Kicken Wing
Snakes and Sparklers
I just posted "thanks to all" in another thread. I am going to do the same here. All of you were awesome! It has been written testimony only on my end this year. I am glad to be acquainted with all of you!
Real Time 3/1 Hearing Discussion
- Thread starter hodgepodge
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast
Member Benefits:
No ad networks! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Raineman
On the 3rd box
I figured out watching this today that if I could figure out how to do the zoom thing, it will be much easier to testify and not spend money to travel or take off work.
Clippinger gets whacked out of shape when a witness (against a bill) insinuates the "gun bills" are in response to crime in Baltimore,, while the main witness FOR the bill is a Balt PD Colonel.
Then the next bill sponser introduces his bill,,,,,,, as a needed response to Balt City crime!!!!!
Then the next bill sponser introduces his bill,,,,,,, as a needed response to Balt City crime!!!!!
knovotny
Active Member
Yea, we're just not allowed to point that out. Although to be fair, I think there was no support for the last bill. They know that won't fly.
Please tell me that someone stressed that the Brady Act prohibits the use of NICS for anything other than firearms checks, with a $1,000 penalty per incident for using it for any other purpose?
Please tell me that that someone stressed that ammunition vendors have no access to NICS?
These two points alone, make the ammo background check bill a non-starter.
hodgepodge
Senior Member (Gold)
Yes, it was pointed out.
And Del. Henson, the sponsor, was backpedaling on that part, and other parts, in her introduction before any part was challenged.
I think this ammo check/registration is dead this year, but it will be backed. After all, it's so successful in Chicago and San Francisco.
hodgepodge
Senior Member (Gold)
Del. Lopez had done some homework on her 'ghost gun' bill. And she had a Fudd advising her.
It was amusing to watch her explain how a lower would be made into a rifle.
It would have been more effective if she had milled out the lower, but maybe it's not that easy.
It would have been more effective if she had completed it, but she alluded to the difficulty of finding parts!
But make no mistake, While homemade firearms may be OK, 'ghost guns' are evil and scary and we will continue to fight this.
WE WILL NOT COMPLY.
It was amusing to watch her explain how a lower would be made into a rifle.
It would have been more effective if she had milled out the lower, but maybe it's not that easy.
It would have been more effective if she had completed it, but she alluded to the difficulty of finding parts!
But make no mistake, While homemade firearms may be OK, 'ghost guns' are evil and scary and we will continue to fight this.
WE WILL NOT COMPLY.
knovotny
Active Member
I had to get my dig in that she didn't complete it because she couldn't find the parts.
It's so easy yet I couldn't do it, but trust me it's so easy! Here's the posterior part, this looks like it's where a trigger goes...
It's so easy yet I couldn't do it, but trust me it's so easy! Here's the posterior part, this looks like it's where a trigger goes...
Great, thanks.
You all were tied up in these hearings virtually all day. Whether Zooming from your own home or sitting in the Senate hearing room, it's exhausting. You guys did Herculean work and I am very grateful for your efforts.
Deep Thought
Active Member
Is the video posted somewhere or did they not want to memorialize this embarrassment?
We'll see what the results of this year's crop of bad bills turns out to be, but I'm going to play Devil's Advocate and state maybe the new testimony rules play to our advantage.
In non-COVID years, the testimony signup free-for-all plays to the Anti's advantage for two reasons:
Last go-around, I was watching the body language of the Senate JPC members during testimony. It was really clear that even the anti-gun bill supporters were getting bored and annoyed at the Red Shirts taking several hours to deliver essentially the same emotional, non-factual talking points over and over. What was really telling was Chairman Smith not having the bouncers intervene when the "incident" occurred after Chamblee's rambling speech (IIRC that was SG, right?). Smith looked like he was actually entertained by what was happening, like it was a break for him from the harpy monotony of the previous several hours.
A few, well-crafted arguments against these bills that are backstopped with facts and delivered while the Committee members are still awake can have much more impact that a dozen people giving the same "these bills are awful and pointless" arguments over and over at 10PM. Maybe more impact on the Senate side than the House side because Atterbeary is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MDA, but it only takes one chair to desk drawer or neuter a bill.
The Dems know our side doesn't have the numbers in MD elections, so we need to be able to influence them with hard facts about why what they're proposing won't work and only harms the otherwise law abiding. And the COVID testimony format might actually be playing to our strength and against the Red Shirts' raw numbers game.
Okay, flame on. Let's see how many rotten tomatoes get lobbed my way for saying all that.
