MD Gun owners in cross hairs
Maryland legislation requires state approval to buy or rent a firearm
By THE WASHINGTON TIMES
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, firstname.lastname@example.org, and Mr. Rosenberg can be reached at 301/858-3179, samuel.rosenberg@ house.state.md.us.
That is no good. No good at all. It's bad enough that my permit is no good when I go to MD for a wedding this summer.
Lol...stay in VA. Day of the wedding hop over the DMZ to attend, then hop back to VA REALLY FAST!:rolleyes:
Originally Posted by Snowman23
So glad I got out of there when I did.........
Every now and then I think about going back to visit, but then I see something like this.
What else is new?
They can't do anything about the bad guys, so they go after the good guys.
It works the same way on my side of the border too.
They're treating as criminals those who are merely suspected ...
That's about all you need to hear.
Start the emails !!!!! Make the phone calls !!!!!
Where's the NRA on this one ???????????????
Damn it, people! Stop electing these idiots and this wouldn't be a problem!
They work for US, remember? I say, "fire them!"
I'm sick, just sick of all the anti crap. Grass roots, God-fearing, Constitutionalists are who we need to get our country back in order !!!!!
My email was sent, albiet I'm out of state. But nevertheless, time to take action folks !!!
I read the bill and it doesn't seem as bad as portrayed. It places pretty high restrictions on dealers, but it would be really bad if a criminal or someone with criminal intent were able to become a legal dealer.
I like that it doesn't allow anyone to use an unreported "my firearm was lost/stolen" as a defense to a crime. I think all of us on this forum are the responsible type that do realize the dangers of firearms. This bill only seems to reinforce what most, if not all, of us here already practice.
I do not think it's OK to place such high prohibitions on persons under age 21 though. It does allow military and LEO to be exceptions but they are not the only ones under age 21 that can be competent with firearms.
Overall, I think it is a solution to an inacurate problem and probably only help keep honest people honest. It will require a little more on my part to be "legal" but it won't prohibit me from exercising my rights any more than MD currently does.
Now, if only MD would become a shall-isssue state.
All I can say is you must be onea the people that think It's okay to limit magazine capacitys, make it Illegal to own a scary gun,anything that has a barrel shroud or collapsible stock is a nono.Make everybody have to get a license before you can even possess a gun that the Constitution says is a right and then only possess what they think you should have.And when being attacked or robbed just call 911 anything else will get you arrested
Originally Posted by jtmoose
Nope, far from it, I lobby for gun rights. I think gun-bans and "gun free" zones are retarded. The bill just isn't going to prevent me or law abiding citizens (except the under 21 part, which I disagree with) from obtaining any of those things, so it doesn't bother me. Am I willing to pay a small fee and wait a few days for a permit, sure. Am I willing to forfeit the 2nd amendment, DEFINITELY NOT!
Originally Posted by dukalmighty
By agreeing with these things, like waiting for the permit, and paying a fee just to possess a gun, you are forfeiting some of the 2nd A! Don't you see that?
Originally Posted by jtmoose
Let's look at this from a 1st amendment viewpoint:
To obtain a free speech license, a person must fill out a long application form, attend a comprehensive speaking 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 library and borrow a computer for a little writing on forums without this license in hand. Out-of-state visitors who might want to speak while on vacation would be out of luck under the proposal because they would not even be allowed to apply for a state free speech license.
The bill would make it a crime on par with murder, kidnapping, rape and extortion for a private party to sell paper 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 speaking or writing 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.
Nope, not good.
I have to agree. Following the logic of the 2nd Amendment your right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A waiting period and a permit are infringements.
Originally Posted by sigmanluke
Now, I agree that a background check (of the instant variety) is in my opinion a good thing, and I'm willing to put up with this infringement in the hopes that felons will not be able to purchase a firearm over the counter. However I hold no illusion that this will stop them from buying it in a back alley. I would not be against abolishing this check, though I've not done enough research to truly post an opinion either way.
The base issue is that some people are bad and they don't get weeded out of society like they did back in the day. Bad people, given the opportunity, will do bad things. And bad people will generally find a way to do what they want, how they want, with the tools they want. I will not give up my freedoms for anything, especially not something guaranteed to fail.
Before I get flamed or start anything, the above opinions are mine alone and have only been spottily researched. I have no doubt that I'm missing some facts that my sway my opinion in either direction.
In a perfect world I would be saving up for a full-auto rifle of my choice, to be purchased over the counter with no wait or paperwork aside from a receipt. But people are scared or have done stupid things and have ruined it for the rest of us.
↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ :yup: ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ :yup: ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ :yup: ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ :yup: ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ :yup: ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑
Originally Posted by sigmanluke
Absolutely!!! Why would it be OK for the Second and not [see below]?
Try applying the same logic to some of the other 10.
Originally Posted by ak56
Would Searches and Seizures be OK w/o search warrant unless the State police agreed, after a fee and application and the Police said you could be protected????
No Due process; Self-incrimination could forced; Double jeopardy OK unless you had paid the current fee and application you had the protection yourself, not just the rich & well conected???
No Rights to a fair and speedy public trial, to notice of accusations, to confront the accuser, to subpoenas, to counsel w/o out fees and police approval???
No Right to trial by jury in civil cases w/o you buying it???
Excessive bail and fines or cruel & unusual punishment are Ok unless you are one of the anointed???
You do realize that it will likely drive already high prices on firearms higher if it passed.
Originally Posted by jtmoose
Maryland really needs to look at the laws it already has on the books and enforce them rather than just passing more and more restrictive ones.