Special Session: SB21 Introduced

[fightinbluhen51]

First round of email away, posted below.

Note: I decided NOT to go full napalm on this round. (I'm sure some in here will take care of that quite nicely!) Instead, since we haven't yet talked directly to Delegate Ferguson, we don't know for sure whether he's a proxy for Frosch, or just simply but naively trying to find some middle ground. To be sure the bill as currently written is bad and must be killed, but I elected to come back with a reasonable response in case he sincerely would like a reasonable alternative. Give him the benefit of the doubt - until we know otherwise... So with that caveat aside, here is my first email to him:

I might steal some of that if you don't mind.

 

[Mr H]

Del Reznik sent back an email I think was intended for staff...

This isn't a constituent, but I thought we might want to have a response prepared if we get more emails in regard to this. What do you think?

And from Pam Beidle (who is one of my reps, and I'm sure knows my name by now)

Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and concerns regarding SB 21, Public Safety - Handgun Permits - Requirements and Limitations. The text of the bill is available at http://mlis.state.md.us/2012s2/bills/sb/sb0021f.pdf . At this time I believe that only the Gaming and Pit Bull issues will receive consideration during this Special Session, however should this bill cross over into the House, I will certainly use the information you have provided in my deliberations.

emphasis mine

 

[Celtic159]

Wow.

Wanna job?

Pay is horrible, hours suck and the girls are not impressed with it.

You might want to work on those sales skills......

 

[aray]

Wow.

Wanna job?

Pay is horrible, hours suck and the girls are not impressed with it.

So, other than that, you're saying it's a great job, eh?

But seriously thanks for the kind words. Knowing how well you write that is high praise indeed.

I might steal some of that if you don't mind.

Absolutely. I post these things (e.g. http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=63524) to generate ideas for others to follow. No need to reinvent the wheel, and we're stronger together than apart. Just make the words your own so that it isn't a cut & paste, and feel free to share!

 

[Minuteman]

First round of email away, posted below.

Note: I decided NOT to go full napalm on this round. ... So with that caveat aside, here is my first email to him:

Good salvo.
------------------
What gets me is that everyone (both sides) are spending so much time talking about training, and restrictions, limitations, etc. None of this really matters; there are plenty of laws on the books that make the things some people (criminals) do illegally with guns, like robbery. So just having a gun, with or without training, or wherever you carry it shouldn't be illegal.

Let me use an analogy; I argue that a 5 gallon can of gasoline could have killed more people in a crowded theatre than that lunatic shooting people in Aurora. People are not clamoring to license people to buy gas, limiting where you can carry it, how many gallons you can purchase or what kinds of combustion engines you can use it in. My point is the 'antis' are clearly using whatever lever that resonates with people (mostly non-gun owners), that sounds 'reasonable' and 'common-sense'; with the ultimate goal of restricting or eliminating guns from society to the maximum extent. This is a civil rights issue; this is directly about limiting our Liberty.

We are less safe when a well trained responsible citizen, is prohibited from carrying a firearm when she takes her kids to the park. Yes there may be an armed security or LEO in the vicinity, but no one is in a better position to protect themselves and their family than the potential victim.

Remember John Lotts video interview (posted already in several threads here), he argues that in every case where there has been a mass shooting (3 or more killed); with only one exception, they have all happened in 'exclusion zones' (places where firearms are prohibited). This is a failed policy; if the politicians keep down this path, ask them if they are willing to take responsibility if there is a mass shooting in an area where guns are prohibited.

The mere suggestion that a criminal hell bent on using a firearm to commit some serious felony (which we already have laws against), will be deterred by some lesser additional charge; and actually respect a 'no-guns' sign would be funny if you didn't think of the harm that will come to those law abiding citizens that would obey such a ridiculous law. Simply put, criminals do not obey the rules.

They have better legs to stand on when they talk about training; if we must have training, make it specific and permit lots of exclusions (like any NRA class, any LEO/Military ID, hunter safety course, etc.).

 

[Jaybeez]

No exercise of the 2nd amendment any place that is dedicated to the exercise of the 1st amendment, 5th, 6th or 7th amendments.

got it. makes perfect sense. md hates us.

 

[Inigoes]

Virginia or Utah should be our model, or at worst, Texas and Florida.

PA model for the win.

 

[fightinbluhen51]

PA model for the win.

Yes...forgot our Quaker neighbors.

