[stsltd]

NOT!

Just received one of the NRA bulletins - noting all the key issues in specific states - even had one for Maryland which does not happen very often. Read with interest but the notice only talked about the bills to vote against and never made mention of any of the key CCW legislation that will be discussed the same day - this week!

Have written them (NRA) a number of times indicating that my dues will not be forth coming since I do not believe their support, what little there is, is in my best interest and that they have for what ever reason have written off Maryland. Message has obviously not gotten through as I still receive my weekly notice

See you in Annapolis this week - March 8, those that are going...

[Helmetcase]

Be there or be square.

And NRA...if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

[Spot77]

Even worse is that the best they could say is to call or write your delegates onb MArch 8th.....WTH?? ON THE DAY of the hearings? Any idiot knows what little value that has. Gee, on the day of the hearings, where do you think the delegates are going to be?

How about encouraging people to show up at the hearings and testify? Oh wait...no NRA rep has testified at any Maryland hearing in the past three years....they obviously see no value in it.

[Harry Tuttle]

IMHO, Maryland serves the NRA as a stalking horse for more donations

[txgho1911]

Aside from what is done or said you can go yourself and meet authors or co-sponsors. Showing up will say volumes. If you are given a chance to speak you can maybe cause some of the committee folks to open up to the idea more guns = less crime.
If this is all after the committee meet then any contact at all for encouragement to the pro reps/sen will keep them in the fight.

[Monkeyleg]

The NRA puts its efforts where there's a at least a chance of winning. It's not like the organization is taxpayer-funded and has unlimited resources.

[Norton]

The NRA puts its efforts where there's a at least a chance of winning. It's not like the organization is taxpayer-funded and has unlimited resources.

If they don't try to do anything, then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Apparently, the NRA has a top-secret plan in the works for MD, but it must be so secret that they don't even want to put it in action :scrutiny:

The NRA said last year that the repeal of the ballistic fingerprinting law was their highest priority. Neither the NRA representative or her minions made an appearance in Annapolis to testify.

[U.S.SFC_RET]

Of the big four antigun states CA,MA,NJ and Md it seems to me that Md is the least of these. Kind of like the silent minority to the rest of the nation.

[Helmetcase]

The NRA puts its efforts where there's a at least a chance of winning. It's not like the organization is taxpayer-funded and has unlimited resources.

This isn't about money. The NRA has gone around to progun delegates (many of whom are GOP) here in MD to warn them that they will NOT support progun bills this year. It's not a matter of money. It's a matter of the NRA being clear that they simply leave their principles at the door when they come to MD; one can presume there's some form of political expediency they're pursuing, but since they won't tell us what it is, the cloak and dagger routine is pretty tiresome. According to Purtilo and Tripwire, the concern is attaching an AWB to a pro-CCW bill, but that's not a compelling argument. If there were enough votes for an AWB, they'd be behind Quinter's bill, and they're not. Besides, let's call the anti-gunner's bluff on this--the question isn't whether we'd trade CCW for an AWB, it's whether THEY WOULD. And I doubt they would.

Nothing was ever accomplished by sitting on your ass, NRA. Action begets action, inaction begets inaction.

[K-Romulus]

They better hurry up . . . the legislative session is over in four weeks . . .:scrutiny:

[Norton]

They better hurry up . . . the legislative session is over in four weeks . .

No, no....you've got it all wrong. You need to take the long view (decades?). ;)

They're not doing anything this year because they need you to send in another donation to help out in this "legislative showdown" :banghead:

[shrpshn]

Although I agree with the above statments, I believe that as soon as the NRA "sticks their head in the door" in Maryland, it is like throwing gasoline on a fire. All the antis - Cease Fire, Brady -he Sun, Post, Gazette & etc., use the NRA as a whipping boy: And, another big reason to beat down any pro-gun proposals, because they misconstrue any issue the NRA supports, as an attempt by them to force their agenda on Marylanders.

Some Maryland politicians consider NRA support a "kiss of death" in this state's anti-gun/liberal climate. NRA support is used against anyone running for office in the state.



John

[Can'thavenuthingood]

"Some Maryland politicians consider NRA support a "kiss of death" in this state's anti-gun/liberal climate. NRA support is used against anyone running for office in the state."

Isn't there someone within the NRA that is a marketing whiz? How about hiring Madison Avenue to put a new fresh face on the NRA? Or re-defining the NRA?

Why not run some national commercials on Oprah and such?

If the antis have set aside the federal level fights because they deem them to be losers, it seems we are then winners. Make the chase, it oughta trigger the response and attack.

800 pound gorilla got no teeth or muscle.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=29657

Yeah easy for me to say, I'm in California.

Vick

[Norton]

Although I agree with the above statments, I believe that as soon as the NRA "sticks their head in the door" in Maryland, it is like throwing gasoline on a fire. All the antis - Cease Fire, Brady -he Sun, Post, Gazette & etc., use the NRA as a whipping boy: And, another big reason to beat down any pro-gun proposals, because they misconstrue any issue the NRA supports, as an attempt by them to force their agenda on Marylanders.

