively remove 90% of the places I would ever take my kids any way. Maybe even 100% since parks and other playgrounds might actually fall under one of those places as well.

And don't make the mistake of being wrong: one year in prison, which conveniently denies you from carrying and possessing ever again.

Should call it the "Converting Lawful Carriers to Criminals Act".

 

[PapiBarcelona]

I thought it would have can't be under the influence of alcohol, not being in a restautant sipping your lemonade is now not good.

 

[Garet Jax]

I would be much more willing to accept a restriction that says no comsumption of alcohlic beverages while choosing to CCW than a blanket statement saying no one can carry while visiting a place licensed to serve.

 

[erwos]

Doesn't go after preemption? At work.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2