PDA

View Full Version : Maryland proposes ridiculous anti-2A legislation


Syntax Error
02-14-2010, 3:59 PM
EDITORIAL: Gun owners in cross hairs (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/12/gun-owners-in-the-cross-hairs/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_must-read-stories-today)

The gun grabbers are at it again in Maryland. Next month, the state's House Judiciary Committee will initiate hearings on legislation forcing firearms enthusiasts to register with the state government before they can exercise their Second Amendment rights.

The plan, drafted by Delegate Samuel I. Rosenberg, Baltimore Democrat, and Sen. Brian E. Frosh, Montgomery County Democrat, would mandate that citizens carry a special license while conducting any number of routine transactions involving a gun.

To obtain a gun license, a person must fill out a long application form, attend a comprehensive firearms safety course, pay a nonrefundable fee to the state and wait 30 days for the completion of a criminal background check. If all items are processed properly, the Maryland State Police would drop the license in the mail.

It would become a crime to go to a gun range and rent a firearm for a little target shooting without this license in hand. Out-of-state visitors who might want to keep up their skills while on vacation would be out of luck under the proposal because they would not even be allowed to apply for a state gun license.

The bill would make it a crime on par with murder, kidnapping, rape and extortion for a private party to sell his own gun to someone who has no license. It also would give police the authority to seize the e-mail, cell phone and other records of anyone merely suspected of selling or renting a gun in Maryland without a license. This is an extreme reaction to conduct that is perfectly legal in most states and should be a constitutional right anywhere in the Land of the Free.

It's obvious that Mr. Rosenberg and Mr. Frosh are not really interested in stopping criminals from obtaining weapons. Instead, this misguided proposal plainly is designed to harass legitimate gun owners with bureaucracy and paperwork until they simply give up on the idea of exercising their legal rights. Readers should let the measure's proponents know what they think. Mr. Frosh is available at 301/ 858-3102, brian.frosh@senate.state.md.us, and Mr. Rosenberg can be reached at 301/858-3179, samuel.rosenberg@ house.state.md.us.

I'm curious what the idiots that proposed such legislation hope to solve by taking such an extreme stance on firearms? If passed, it would almost make California look "free"! :mad:

bwiese
02-14-2010, 4:01 PM
I don't know why they think they're being smart, when that's walking distance from Alan Gura's office.

Foulball
02-14-2010, 4:08 PM
I don't know why they think they're being smart, when that's walking distance from Alan Gura's office.

Heh

Not a whole ton of thinking going on over there.

chrisw
02-14-2010, 4:11 PM
the anti gunners will never learn. I think there is already a license like this in place...the United States Constitution.

Gray Peterson
02-14-2010, 4:33 PM
I don't know why they think they're being smart, when that's walking distance from Alan Gura's office.

Because you CANT FIX STUPID!

7x57
02-14-2010, 4:35 PM
I don't know why they think they're being smart, when that's walking distance from Alan Gura's office.

At some point Alan is going to have to become a government agency, since he'll be the single largest recipient of state and federal funds in the nation. :43:

7x57

Buckeye Dan
02-14-2010, 4:57 PM
This resembles the Illinois FOID. It's more strict but on the same principle. How's that working out for them? If we could donate Chicago to Canada our firearm and crime rate statistics would plummet so far below the global numbers it would scare the anti gunners.

pitchbaby
02-14-2010, 4:58 PM
Heh

Not a whole ton of thinking going on over there.

Not even half a ton!!!

bigcalidave
02-14-2010, 5:12 PM
How long is it gonna take for him to get paid for heller?

N6ATF
02-14-2010, 5:22 PM
Two...



decades.

Pension.

AndrewMendez
02-14-2010, 5:29 PM
Its Maryland, what do you expect. The are buried in snow, and have nothing better to do. 30 days is incredible.
Can you imagine the lawsuit, when a law abiding citizen has to wait the 30 days, and on the 29th someone breaks into his home and kills him!?

yellowfin
02-14-2010, 5:52 PM
How's it working out in Illinois, you ask? Perfectly well, as no anti gun politicians get beaten in elections. That's all they care about. Not crime, not getting sued, not expense, but power. Not a single other thing, not now not ever. So long as anti gun laws pay off with power, they'll keep after it with complete abandon.

