2013 HB 107 - FIREARMS – DETACHABLE MAGAZINES – MAXIMUM CAPACITY FOR AMMUNITION

[MJD438]

I urge everyone to calm down and support this legislation. However, I would not support anything more aggressive than this.

Also, I would make it clear to our elected officials that while you can support this you wouldn't support anything more aggressive.

Personally, I highly disagree with this approach. This is nothing more than a "feel good" emotional response to an issue that serves as the camel's nose under the wall of the tent. Reducing magazine sizes will devastate businesses in the state, without doing anything to curb the "gun violence" issue - as already mentioned in this thread, most modern semi-automatic firearms do not come with compliant size magazines from the manufacturer. This is a de facto ban on semi-automatic firearms without declaring it as such.

 

[HumbleEinstein]

Personally, I highly disagree with this approach. This is nothing more than a "feel good" emotional response to an issue that serves as the camel's nose under the wall of the tent. Reducing magazine sizes will devastate businesses in the state, without doing anything to curb the "gun violence" issue - as already mentioned in this thread, most modern semi-automatic firearms do not come with compliant size magazines from the manufacturer. This is a de facto ban on semi-automatic firearms without declaring it as such.

Regardless to what your wishes are, we're getting something soon. It can either be this or something much much more restrictive like what was just passed in NY. If you want to have any political sway and not be cast aside as being out of touch, you have to accept reasonable change. Once again, I urge everyone to take this position. What we want to avoid here is a retroactive bill. We should be willing to give up a lot of conveniences in order to avoid something retroactive.

 

[Cig Sour]

Who are the legislators in Annapolis whom would be considered "fence sitters" on this issue? We may have a better chance of success by targeting (no pun intended) these legislators. The legislators who sit on these powerful committees . Your hard core freedom hating O Malley boot licking lefties will never be pursuaded. It maybe a wasted effort trying to convince them. I'm not too familiar with the personalities and political leanings of most of our legislators.Any names come to mind?

 

[aquaman]

Regardless to what your wishes are, we're getting something soon. It can either be this or something much much more restrictive like what was just passed in NY. If you want to have any political sway and not be cast aside as being out of touch, you have to accept reasonable change. Once again, I urge everyone to take this position. What we want to avoid here is a retroactive bill. We should be willing to give up a lot of conveniences in order to avoid something retroactive.

No. Our rights are not up for compromise, the 2A is a right not a hobby. I suggest you learn the difference. If your not in 100% and want to roll over for the Gov fine. Just stop posting, your doing more harm than good.

 

[Cig Sour]

Oops ... typing in on my Droid

 

[vector03]

I urge everyone to calm down and support this legislation. However, I would not support anything more aggressive than this.

How do you plan on successfully competing in IDPA matches with magazines that only hold 10 rounds?

 

[annihilation-time]

I called the office of Delegate Susan K. McComas, and I wasn't happen to hear that she is open to listening. According to her office, the climate has changed, and she is going to be open minded this year.

If you live in District 35B, Harford County, call and write the Delegate.

Please only respond if you live in District 35B. They will ask for your name and address.

http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmga/f...age&tab=subject6&id=mccomas&stab=01&ys=2013RS

 

[Mr H]

Also, I would make it clear to our elected officials that while you can support this you wouldn't support anything more aggressive.

Disagree completely.

This is a "camel's nose" bill. Incrementalism is the enemy of our rights.

 

[Crawls]

Regardless to what your wishes are, we're getting something soon. It can either be this or something much much more restrictive like what was just passed in NY. If you want to have any political sway and not be cast aside as being out of touch, you have to accept reasonable change. Once again, I urge everyone to take this position. What we want to avoid here is a retroactive bill. We should be willing to give up a lot of conveniences in order to avoid something retroactive.