In non-COVID years, the testimony signup free-for-all plays to the Anti's advantage for two reasons:
- They can "flood the zone" with huge numbers of astroturfers, stretching out the hearings into the late evening
- The fact that testimony against bills is heard last means that what ever attention span the committees may have had is long exhausted by the time we get to testify; everybody just wants to get it over and go home
Last go-around, I was watching the body language of the Senate JPC members during testimony. It was really clear that even the anti-gun bill supporters were getting bored and annoyed at the Red Shirts taking several hours to deliver essentially the same emotional, non-factual talking points over and over. What was really telling was Chairman Smith not having the bouncers intervene when the "incident" occurred after Chamblee's rambling speech (IIRC that was SG, right?). Smith looked like he was actually entertained by what was happening, like it was a break for him from the harpy monotony of the previous several hours.
A few, well-crafted arguments against these bills that are backstopped with facts and delivered while the Committee members are still awake can have much more impact that a dozen people giving the same "these bills are awful and pointless" arguments over and over at 10PM. Maybe more impact on the Senate side than the House side because Atterbeary is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MDA, but it only takes one chair to desk drawer or neuter a bill.
The Dems know our side doesn't have the numbers in MD elections, so we need to be able to influence them with hard facts about why what they're proposing won't work and only harms the otherwise law abiding. And the COVID testimony format might actually be playing to our strength and against the Red Shirts' raw numbers game.
Okay, flame on. Let's see how many rotten tomatoes get lobbed my way for saying all that.
No flames, but in regards to your statement above, I'm not sure the Dems care because their agenda doesn't deal in facts - it never has. They also fundamentally know that even if pushing bad bills through hurts their population in their effort to achieve their agenda, most of the people who vote to keep them in office are too ignorant to know that those Democratic delegates aren't out for their best interests - they simply lap up what they are spoon fed and regurgitate it back as if it was Gospel. They're too ignorant to look at the facts for what they are.
In a perfect world we could appeal to logic and common sense, but those two attributes are woefully lacking on that side of the aisle.
knovotny
Active Member
Squaregrouper
Kragaphile
Yes, it was me. I did it because of exactly what you stated above... Someone ?Bloomberg? is funding busloads of "antis" to come and testify the same talking point over and over. They even hand out a slip of paper instructing them what to say. They know they can bring in hundreds of people and slow the process to the point we can't even start our testimonies until late at night.
I figured if I became "one of them", I could testify while the senate was actually still listening. (I have no idea how I ended up on the panel of experts for the demanding mommies). I do stand by my statement "I do support this, because if this bill passes, a lot of eyes are going to be opened as to how Maryland treats criminals vs. law abiding citizens." The new long gun transfer law might actually be the one that gets the attention of the Fudds and casual gun owners.
Please remind everyone you know that the new law makes selling a long gun w/o a background check a much bigger crime than stealing the same firearm. This is very important for people to understand.
The Dems, just like the Reps, aren't a group of clones. There are many factions, and individual personalities, and they fight with each other sometimes even more vehemently than they fight the other party. Look back at the selection process last year for the new House Speaker and Senate President. It got really ugly.
There are a few Dems, like Smith on the JPC side, who are ideologically anti-gun, but who can be reasoned with to at least reduce the harm some of these bills can do, and who don't like ambiguous law as a matter of principle. Sort of like with Zirkin before him, he's the Opposition, not necessarily the Enemy. And some of our loudest foes, like Atterbeary and Dumais, have managed to irritate their fellow Dems enough to render themselves ineffective in pushing pet legislation through. Remember Atterbeary's Long Gun Qualification License and how she tried to threaten the Senate JPC Chair for having removed it from the larger long gun background check bill? How'd that work out for her? We're lucky to have enemies like her who get their tightest shot groups when they aim at their own feet.
Yeah, MD gun laws suck and will get worse. But until SCOTUS steps in and eliminates Intermediate Scrutiny for enumerated rights as well as Chevron and other deference, we can use well crafted testimony to hold back or divert the worst of the flood.
Jeff didn't testify. I saw him on Sunday so got a bit of an update. He started a new chemo regimen to hopefully address the golfball-sized cancer metastases in his liver. Really his last chance. He said he would be receiving therapy on Monday through Wednesday (and said it was fine to share this information with others). His attitude is always positive, but he did say his energy was flagging. Anyway, fingers crossed for this 2A warrior.
And agree, we are lucky to have DC-W on our team.
Well, I suppose there is hope, and like you said, sometimes infighting within the part is bad too. It's actually happening already on a national level now that they no longer have "Orange Man Bad" as a united front of solidarity within their party. They swindled their way into getting Trump out of office, and now that he is, they're starting to bicker amongst themselves, particularly AOC and Co.
Attachments
Users who are viewing this thread
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
-
-
-
-
-
Hair-trigger posting... please include more than just the "headline" (2 Viewers)- Started by Mr H
- Replies: 13
-
