Delegate Dwyer to propose bill that prohibits LE from using "banned" firearms

[Ab_Normal]

Not only police and swat... What about MD nat. Guard? They are also a state agency are they not?

SCHWEET!!

They can take their non-civiilian airplanes out of here too.

 

[Bono]

This must be an amendment. The deadline to file new bills for this year has passed.

 

[beafly.cakes]

Enough for what? Remember that you don't know how many rounds you need until AFTER the fact.

I think my sarcasm was lost in translation.

 

[MJD438]

This must be an amendment. The deadline to file new bills for this year has passed.

The deadline does not mean that new bills cannot be introduced. However, it does mean that the bill must pass through the respective Rules Committee to determine if the proposed bill should be allowed to proceed in violation of the deadline. If it passes the Rules Committee, it would then get assigned to the appropriate committee in the respective house.

 

[GRAY GHOST]

I'm imagining SWAT gearing up and pulling bolt-action hunting rifles off a gun rack. I am amused.

bolt action or not fido will still die.

 

[LiberalClassic]

We need to have this debate, and this bill could force the issue. Those who support gun control ignore the fact that the regulations they are proposing could put people at risk. By supporting an armed elite, they are in the position of defending inequality, which is the antithesis of liberalism. They should explain themselves.

 

[FrankOceanXray]

We need to have this debate, and this bill could force the issue. Those who support gun control ignore the fact that the regulations they are proposing could put people at risk. By supporting an armed elite, they are in the position of defending inequality, which is the antithesis of liberalism. They should explain themselves.

That's what I'm talking about

 

[Skins_Brew]

We need to have this debate, and this bill could force the issue. Those who support gun control ignore the fact that the regulations they are proposing could put people at risk. By supporting an armed elite, they are in the position of defending inequality, which is the antithesis of liberalism. They should explain themselves.

solid point.

 

[Brooklyn]

Maybe instead of a separate bill, make it an amendment to every gun grabbing bill brought up?

If this is possible. But it will fail each time. I think I need to learn how ga works anyone know if a recorded vote is recruited for amendment s ?

 

[tinydata]

We need to have this debate, and this bill could force the issue. Those who support gun control ignore the fact that the regulations they are proposing could put people at risk. By supporting an armed elite, they are in the position of defending inequality, which is the antithesis of liberalism. They should explain themselves.

Yet their hypocrisy will prevent reasonable explanation. They can't really justify racial affirmative action either.

Its good to see someone taking the offensive stance on this issue. Hopefully some people wake up.

 

[Brooklyn]

I can understand and appreciate the gesture. In the short run its a total failure. Gun grabbers don't like guns but want the police to be armed to the teeth.

Its not supposed to succeed. Aside from political theater,it forces a vote. But as police are civilian and not military it does go at the weapons of war canard.
Also puts it puts the legislative intent right in the face of malita arms.

That is if they did exclude the police,but not military units, they can clsim ,implausibly that the arms are military not militia.

Police are civilian under the law of war..

We gain in the court from its failure and it the court of public opinion either way. Plus there are liberals that will vote for it if they are sure it will not pass, so they can say they did... if it phases it will be. cf.

But recall that in NY they did cf the bill.


Nobody here wants it to pass. It posturing but IMHO it is not useless posturing. It can help in a court challenge.

 

[Eviljagtech]

I like it, and I'm going to help this guy keep his job. If we are lucky while they scramble to get the bad bill passed my be they can slip this in. Hell look what was slipped into the bill in Washington State and the guy how brought the bill up didn't even know it was there. People seem to think most politicians read bills, lol that is a funny joke.

 

[Brooklyn]

Not much thought for the police officer who has to risk his life against a criminal who will not follow laws and use any weapon they choose. Don't put officer's lives a risk just to make a statement. This is bill is just as stupid as the ones trying to restrict gun ownership.

This bill is not designed to pass. Its designed to force moderates to think. If it does pass who will enforce it..

Do not worry about it actually passing.

 

[OLM-Medic]

Granted, I heard this from a friend, but...

2 of his friends are officers; one from AA and one in Baltimore Co.
Both said that we are sovereign citizens and would have no problem confiscating arms if asked to.

My friend is in his mid 20's, and I know one of the officers is the same.
Needless to say, this friend has had a falling out with both.

I don't know why someone would risk suffering the consequences of being an enemy of the constitution just for their job.

 

[eddy8888]

Just like congress to pass bill they don't have to live by. O'mally wants something and is getting something else. Biggest turn out ever aganist a bill. Once people see what this bill does they may vote want to vote him out.

 

[Brooklyn]

The violence of action for non-police officers is usually more intense because the victim is at the mercy of the criminal as to the time and place which a crime takes place. The police use the same tactics (time and place) when apprehending criminals and usually with multiple officers.

If anything the citizens have more of a need for high standard capacity magazines and semi-auto firearms than the police.

YMMV

All true. No backup for us. No first mover advantage.
More likely to be targeted in the first place. I could go on but why bother we all know this....

 

[OLM-Medic]

On the topic of the bill, I do agree with it. If they want to restrict firearms in Maryland then the police should have those laws too. As for the safety, oh well. Blame the lawmakers.

 

[Brooklyn]

What pisses me off about this entire bill is that Del. Dwyer is doing the same thing as our wonderful president is doing. He's trying to make people look at the police as enemies against the 2A. If you ever stopped scowling and cussing an officer under your breath and took the time to actually talk to him about 2A rights i'd be willing to bet you would be surprised with their outlook on it.

No he is attempting to demonstrate that they are not weapons of war as they are used by piece officers. Civilians not military .

This is not about the police it is about the law. You can not say that a weapon is only designed to mow down people and then claim that the police need it, unless you belive that the police now down people.


WE BELIVE NO SUCH THING. Now we ask them to pick.

Are they weapons of war or weapons or defense. can they be used to restore peace or only now down people..



Please do not jump to conclusions. I think it is a good play that will help in court.

 

[platoonDaddy]

No he is attempting to demonstrate that they are not weapons of war as they are used by piece officers. Civilians not military .

This is not about the police it is about the law.

You are right ON!

Don't understand why reasonable people don't understand this isn't a "hit" on LEO's. If the LAW of the state is 10 round magazines, why shouldn't this law apply to LEO's?

Who elevated the guardians, above the common-folk? (!)

 

[echo6mike]

+1 to Del Dwyer and to the idea of making *all* civilians equal under the law - if you restrict basic rights unevenly you have created a tyranny!