Some Maryland politicians consider NRA support a "kiss of death" in this state's anti-gun/liberal climate. NRA support is used against anyone running for office in the state.

I heard a figure a few weeks ago that there were several thousand members of the NRA in Maryland, 4000 of those in AA County alone. If the NRA would get involved and encourage its membership to get behind these pro-active bills, how much faster could we speed along reform of this state's draconian laws?

[Jim K]

Last session, we had a pretty good chance to get the "ballistics fingerprint" law repealed, allowing some good guns to be sold in Maryland. But the CCW people were so aggressive and so nasty that the Assembly "powers that be" (including people on our side) just sank all the gun bills.

Some of the CCW folks were willing to trade an assault rifle ban and handgun registration and licensing for a CCW bill. And the anti-gun people were ready with a host of amendments to the CCW bill (if it stood a chance) that would have negated it (like banning carry within a 1000 yards of a school or church or place of public assembly).

Let's face it, folks. CCW is not going to happen in MD any time soon. We can do a long term education campaign, and keep voting the right way, and maybe, some day. But meantime, let's not s**t in our own nest pushing for something we won't get.

Jim

[Norton]

Last session, we had a pretty good chance to get the "ballistics fingerprint" law repealed, allowing some good guns to be sold in Maryland. But the CCW people were so aggressive and so nasty that the Assembly "powers that be" (including people on our side) just sank all the gun bills.

Since there was such a "pretty good chance", I suppose that's why neither Purtilo or Jenn Palmer made an appearance in Annapolis to testify on behalf of the IBIS repeal? If this was the NRA/Tripwire "highest legislative priority" why did neither make an effort to work actively for the repeal of the ballistic fingerprinting? Funny how I seem to remember that it was all of those "nasty, aggressive" CCW advocates who testified on behalf of the IBIS repeal.

Some of the CCW folks were willing to trade an assault rifle ban and handgun registration and licensing for a CCW bill. And the anti-gun people were ready with a host of amendments to the CCW bill (if it stood a chance) that would have negated it (like banning carry within a 1000 yards of a school or church or place of public assembly).

Another Purtilo lie. Are you forgetting that it was the IBIS repeal bill that they attached the AWB to? So, isn't it more accurate to say that Jim Purtilo/Tripwire and the NRA are in favor of trading an an AWB in order to push their bills through the General Assembly? THe CCW bill was put up as a clean one.

Time and time again, Quinter on the House side and Garagiola in the Senate have demonstrated that they don't need any legislation to attach an AWB to. They put it up as a stand alone bill. Besides, if they really wanted to put the AWB through there isn't a damned thing we could do about it.

Let's face it, folks. CCW is not going to happen in MD any time soon. We can do a long term education campaign, and keep voting the right way, and maybe, some day. But meantime, let's not s**t in our own nest pushing for something we won't get.

They said the same thing in most of the other 38 states that now have CCW legislation. If everyone sits around and does nothing, then your statement becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

[Spot77]

Some of the CCW folks were willing to trade an assault rifle ban and handgun registration and licensing for a CCW bill.

So a group that founded itself two months before the legislative hearings had enough clout to make a trade with legislators? Wow! I never knew that a few rednecks and myself could wield such power in such little time.

Shame on you Jim. I've always thougt you were better educated on issues than to repeat a blatant unfounded LIE.

See you in Annapolis tomorrow. Or probably not.

[Ohen Cepel]

I think the NRA keeps a bit of distance from MD since it probably doesn't want to spend political capital in a state that it thinks it can't win in. It's politics.

Sad, and I really wish it wasn't the case. However, you can't take losses on a national stage if you can win elsewhere.

[doggscube]

Maryland will become a gun-friendly state when Montgomery and Prince George's Counties are forced to become part of Washington, DC. Those counties deserve it (I spent 5 years "in exile" in PG Co. before my homecoming to Ohio).

About the time we were moving, the neighborhood watch captain was setting up "citizen patrol" training. Do you want to put on orange jackets and walk around PG Co. at night with no means of self-defense?!

-Jeff

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Here are just a few cases where the NRA has come to the aid of Maryland gun owners:

Douglas J. Godesky (Maryland). He is an employee of the federal government. He was subjected to harsh discipline, namely, termination, on account of his membership in the NRA and because he is a gun owner. On June 11, 2004, the arbitrator ruled that "the Agency consciously disregarded previous disciplinary decisions of similarly situated employees." The arbitrator ordered that "the Grievant be reinstated to his position [and] ... awarded full back pay and benefits." He is pursuing EEOC, federal tort claims, and a Bivens action against the agency and individuals responsible.

Keith Barrett (Maryland). He is a Maryland State Trooper. He was charged with a violating a federal law that restricts possession of certain semiautomatic firearms to police officers. The law is unclear whether this applies to duty only or if it includes off duty status. On May 28, 2004, information was provided that Trooper Barrett has been reinstated and his record has been cleared.