RP1911
02-14-2010, 7:16 PM
This from a guy in NJ.

"Here on the other coast I have to apply for a handgun permit for every gun, can take 3-4 weeks !!!"

Alaric
02-14-2010, 7:32 PM
Until we, as the 2A community, can being to effectively fight this sort of legislation in this press and within the legislatures themselves, we will continue to play a delayed catch up game in the courts.

yellowfin
02-14-2010, 8:03 PM
^ We're playing catch up because we didn't start opposing it with any significance until after '86 at best. That means the antis had an uninterrupted head start all the way from 1911, 75 years at very least. It took way too long.

Alaric
02-14-2010, 8:06 PM
^ We're playing catch up because we didn't start opposing it with any significance until after '86 at best. That means the antis had an uninterrupted head start all the way from 1911, 75 years at very least. It took way too long.

Im not disputing that we're playing catch up, I'm saying we will continue to be, until we change our tactics.

yellowfin
02-14-2010, 8:20 PM
Agreed, I'm just reinforcing that's how far behind we actually are, that we're not caught up until we fix problems dating to 1911. We had better attack it soon and decisively.

jdberger
02-14-2010, 8:34 PM
I don't know why they think they're being smart, when that's walking distance from Alan Gura's office.

Maybe they're running a budget surplus...:cool:

MP301
02-14-2010, 9:37 PM
This from a guy in NJ.

"Here on the other coast I have to apply for a handgun permit for every gun, can take 3-4 weeks !!!"

Es GF lives in NJ and she says in her jurisdiction it could take months!

press1280
02-15-2010, 2:31 AM
I may be giving those politicians too much credit, but does anyone think they know the time is almost up(McDonald), so they'll ram through as much garbage so it'll take years to undo the damage piece by piece?

Kharn
02-15-2010, 5:25 AM
Frosh, one of the writers of this bill, is the head of the Judiciary committee in the MD Senate and is given the ability to desk-drawer any bill he does not like, preventing it from coming up for a committee vote (MD Senate does not have a discharge petition rule). He's been desk-drawering our shall-issue CCW bills for years even though we have enough votes on the floor of both the House and Senate to pass it and possibly even enough for a veto override. One man. :mad:This resembles the Illinois FOID. It's more strict but on the same principle. How's that working out for them? If we could donate Chicago to Canada our firearm and crime rate statistics would plummet so far below the global numbers it would scare the anti gunners.What the editorial does not mention is the bill also would require anyone that wants to be able to buy a gun have their driver's license amended with a notation on the front that states the person is eligible to own a firearm, not a separate card like in IL. So anytime you get carded, everyone would see the 'gun owner' notation right next to your organ donor status, in addition to acquiring a permit to purchase each firearm. Gura's going to make money from MD, its only a matter of time.

dantodd
02-15-2010, 5:39 AM
Because you CANT FIX STUPID!

No but Alan has found a way to tax it.

OC4ME
02-15-2010, 6:17 AM
...Maryland, good crab, not much else good in Maryland though.

RandyD
02-15-2010, 6:37 AM
This restriction on firearm owners is a clear indication to the U.S. Supreme Court what can happen if they do not incorporate the Second Amendment.

campperrykid
02-15-2010, 8:34 AM
The bill is dumber than dirt. I gotta wonder: how many co-sponsors does it have ?

press1280
02-15-2010, 9:05 AM
The bill is dumber than dirt. I gotta wonder: how many co-sponsors does it have ?
I only see the one sponsor for the senate version and one for the house version. On the other hand, the pure "shall-issue" bill has 39 co-sponsors(there are 141 delegates total,so about 30% of the house is co-sponsoring), but the MD folks know even if the votes are there, one anti head of the right commitee can block it.
If you all remember the Jessica's Law problems in many states was because of 1 committee chair being able to block it. I wish they'd not let ONE single person hold up important votes like this.
BTW:March 11th is when a few of these laws will heard.

