Bill Status Thread

[esqappellate]

But you have not faced problems before, right? Your occupation is (in general) one of the accepted reasons to be issued a permit based on current law.
I'm certainly interested in your results and hope that it works out for you, but have no reason to think that it won't. Now, if you were simply to list self defense as your G&S,...

Were that only true! Yes, I got a lot of push back. And no, I did *not* get an unrestricted occupational permit. The attitude at the time (2 years ago) was to deny regardless of the facts. I am hoping that has changed. We shall see.

 

[LCPIWB]

Not quite dead yet. Since it's cross filed, if no amendments are made, it could pass both chambers until nearly sine die for the governors signature.

Then again, chances of this happening are (and have always been) about .00000001%.

Can you elaborate? Is there something special about cross-filed bills?
If it gets desk drawer-ed by House Judicary(check) and desk drawer-ed by Senate Judicial Proceedings (check) then it will never be up for a vote to the General Assembly. Correct? no?

 

[esqappellate]

The perception that attorneys get a pass on G&S is incorrect. Unlike being a legislator (Jack McCauley has stated the MSP considers a legislator to have an inherent G&S), just being an attorney is not an "automatic" G&S based on profession/position alone. Of course depending on their particular practice, and the people they represent and the people they oppose (and really piss off), attorneys may very well have a G&S (I would say even more so than a State delegate or senator), but it hasn't been automatic. They may also be a "business owner" to satisfy G&S. Just another example of the arbitrary process. Legislator yes, attorney no, doctor maybe, business owner yes, etc.

Second, just my two cents worth, under the current climate if the MSP is to start treating "self-defense" (absent SB100 prying itself out of Zirkin's drawer and passing) as G&S, I think any applicant would be better off articulating a basis for that self-defense as opposed to just stating self-defense period. I don't like it, but I tend to think if you articulate a basis for the self-defense in lieu of just a bald claim of self-defense, you'd have a better chance. I am not saying provide a particular threat to satisfy the traditional G&S, but do more than just say self-defense. Just me speculating, nothing to actually back this up. My thought is that for the near future you are stuck with establishing G&S, even if MSP starts treating self-defense as acceptable, so you are better off making your argument. Unfortunately, under the current unconstitutional system a permit is a privilege not a right.

All of this is correct. And I agree completely with the approach. Articulate, if you can, the reason for self-defense (other than it is your right). It is not very satisfactory, but I am of the view that the more folks out there with a permit the better off we all are. One additional person is better than none.

 

[ShallNotInfringe]

Can you elaborate? Is there something special about cross-filed bills? If it gets desk drawer-ed by House Judicary(check) and desk drawer-ed by Senate Judicial Proceedings (check) then it will never be up for a vote to the General Assembly. Correct? no?

Cross filed bills do not need to pass either chamber by Crossover Day, which was yesterday. Correct, neither chamber can even bring it up for a vote in committee, therefore, never reaching the respective floor for a vote. I am sure "The Mikes" control what gets voted on in committee very tightly, and they have no intention of supporting any pro-2A bills.

 

[Abacab]

You did. Frosh submitted the bill, and then performed surgery on it right there in his committee. IIRC, it went from one feature to two feature, thumbhole stocks got removed as a banned feature, and the infamous transportation clause got clarified to not be horrible. It was something of a surprise to everyone at the time, believe me.

I was there at the time. I just disagree with your use of the verb "gutted." Frosh and his committee tweaked the bill to pick up votes.

The HJC came closer to "gutting" it but I still think that's a stretch. It was significantly watered down for sure.

Rarely do you see a bill changed in committee with the intent of killing it when it leaves. The far more logical choice is to kill it in committee. Why amend it to kill it and send it to the full House/Senate when they can just undue the damage on their respective floors? You kill the bill with an unfavorable report. We didnt have the votes, simple as that.

Sure, there are plenty of examples of 'poison pill' amendments being used to kill legislation. The Democrat leadership had no intention of scuttling this bill. They did everything they needed to collect as many votes as possible.

For the record, I don't disagree with most of what you're saying.

 

[Schipperke]

So far I haven't seen anything added to any of the bill pages.

Regardless I'm mailing my application this week with Self-defense as my G&S.

The following has been stated before;

“Living in a high-crime area is not sufficient to establish the good cause.”

So I'm willing to bet visiting or working in those areas are no cause as well. I've read Maryland seems to value cash more than your life, go that angle. Maybe they are more inclined to make sure their tax revenue is protected.

 

[LCPIWB]

Cross filed bills do not need to pass either chamber by Crossover Day, which was yesterday. Correct, neither chamber can even bring it up for a vote in committee, therefore, never reaching the respective floor for a vote. I am sure "The Mikes" control what gets voted on in committee very tightly, and they have no intention of supporting any pro-2A bills.

Ahh, thank you. I think it clicked in my brain now what you mean. (Just that I did not understand before).
Because it is cross-filed, as long as no amendments to the bill as filed, it could potentially be voted on in the respective committee, if vote favorable out of committee and then voted on in the respective side of the general assembly.
All makes sense now.

 

[erwos]

I was there at the time. I just disagree with your use of the verb "gutted." Frosh and his committee tweaked the bill to pick up votes.

