Intel:Giffords roadmap to resist Bruen

[K-Romulus]

Giffords has come out with a set of guidelines for states that don’t like the Bruen decision:

How States Impacted by Bruen Can Act to Protect the Public

Lawmakers in affected states have a path forward to protect the public and limit the harm this ruling might cause.

giffords.org

Highlights:
- calls out MD as a state that *needs* to do what Giffords says
- deep background checks incl. requiring privacy waivers to permit snooping into wherever LE wants to look
- mandatory in person interview with LE
- doubling down on providing multiple references as part of the “objective” process
- LE should snoop into social media as part of the “objective” process
- expanding “sensitive areas” definition
- Vampire Carry (ie crime if not specifically invited in by private property business owner)
- destroy preemption to let locals expand “sensitive areas” and whatever else they want to do

There is more but you get the idea.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[lazarus]

Giffords has come out with a set of guidelines for states that don’t like the Bruen decision:

How States Impacted by Bruen Can Act to Protect the Public

Lawmakers in affected states have a path forward to protect the public and limit the harm this ruling might cause.

giffords.org

Highlights:
- calls out MD as a state that *needs* to do what Giffords says
- deep background checks incl. requiring privacy waivers to permit snooping into wherever LE wants to look
- mandatory in person interview with LE
- doubling down on providing multiple references as part of the “objective” process
- LE should snoop into social media as part of the “objective” process
- expanding “sensitive areas” definition
- Vampire Carry (ie crime if not specifically invited in by private property business owner)
- destroy preemption to let locals expand “sensitive areas” and whatever else they want to do

There is more but you get the idea.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Makes sense. I hate it, but it makes sense. If you get rid of pre-emotion you aren’t fighting one bad law, you are fighting a dozen, or a score, or 30 bad laws all in the same state.

Unless they get voted out, the pols don’t care they are wasting money on lawsuits.

 

[6-Pack]

I hope whomever made the "Frosh Reacts to Buren" video will make a similar one when Maryland's "assault weapon" ban is struck down. Along those lines, I can't wait to see what Giffords and the mommies say then.

Giffords can take their advice and place it in an area unexposed to sunshine for all I care.

 

[Doctor_M]

Preemption is a sword that cuts both ways. They won't risk allowing counties or municipalities open up gun regs... remember, most of MD, in terms of area, is red, it is just the population centers that are blue.

 

[lazarus]

Preemption is a sword that cuts both ways. They won't risk allowing counties or municipalities open up gun regs... remember, most of MD, in terms of area, is red, it is just the population centers that are blue.

The problem is you can just change ore-emotion to say counties are not allowed to enact any laws less stringent than the state. Leave it at that.

 

[Jake4U]

Giffords has come out with a set of guidelines for states that don’t like the Bruen decision:

How States Impacted by Bruen Can Act to Protect the Public

Lawmakers in affected states have a path forward to protect the public and limit the harm this ruling might cause.

giffords.org

Highlights:
- calls out MD as a state that *needs* to do what Giffords says
- deep background checks incl. requiring privacy waivers to permit snooping into wherever LE wants to look
- mandatory in person interview with LE
- doubling down on providing multiple references as part of the “objective” process
- LE should snoop into social media as part of the “objective” process
- expanding “sensitive areas” definition
- Vampire Carry (ie crime if not specifically invited in by private property business owner)
- destroy preemption to let locals expand “sensitive areas” and whatever else they want to do

There is more but you get the idea.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Seems like an excellent voter approval process. Pass a background check and be interviewed by a LEO before you have access to a ballot.

 

[Mike OTDP]

I get the impression that the MGA is inclined to let New York and California clear the minefield on this one. Especially since Justice Thomas anticipated most of the potential tricks when he wrote the decision.

 

[teratos]

They didn’t read the opinion either.

 

[Mike OTDP]

Unless they get voted out, the pols don’t care they are wasting money on lawsuits.

Voted out? Oh, no. There's a point where they are liable to both civil suit and criminal prosecution. I favor the latter.

 

[Dingo3]

Did she shrink of this on her own with less an half a brain remaining? Or was it wannabe space cadet’s idea?

 

[BeoBill]

It's gotta be Space Cowboy's idea. I doubt she's capable of that much thought that quickly.

 

[beetles]

Giffords has come out with a set of guidelines for states that don’t like the Bruen decision:

How States Impacted by Bruen Can Act to Protect the Public

Lawmakers in affected states have a path forward to protect the public and limit the harm this ruling might cause.

giffords.org

Highlights:
- calls out MD as a state that *needs* to do what Giffords says
- deep background checks incl. requiring privacy waivers to permit snooping into wherever LE wants to look
- mandatory in person interview with LE
- doubling down on providing multiple references as part of the “objective” process
- LE should snoop into social media as part of the “objective” process
- expanding “sensitive areas” definition
- Vampire Carry (ie crime if not specifically invited in by private property business owner)
- destroy preemption to let locals expand “sensitive areas” and whatever else they want to do

There is more but you get the idea.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Most of which appear to be in violation of the Bruen ruling and serve no legitimate purpose. The intent appears to be to impose burdens on the applicants for the sake of burden and to delay approval. They are taking a page (really as much as they can carry) from the policies in Japan.

The result might be what they hope least for which is constitutional carry.

 

[BeoBill]

Most of which appear to be in violation of the Bruen ruling and serve no legitimate purpose. The intent appears to be to impose burdens on the applicants for the sake of burden and to delay approval. They are taking a page (really as much as they can carry) from the policies in Japan.

The result might be what they hope least for which is constitutional carry.

"Never interrupt an adversary while they are making a mistake..."

 

[Applehd]

I just finished reading that and had the same thought... as to doing everything St. Clarence of Thomas warned against.

 

[mac1_131]

It's gotta be Space Cowboy's idea. I doubt she's capable of that much thought that quickly.

For sure.

 

[Bob A]

Seems like an excellent voter approval process. Pass a background check and be interviewed by a LEO before you have access to a ballot.

Three local MD references.

That will reduce the Republican voters considerably.

 

[jrumann59]

They didn’t read the opinion either.

They did but like all good liberals they will choose to ignore it and plead ignorance.