I disagree. What happened in NY yesterday is different. That legislation was announced; pushed through committee and jammed through the full assembly in a 24 hour period. I don't think many New Yorkers knew what hit them. Here in MD, we have time to to make our voices heard and to point out the absurdity of this proposal. We lose the entire war on "sensible gun control" is we let nonsense be the metric by which we measure sensible.
CJ

 

[Ranchero50]

So what will this law really accomplish?

 

[HumbleEinstein]

No. Our rights are not up for compromise, the 2A is a right not a hobby. I suggest you learn the difference. If your not in 100% and want to roll over for the Gov fine. Just stop posting, your doing more harm than good.

This kind of talk does more harm to our cause than good. There is no 2nd Amendment right to high capacity magazines. I will refer you to the SCOTUS on than.

Vector, IDPA has 10 round limit anyway. That aside, I'll be happy if I can keep the many magazines I already own. And if I have to drive to Virginia to get more, I'm fine with that too.

 

[SigMatt]

HumbleEinstein,

With all due respect, who are you to decide what is acceptable for us? Maryland already has a capacity limit set at 20, ostensibly to limit access to what is perceived as the deadlier so-called "high capacity" magazine. So lowering the limit is very clearly just the next step downward on the ratchet and I don't like that.

Why 10? Most guns, especially handguns, are designed for higher capacities. You think makers are going to build special 7 and 10 round magazines for MD and NY? I doubt it. The point is to drive us into a corner and kill the gun culture. To make us ****ing slaves and servants to their whim.

Do us a favor and not sell us out until after we've had a chance to fight. You want to roll over and give in, fine. Step back, shut up and hold out your wrists to accept your chains. Because tomorrow, after the next tragedy, it will be ****ing New York. Or worse. If I was in New York right now, I'd be pissed because they just declared most of my cabinet and accessories illegal.

That's a taking. They are depriving me of my property, and by extension, hours from my life to acquire that I DON'T GET THEM BACK. Whether you agree with it or not, whether you agree with my need or not, today it is the easy targets, the black rifles and magazines. Tomorrow it is my F-class gun. I, and a lot of us, of have something to lose here.

Maryland has some of the most restrictive gun laws there are and still allow us some sliver of freedom to pursue our hobby, interests and needs of self-defense in peace. I don't like them but the status quo is as far I am willing to accept and work in the future to get that ratchet to move in the other direction for once.

If you believe we're getting this, that's your choice. Let the rest of us fight and get in the faces of those who would deprive us of our property, freedom of association and our 2nd Amendment rights.

The last we need are bloody Quislings in our own ranks. There is no guarantee you're getting eaten last in this one.

Matt

 

[Mr H]

My next letter...

The recent rush to enact new legislation and administrative measures related to "Gun Control" is disturbing (currently notable are the "NY SAFE" bill ramrodded through the New York State Assembly, and the proposed draconian measures in Delaware supported by their Atty. General Beau Biden). These proposed laws and actions are sadly misdirected.

I would like to address two specific concerns which, if implemented, would serve no purpose other than to disarm law-abiding citizens, and create a further imbalance giving criminals an additional advantage over the protection of our families, homes, and businesses.

With regard to Del. Gutierrez's HB 107, there are inconsistencies in the summary which indicate a very poor bill is forthcoming.

As written, the restrictions emplaced would create criminal conditions for currently lawful citizens who own semi-automatic handguns for personal protection and target practice, or sporting rifles for home defense, recreational use and organized competition. It also appears to provide a bargaining chip for criminals who would use a weapon (which would rarely if at all be the euphemistic "assault weapon"), to be able to plead to a lesser charge. This seems to be a theme for Del. Gutierrez, who supported the restoration of firearm rights for convicted felons back in 2007.