Hmm. I see where you're coming from. To me, the move from a one feature test to a two feature test was huge and represented a very large concession even before the fight against it had ramped up to full volume. One feature tests are frigging horrible, and nearly impossible to work around in a sane way. Two features... that's doable. Not fun, but it doesn't reduce us to CA-style abominations. To me, that was a major, major change. Perhaps others didn't see it quite the same way, which is fair enough.

 

[makijo]

So I have a question, since none of the pro 2a bills seem to have made it out of committee, what are the chances of a citizen taking out a full page editorial calling out the committee members and the chairmen? Let the people of the FREE STATE (??) know just how little they care about our rights. Maybe if people saw who was responsible for holding back the rights of the citizens, some may do something to change it.

 

[NoMoreTreadingOnUs]

So I have a question, since none of the pro 2a bills seem to have made it out of committee, what are the chances of a citizen taking out a full page editorial calling out the committee members and the chairmen? Let the people of the FREE STATE (??) know just how little they care about our rights. Maybe if people saw who was responsible for holding back the rights of the citizens, some may do something to change it.

I like that idea. The language and tone would need to be clear and compelling and as "centrist"-sounding as possible.

 

[Gryphon]

"Bobby Zirkin doesn't think your fundamental right to self-defense is good and substantial
Let him know otherwise by holding him accountable for failing to allow a vote on SB100.
(410) 841-3131, (301) 858-3131, 1-800-492-7122, ext. 3131 (toll free)
or just email Bobby @ bobby.zirkin@senate.state.md.us"

 

[moojersey]

"Bobby Zirkin doesn't think your fundamental right to self-defense is good and substantial.
Let him know otherwise (410) 841-3131, (301) 858-3131
1-800-492-7122, ext. 3131 (toll free) or
e-mail: bobby.zirkin@senate.state.md.us"

I like it

 

[moojersey]

I like that idea. The language and tone would need to be clear and compelling and as "centrist"-sounding as possible.

Because that has worked so well for us right ? Wouldn't want to make them mad would we ?

 

[makijo]

I like that idea. The language and tone would need to be clear and compelling and as "centrist"-sounding as possible.

Because that has worked so well for us right ? Wouldn't want to make them mad would we ?

My thought is make them look as bad as they are, especially the chairmen, because ultimately they are the ones responsible for desk-drawering the bills. I would use very strong and concise language to show they care nothing about the people of this state with regards to protection from the thugs who don't care about laws. I will gladly construct the editorial and post here for comments before going forward.

 

[moojersey]

My thought is make them look as bad as they are, especially the chairmen, because ultimately they are the ones responsible for desk-drawering the bills. I would use very strong and concise language to show they care nothing about the people of this state with regards to protection from the thugs who don't care about laws. I will gladly construct the editorial and post here for comments before going forward.

I think it is a great idea and would contribute $$$ to that cause. Frankly, I'm tired of people who are scared and want to play nice with these assholes down in Annapolis. Also tired that the urban centers run this state while having nothing in common with the values of the rural sectors such as where I happen to live.

 

[Gryphon]

Hell with a full page add it could include the verbatim language of the bill itself. It couldn't be simpler. Anyone that can read will understand it and wonder why its a bad idea, and why he won't allow a vote. You may be on to something makijo?

Anyone have any idea what something like that would cost? Maybe it's just the kind of nudge Bobby needs?

Now you really have me thinking. We can include the web address/link for Capt. Jack's live stream testimony!

 

[danb]

What we need is not an ad, but a commitment to unseat Zirkin in 4 years. Keep in mind, most of these idiots ran unopposed in districts Hogan won.

 

[Gryphon]

What we need is not an ad, but a commitment to unseat Zirkin in 4 years. Keep in mind, most of these idiots ran unopposed in districts Hogan won.

True for the long term, but one way to get that started might be an ad to start getting the word out early? I was incredibly encouraged by all the testimony, and the lack of any meaningful opposition, but Zirkin ought to be held accountable now and later if he doesn't allow a vote. To me it wouldn't be about making him look bad, just holding him accountable. Let the readers decide for themselves.

 

[NoMoreTreadingOnUs]

My thought is make them look as bad as they are, especially the chairmen, because ultimately they are the ones responsible for desk-drawering the bills. I would use very strong and concise language to show they care nothing about the people of this state with regards to protection from the thugs who don't care about laws. I will gladly construct the editorial and post here for comments before going forward.

I may have misunderstood the OP idea. If running an ad before the end of the session, I agree with using the strongest language possible. I thought OP was talking longer-term, e.g. as part of an effort to unseat Zirkin, which will require appealing to many that are either apathetic or currently anti.

 

[makijo]

I say now and then, now to shame them for what they could have done and instead did nothing, and then when it is time to unseat the idiot. Below is what I sent to both Zirkin and Vallario.

"I find it despicable and reprehensible that you would deny the people of Maryland a vote in the general assembly on the gun bills presented to your committee. Your actions are the exact reason million of people flee this state, you think of no one but yourselves and how will this affect my chance at re-election. Well let me explain, I for one will be be letting the people of this state know what you and your committee members have done to trample the free exercise of our 2nd amendment rights. I will make sure as many people as possible know that you as the chairman, simply desk drawered the bills and never let them come up for a vote. I will let the people know that you care more about the thugs, who don't care about laws, than laws that would make the thugs think twice."