 

[Minuteman]

This entire 'special session' is suspect. The Maryland Comptroller (a Democrat) is even suspicious about it. Here is an email he's sent around today:

"As you know, the General Assembly is convening today for its second special session in the past three months, primarily to pave the way for a Las Vegas-style casino in Prince George’s County and around-the-clock table games at Maryland’s current gambling sites.

Due to the highly irregular occurrence of convening a special session to benefit a single industry, and in the interest of transparency, I sent a letter yesterday to the governor and members of the General Assembly requesting that they voluntarily disclose all contributions they have received for any and all affiliated campaign accounts from national gambling interests. Based on my work with taxpayers throughout the State, I'm aware of the growing public suspicion that this special session is not about jobs, revenue or public reinvestment, but rather an illustration of the corrosive effects of special interest money in our political system. We simply can’t afford this pervasive cynicism to erode public confidence in our institutions of state government. During the regular 90 day session, current campaign finance reports of public officials are open to public scrutiny; however, this special session doesn’t provide this basic level of transparency and legitimacy without the voluntary disclosure I’ve requested.

READ THE FULL LETTER TEXT

It’s my hope that this modest gesture of transparency would alleviate public suspicion of the domination of corrosive special interests over our legislative process, and would send a powerful message about Maryland’s commitment to progressive values.
Sincerely, Peter"

Here's his letter to O'Malley: http://www.franchot.com/files/8.8.12 Special Session Letter_1.pdf
Where he say's in part: "The mere act of convening a special session for the benefit of a single industry is highly irregular. .... I would respectfully encourage you, as well as all members of the Maryland General Assembly, to voluntarily disclose all contributions from national gambling interests that have been received by all of your personal and affiliated committees from the date of their most recent reports."

 

[gmhowell]

I believe it would kill it, which is (I think) the real reason for this bill. Restrictions galore, training requirements (even to renew), and then they will just add back G&S next year. It's for the children!

This is it in a nutshell. Read the very last section. Something about "this is emergency legislation, essential to the state's interests, blah, blah, blah". It takes effect immediately upon signature. That is an attempt to moot the Woolard case ASAFP. The decision prohibits G&S and similar arbitrary criteria in the future. Immediately after passage, Gansler et al. move to vacate the decision as moot. Then, in the GA next Winter/Spring, G&S comes back in.

Other than this, the most troubling aspect has already been pointed out: the future nature of at least two important aspects. One was the police getting to make up training. I like that it looks to be cost free, but there is no reason given for training, no guidelines for the police to use in development, no mandate that it is easily and universally available, etc, etc, etc. There was another section, grounds for exemption. Lets see those. Is that in existing law? Oh, wait, found it. It could easily be interpreted that people who already have a permit don't need training going forward. The special people of the state, of course.

Ray, another good letter. Might I suggest changing your reference to the Police Training Commission from 'unelected representatives' to 'unaccountable members of the government'? Or even 'unelected government officials'? Basically, I'd like to eliminate the word 'representative', as they represent nobody but themselves and the State (capital form of the word intended).

 

[MDFF2008]

PA model for the win.

If you mean training; yes.

If you mean how they let each county issue permits, F**K NO!

 

[Lou45]

Pretty much. You could fill in the rest of those places with a little more Googling. Like the US Congress shootings a few years back, where the guard was killed.

It's illustrative of the mindset.

I won't damn this, but will say it's a bad bill in its current form.

THIS ^^^ THIS ^^^ THIS ^^^

Not sure I agree completely - another viable option is to negotiate the content of the bill by supplying our own amendments through our own representation.

I don't think this ^^^ will happen during this current special few day session. I believe the best thing to do, contrary to the immediate above and below quoted posts, is to kill SB21 and pursue a more desirably related bill in the near future as it will show the State (MD) that we mean business and WON'T settle for a frivilous "feel good" CCW bill that we will have very little to gain regarding our 2A rights. IMO, this bill equates to throwing a toothpick to a drowning person for them to grab ahold.

KILL SB21 and let's start over. I think this will show the State we won't settle.

Agreed.

If this bill (big if, in my opinion) passes, it seems better than the current status quo. It will allow people who really want to (myself included) to get carry permits, when we could not previously due to not having the "good fortune" to have been robbed, beaten, or violated in some way, (/sarcasm) or be friends with a politician.

Then we can work on relaxing or removing the more onerous restrictions.

Easier to get? Maybe.

