Why can't we do this!?!?

[uneven]

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingn...proposal-aimed-at-undoing-ammunition-magazine

"Two Littleton men have filed a proposed ballot measure that seeks to undo proposed legislation that would limit ammunition magazines of more than 15 rounds."

Anyone here familiar with the process of submitting ballot initiatives in Maryland? Seems like a valid weakness in their plan since the majority of Dems tend to miss out on the interim elections anyway, and there are tons of pissed 2A supporters who would camp outside for days for the chance to vote about the issue.

 

[jonnyl]

Even if we could muster enough votes to win something like that, do you really want your civil rights put to a majority vote?

How do you think the question would be worded on a ballot in MD?

Do you believe that law abiding citizens should have the proper tools available to them to protect their families?

OR

Do you think psychos, and wannabe Rambos need weapons of mass destruction and high capacity assault clips, or should we have commons sense restrictions?

NOTE: The second quote is how the anti's in the MD Gov will try to word a ballot referendum.

EDITED: to clarify

 

[uneven]

Even if we could muster enough votes to win something like that, do you really want your civil rights put to a majority vote?

The ban is passing anyway. And it is safe to assume the courts will uphold, at least on the state level, every single piece of it.

Submitting a ballot initiative to amend our state constitution to prevent limitations on magazines for example is not putting civil rights to a vote. It's another tactic to attempt to level the playing field.

 

[pbharvey]

Three reasons we can't do this:
1. gay marriage
2. redistricting
3. in-state tuition for illegal immigrants

A lose, lose, lose for conservative voters.
Maryland_2012_ballot_measures
A ballot question would most likely say, "are you opposed to people slaughtering children with firearms?"

 

[JAY1234]

Even if we could muster enough votes to win something like that, do you really want your civil rights put to a majority vote?

How do you think the question would be worded on a ballot in MD?

Do you believe that law abiding citizens should have the proper tools available to them to protect their families?

OR

Do you think psychos, and wannabe Rambos need weapons of mass destruction and high capacity assault clips, or should we have commons sense restrictions?

I wonder where you are coming from? Wannebe RAMBO's! You sound like a one of the anti-2A people. Do you actually believe our civil rights aren't being attacked by the anti-2A people? The idea of a people vote is appealing because the majority of the people oppose these gun grabbers, whereas the majority of the Maryland politicians support it, thereby letting a few politicians screw the Maryland gun owners. Yes we should have common sense restrictions like putting criminals in prison, providing real time treatment for the mentally ill (ones with criminal intent). Penalizing legal gun owners will NOT reduce gun crime and you are living in a dream world if you believe otherwise.

Weapons of mass destruction are not firearms, so maybe you should research your terminology prior to spewing forth innuendo's that are false.

 

[2AHokie]

The point the other posters are making is that it is unlikely we would win on the ballot. It's pretty unlikely the question would be worded fairly, too.

In the event that we lose, we may also end up accidentally showing our position to be weak (if we lost say 80% to 20%, just to pick numbers) which would simply embolden future attacks on our rights. I don't think support for our position is that low, but it is a possible outcome considering the state in which we live. CO is a much more even D vs. R split (3 total Democrat defections in the CO senate was all they needed to kill any given gun grab bill there) compared to MD.

I'm willing to do whatever MSI advises us to do should SB281 or HB294 pass.

 

[MDFF2008]

I wonder where you are coming from? Wannebe RAMBO's! You sound like a one of the anti-2A people. Do you actually believe our civil rights aren't being attacked by the anti-2A people? The idea of a people vote is appealing because the majority of the people oppose these gun grabbers, whereas the majority of the Maryland politicians support it, thereby letting a few politicians screw the Maryland gun owners. Yes we should have common sense restrictions like putting criminals in prison, providing real time treatment for the mentally ill (ones with criminal intent). Penalizing legal gun owners will NOT reduce gun crime and you are living in a dream world if you believe otherwise.

Weapons of mass destruction are not firearms, so maybe you should research your terminology prior to spewing forth innuendo's that are false.

Calm down.

What the poster is saying is that in Maryland, the government writes the ballot questions so do you think the MD govt will be fair to us or write a nasty question designed to fail?

 

[PJDiesel]

Why was gay marriage a "lose" for Republican voters?

 

[pbharvey]

Why was gay marriage a "lose" for Republican voters?

Its not. I said conservative voters. Traditional marriage is a conservative value.

 

[PJDiesel]

Its not. I said conservative voters. Traditional marriage is a conservative value.

Got it.

I just think of Republican as being hand in hand with conservative. Everything non-conservative is a Democrat though, correct?

 

[Les Gawlik]

The difference to me is that the previous ballot initiatives had highly motivated people on both sides, and at least one of the initiatives was at the time of a national election.

From what I saw in Annapolis, the only highly motivated group is ours. Will Organizing For Feckless Anti-American Liberals (OFFAL) be able to get out the masses in an off year election for one issue? It seems to me to be worth a try. I don't put that much faith in the court system to abide by the Second Amendment.