N6ATF
02-15-2010, 9:11 AM
Frosh, one of the writers of this bill, is the head of the Judiciary committee in the MD Senate and is given the ability to desk-drawer any bill he does not like, preventing it from coming up for a committee vote (MD Senate does not have a discharge petition rule). He's been desk-drawering our shall-issue CCW bills for years even though we have enough votes on the floor of both the House and Senate to pass it and possibly even enough for a veto override. One man.

Not even one man. A pitiful excuse for a man, a traitor, who violates his oath to the Constitution 24/7/365, and deserves revocation of citizenship and U.S. residency at the least, capital punishment under Article III, Section 3 at most.

kermit315
02-15-2010, 9:11 AM
In the wake of incorporation, this would be nullified (or, more properly, it would go to court and be overturned), no? If thats the case, what do you think the chances would be to get FOID killed at the same time. I would love to not have to have a FOID card anymore.

lomalinda
02-15-2010, 9:14 AM
"Frosh is an ardent supporter of gun control laws[1]. He has publicly stated that anyone who wishes to carry a gun (who is not a LEO) is "nuts"[2]. As committee chairman, Frosh has repeatedly used a technique called the "desk drawer veto", the practice by which a Committee Chairperson can single-handedly prevent a piece of legislation from being voted on. He is accused by his many detractors of "vetoing" bills with which he personally disagrees or that would hurt his personal injury law firm's business. One such bill is HB420 (which passed unanimously in the MD House), which would grant homeowners civil immunity from lawsuits by a criminal who injures himself during a home invasion[3]. Frosh's critics claim that he has a conflict of interest since his law firm would lose clients should this civil immunity bill pass, which is potentially the reason why he has done everything to prevent it from being passed into law."

Unsure if this is true, but would be very interesting if it were...

Bhobbs
02-15-2010, 9:47 AM
I seem to remember treasoners being hanged in public not being elected to state or federal government positions.

dixieD
02-15-2010, 10:12 AM
Doesn't this violate the 4th, 5th and 14th amendments as well as the "original" intent of the commerce clause?

I edited this because I am not an attorney, and I am wondering the correctness of my claim. I would like to be able to make more cogent argument when this inevitably comes up around the office water cooler.

Violation of the 2A - clearly the intent of the proposed legislation

Violation of the 4th - seizure of email and cell records based on mere suspicion is an unreasonable search

Violation of the 5th - I think that I am wrong here.

Violation of the 14th - ok jumping the gun here until the McDonald decision, but how about equal protection with the argument that visitors to the state are denied the opportunity to visit a gun range and practice and in fact place themselves in jeopardy by attempting to, violation of the right to privacy by requiring the firearm license be printed on a publicly viewable document such as a drivers license?

Commerce Clause - requiring a license disallowing an out of state individual to rent a firearm at a range, law will impact sales at range and therefore commerce by out of state vendors for range equipment and shooting accessories, opening up out of state sellers of firearms to financial penalty and jail time for not having the impossibly obtained Maryland State license; subject a Maryland seller to penalty and jail time for selling a firearm through private transfer to someone from out of state.

campperrykid
02-15-2010, 10:15 AM
I only see the one sponsor for the senate version and one for the house version. On the other hand, the pure "shall-issue" bill has 39 co-sponsors(there are 141 delegates total,so about 30% of the house is co-sponsoring), but the MD folks know even if the votes are there, one anti head of the right commitee can block it.
If you all remember the Jessica's Law problems in many states was because of 1 committee chair being able to block it. I wish they'd not let ONE single person hold up important votes like this.
BTW:March 11th is when a few of these laws will heard.

39 against 2 , so far anyway. Could be a lot worse.

campperrykid
02-18-2010, 2:40 PM
Anything that's not bad news drifts away?

blacksheep
02-18-2010, 2:44 PM
EDITORIAL: Gun owners in cross hairs (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/12/gun-owners-in-the-cross-hairs/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_must-read-stories-today)



I'm curious what the idiots that proposed such legislation hope to solve by taking such an extreme stance on firearms? If passed, it would almost make California look "free"! :mad:

Is this similar to F.O.I.D card ( firearms owner identification card ) that Illinois has ?