Easier to keep? Less certain.

Actually be able to carry? NFL. See the new section at the end of the bill.

It may be easier to stop a bad bill, than to fix it once it's enacted.

THIS AGAIN ^^^

That's already in work, and might already be done. We're waiting on a few things before calling it. The only way this passes is with a concerted effort from many folks who seemed surprised it showed up. Right now we've been poking this with sharp sticks and keeping it in the corner. If it breaks out of Rules, we'll go with much more vigor.

I am more concerned with this coming back in January. It's smartly written and could pass if we were not vigilant.

As for CA4 or the legislature, I will say that Mr. Gura has told us to get what we can from the legislature anytime we can get it. He has a lot of steam in the other circuits already built. Realistically Woollard will not be the first to ask for cert, so if we could get practical carry from the GA next session we'd take it. That would avoid stays and Supreme Court games, and leave open the door to more if SCOTUS came back real strong in late 2013. During that time, we'd be carrying.

MSI wants practical carry, though. We're not taking something like this because it means we can make a claim. We need it to be practical to our lifestyles and protective of our rights, and not dangerous to practice. This bill would not cut it.

If they want to talk, we can talk. But we're not interested in becoming the "Most Restrictive Shall-Issue state in the Union". Let's join the club of states that do it right.

You definately have the right idea

First round of email away, posted below.

Note: I decided NOT to go full napalm on this round. (I'm sure some in here will take care of that quite nicely!) Instead, since we haven't yet talked directly to Delegate Ferguson, we don't know for sure whether he's a proxy for Frosch, or just simply but naively trying to find some middle ground. To be sure the bill as currently written is bad and must be killed, but I elected to come back with a reasonable response in case he sincerely would like a reasonable alternative. Give him the benefit of the doubt - until we know otherwise... So with that caveat aside, here is my first email to him:

Your email was spot on.

 

[hodgepodge]

The key bad thing in the porposed bill is the undefined "training" left to the discretion of the MSP. We know how that works out.

I think this is not currently supported by the leadership and it will die in the Special Session.

But stay tuned for January!

 

[Mr H]

This entire 'special session' is suspect. The Maryland Comptroller (a Democrat) is even suspicious about it. Here is an email he's sent around today

Dang...

I may need to carry around my Louis Goldstein coin for a few days in honor of this!!

That was an amazing example of putting your position above politics.

 

[Inigoes]

If you mean training; yes.

If you mean how they let each county issue permits, F**K NO!

Anyone should be able to walk into a MSP barracks, fill out a one page form, pay $$, get a picture taken, and walk out with a carry permit.

 

[Hopalong]

No exercise of the 2nd amendment any place that is dedicated to the exercise of the 1st amendment, 5th, 6th or 7th amendments.

got it. makes perfect sense. md hates us.

That's a pretty neat way of summing that up I think.

This entire 'special session' is suspect. The Maryland Comptroller (a Democrat) is even suspicious about it. Here is an email he's sent around today:

Good on him. Always follow the money. Always.

 

[Docster]

Didn't get a chance to read through the entire thread, but I would suggest we defer to the advise of Patrick since he's closer to this than most and has not led us astray. Until we know if the bill is even going to be dealt with during this session just pressure our delegates respectfully and factually until more needs to be done.

 

[Kimerazor]

Sorry, I don't subscribe to that sort of tinfoil hat pessimism. If that were the prevailing attitude in Md, there would be no hunting, no ranges to belong to, and I would not currently own the weapons I now posess.

Yes, this state is more restrictive than some, or most, if you must, but it is also less restrictive than some. The reactionary wings of BOTH SIDES of this issue are to blame, but with time and patience, I believe an accord acceptable to all can be reached.

I don't have a tinfoil hat, & this is NOT exaggeration. Many legislators do want ALL guns removed from the people.

So, we need to press hard & not settle. We know their motives & many of their tactics. They'll re-write laws to get around the current ruling.

They will not just give up. Don't kid yourself.


NRA Life Member
SAF Life Member
GRRN Supporter

 

[kharris]

Email sent, auto reply received

 

[Lou45]

Dang...

I may need to carry around my Louis Goldstein coin for a few days in honor of this!!

That was an amazing example of putting your position above politics.

Yep, I agree. Franchot wrote that and I'm somewhat surprised.

The "thing" I didn't like in his letter was the use of the word "progressive"; I think we all know what that means to the leftists.