The National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) recently issues a release regarding their concerns for this 2013 General Assembly session, and Governor O'Malley's suspected attempt to enact rights-killing legislation which would damage the Constitutional condition of millions of Marylanders. Of note in their release is the following:


O’Malley’s extremist gun control package would include the following:

· An across-the-board ban on commonly owned semi-automatic firearms
· Restrict magazine capacity to no more than ten rounds
· Require a state permit to purchase a firearm which would be obtained after prospective gun purchasers complete a mandatory gun safety class, submit their fingerprints to a state-run database, and undergo a state-funded background check
· Broaden the list of disqualifying mental health criteria and conditions
· Grant police additional authority to confiscate firearms
· Require an additional federal background check at the time of purchase
· Impose a seven-day waiting period before a purchaser can take possession of their firearm

O’Malley’s proposed legislation over-reaches and misses the mark. It will do nothing to stop crime and will only penalize the law-abiding.

I will not go point-by-point here, but suffice that nearly all of these will do nothing to make the individual or the citizenry safer, and in the broad scheme amount to nothing more than a near-universal elimination of Marylanders' Constitutional rights (not only under the Second Amendment, but potentially the 4th, 5th, and 14th).

I correspond regularly with gun owners across the state, and I assure you that they are well aware of these proposed intrusions. You have no doubt already noticed the upwelling of dissent in the letters, calls, and other communications you are receiving.
Removing the personal protection and recreational capabilities of lawful citizens simply to benefit criminals and politicians' idealogical positions--whether at the State or Federal level--is bad law, and bad policy.

Marylanders are paying attention, now more than ever. We are not willing to submit to these overreaches, and will continue making our voices heard.

 

[MDFF2008]

This kind of talk does more harm to our cause than good. There is no 2nd Amendment right to high capacity magazines. I will refer you to the SCOTUS on than.

Vector, IDPA has 10 round limit anyway. That aside, I'll be happy if I can keep the many magazines I already own. And if I have to drive to Virginia to get more, I'm fine with that too.

Actually there is. The 2nd Amendment guarantees us weapons in common use. (Heller vs DC)

Further, are you comfortable with only having 10 chances to defend yourself? Did you see the woman in Georgia who shot a man 5 times, and he drove away? What if she had missed? What if there had been multiple attackers?

Think of it this way. When you buy a fire extinguisher, do you want one that covers 10 feet or 20 feet? With a gun, do you want 10 chances, or 20 chances?

Both defend your home and your life, why cripple one?

 

[MJD438]

Regardless to what your wishes are, we're getting something soon. It can either be this or something much much more restrictive like what was just passed in NY. If you want to have any political sway and not be cast aside as being out of touch, you have to accept reasonable change. Once again, I urge everyone to take this position. What we want to avoid here is a retroactive bill. We should be willing to give up a lot of conveniences in order to avoid something retroactive.

You want to compromise, feel free to do so. I have chosen not to. Your decision is not correct for me and I will not accept the position. This is not reasonable change; it is a backdoor attempt to completely ban semi-automatic firearms and destructive to the firearms business and 2A rights of Maryland citizens.

 

[BenL]

Does anyone have a targeted tool for emailing the appropriate people, or can I just use the tool in my signature?

 

[MJD438]

Does anyone have a targeted tool for emailing the appropriate people, or can I just use the tool in my signature?

If you want to send emails specifically to your reps in the Maryland House, you can use the Legislator links on the MGA website - http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmga/frmmain.aspx?pid=legisrpage&tab=subject6.

 

[vector03]

Vector, IDPA has 10 round limit anyway. That aside, I'll be happy if I can keep the many magazines I already own. And if I have to drive to Virginia to get more, I'm fine with that too.

Don't you see how useless this new law is if you can simply drive out of state to get more?

 

[MDFF2008]

BenL, the tool in your email has links to target the Judicial committee.

 

[BenL]

This kind of talk does more harm to our cause than good. There is no 2nd Amendment right to high capacity magazines. I will refer you to the SCOTUS on than.

Vector, IDPA has 10 round limit anyway. That aside, I'll be happy if I can keep the many magazines I already own. And if I have to drive to Virginia to get more, I'm fine with that too.

I shoot 3 gun. So, f*ck me, I guess?

I will not give an inch. Not one.