 

[Mooseman]

Three reasons we can't do this:
1. gay marriage
2. redistricting
3. in-state tuition for illegal immigrants

A lose, lose, lose for conservative voters.
Maryland_2012_ballot_measures
A ballot question would most likely say, "are you opposed to people slaughtering children with firearms?"

What he said.

 

[jonnyl]

I wonder where you are coming from? Wannebe RAMBO's! You sound like a one of the anti-2A people. Do you actually believe our civil rights aren't being attacked by the anti-2A people? The idea of a people vote is appealing because the majority of the people oppose these gun grabbers, whereas the majority of the Maryland politicians support it, thereby letting a few politicians screw the Maryland gun owners. Yes we should have common sense restrictions like putting criminals in prison, providing real time treatment for the mentally ill (ones with criminal intent). Penalizing legal gun owners will NOT reduce gun crime and you are living in a dream world if you believe otherwise.

Weapons of mass destruction are not firearms, so maybe you should research your terminology prior to spewing forth innuendo's that are false.

I think you completely mis-understood my intent. My point is that the anti's will probably be the ones that get to choose the wording of any ballot initiative. The first proposed wording in my post is a question that could likely get majority support, the second wording that you took issue with is my worst imagination on how O'Malley's minions would word the initiative. It IS NOT how I would word it, or how I feel.

To your other points, I absolutely feel that our civil rights are being attacked by the anti's. However, I don't think that civil rights are something that should be up for majority vote. A majority can vote for tyranny over a minority just as easily as a dictator can decree it.

Anyway, read my post again. I think we're on the same side.

 

[kohburn]

The difference to me is that the previous ballot initiatives had highly motivated people on both sides, and at least one of the initiatives was at the time of a national election.

From what I saw in Annapolis, the only highly motivated group is ours. Will Organizing For Feckless Anti-American Liberals (OFFAL) be able to get out the masses in an off year election for one issue? It seems to me to be worth a try. I don't put that much faith in the court system to abide by the Second Amendment.

this:

timing and knowing the opposition is crucial

we could win it this year but not as likely at the next major election

 

[pbharvey]

I just think of Republican as being hand in hand with conservative. Everything non-conservative is a Democrat though, correct?

Not necessarily.
(I'm not taking the bait )

I've met a lot of pro 2A democrats the last several weeks.

I try not to categorize people, it just reinforces my stereotypes.

 

[Mark75H]

We lost, but it was only by a slim margin on most of the ballot initiatives.

They had massive last minute TV & radio ads, we had nothing and it still came down to a few votes


Because they almost lost, they are trying to make new legal requirements for voting on laws .... I repeat because they almost lost they are changing the rules.

This means they are afraid of our ability to vote laws out

We need to keep pressure on our legislators for no petition rule changes, no new gas tax and protection of 2A

As far as whether we SHOULD have a petition ... it would be foolish not to use every tool at our disposal.

 

[Mark75H]

I'm beginning to suspect trolls ... we keep hearing how all the referendums lost ... that they all lost is less relevant than the margin.

Had all of the bills lost by 75-90% it would be relevant ... this was not the case

I have to repeat myself ... it would be foolish not to use every tool at our disposal. Even if we lost at the ballot again, it would not change the effect of the law or the court opinion of it. NOTHING would be lost. If the vote came up close, there would be possibility of revisiting it in the next legislature; it would be a signal from the people that its not over.

 

[MadCat0911]

Three reasons we can't do this:
1. gay marriage
2. redistricting
3. in-state tuition for illegal immigrants

A lose, lose, lose for conservative voters.

23% of democrats and 27% of independents are gun owners, compared to 41% of republicans. (http://www.gallup.com/poll/21496/gun-ownership-higher-among-republicans-than-democrats.aspx)

I see a chance for it to pass, especially if it's on a ballot during a non-presidential campaign year. Who normally votes in a state only election?

 

[gtodave]

I'm beginning to suspect trolls ... we keep hearing how all the referendums lost ... that they all lost is less relevant than the margin.

Had all of the bills lost by 75-90% it would be relevant ... this was not the case

I have to repeat myself ... it would be foolish not to use every tool at our disposal. Even if we lost at the ballot again, it would not change the effect of the law or the court opinion of it. NOTHING would be lost. If the vote came up close, there would be possibility of revisiting it in the next legislature; it would be a signal from the people that its not over.

I don't want anyone else to vote on my right to defend myself. I don't care if 99% of Marylanders would vote with me....the choice isn't theirs.

If this bill passes, we need to fight it in the courts. If we lose there....well, things could get ugly...

 

[Mark75H]

I don't want anyone else to vote on my right to defend myself. I don't care if 99% of Marylanders would vote with me....the choice isn't theirs.

If this bill passes, we need to fight it in the courts. If we lose there....well, things could get ugly...

We can fight it both in court and at ballot, its not an either or situation.

Why should we give up a tool that would nullify an illegal law? We have the right to the ballot as much as to bear

Which other rights would you give up?