David Pence v. Montgomery County (Maryland). This case involved the seizure of firearms from the victim of a home invasion. The police refused to return the firearms. To make matters worse, the firearms were destroyed after the filing of a lawsuit based on 42 U.S. Code § 1983. The lawsuit was filed on March 17, 2003. Mr. Pence's attorney advised on March 9, 2005, that Judge Dugan of the Montgomery County Circuit Court found that the county had denied Mr. Pence due process. The court did issue a judgment awarding Mr. Pence the value of his firearms. A valuation hearing was held following the decision. The judge did chide the county for failing to observe due process, for failing to grant a hearing, and for the county's actions on seizing, retaining, refusing to return, and eventually destroying property and never giving Mr. Pence an opportunity to be heard.

Maryland Gun Safety Act of 2000. Maryland enacted in 2000 a law requiring "Any manufacturer that ships or transports a handgun to be sold, rented, or transferred in the state shall include in the box with the handgun in a separate sealed container ... a shell casing of a projectile discharged from that handgun." A declaratory judgment action was filed to affirm that the law applies just where the legislature said it applies: to manufacturers. The court was asked to enjoin the state from enforcing its new mandate upon entities outside the scope of this law. Meaning of mechanical safety provision was challenged through a declaratory relief action. On April 27, 2004, a complaint for declaratory judgment was filed in the circuit court for Montgomery County. It is captioned James M. Purtilo v. Col. Thomas E. Hutchins, Secretary of Department of Maryland State Police. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss. Plaintiff filed his opposition on September 7, 2004. A hearing occurred on December 9, 2004. The circuit court found that plaintiff suffered no harm and dismissed the lawsuit based on a lack of standing. The hearing results suggest that the plaintiff seek administrative redress first. Once administrative remedies have been exhausted, he could seek relief in court.

Krasner (Silverado Gun Show) v. Montgomery County (Md.). This is an effort by the county to shut down gun shows by prohibiting financial or in-kind support to any organization that allows gun shows. This prohibition applies to the fair grounds located within the City of Gaithersburg. The U.S. District Court granted injunctive relief based on the county's violation of the Tillie Frank state law. The court did not reach the 1st Amendment claims. The case is reported as Krasner v. Montgomery County, 166 F.Supp.2d 1058 (D.Md. 2001). The county appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit. On April 1, 2003, the court sent the case back to the trial court to determine whether the plaintiffs have standing to sue. The trial court still found standing to sue for two of the three plaintiffs. The county appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit. Oral argument occurred on December 1, 2004. The Court of Appeals held on March 11, 2005, that the gun show promoter and exhibitor have no standing to challenge a county law that denies public funding to venues that display and sell firearms.

Troy Bradley Brigance (Md.). He lives in a high crime area in Baltimore. Two drug dealers attempted to invade his home. Mr. Brigance showed up at the front window of his home holding a shotgun. The two men, who had up to that point been kicking and beating his front door, ran to a nearby police substation and claimed Mr. Brigance had for no reason aimed his shotgun at them. Mr. Brigance was arrested. Charges were dismissed on the day of trial when defense counsel was able to show one witness had used the name and address of a man who been dead for two years (the real complainant had outstanding felony arrest warrants), and the other complainant was being arraigned in the same courthouse, but different courtroom, on other charges. This information was provided on September 10, 2004.

Todd Lin Chow (Md.). On April 23, 2003, Todd Lin Chow, a District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Officer in good standing, met with his friend, Man Nguyen, in Maryland. Mr. Nguyen wanted to purchase a pistil from Officer Chow. It was decided that before any agreement to buy the pistol would be consummated and the terms of an agreement would be reached, Mr. Nguyen would first test-fire the pistol at a local shooting range. Subsequently, Mr. Nguyen was stopped by the police and the pistol was seized. Officer Chow was charged with transferring a pistil to a person other than a firearms dealer without first going through the application for transfer process with the Maryland State Police and receiving an approval. He was convicted. On June 2, 2005, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals upheld the conviction. The court held that a "transfer" under the statute includes a temporary transfer without consideration, that is, without payment of anything of value. There are a multitude of "temporary transfer" scenarios where the present decision in Chow will weigh against the everyday activities of firearm owners. A petition for a writ of certiorari was filed in the Maryland Court of Appeals. The NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund filed a motion in support of certiorari on October 20, 2005.

National Capital Skeet & Trap Club, Inc. (Maryland). According to an August 1, 2005, letter this case involves a range and the use of environmental law to attempt to shut it down. The club operated a skeet and trap club on the same plot of land since 1954. In 1979 the Maryland Department of Natural Resources purchased the club's land, incorporating the parcel into Seneca Creek State Park. For a quarter-century thereafter the club operated under state supervision and control. Potomac Riverkeeper, Inc., want an order enjoining operation of the range, clean up and remediation of lead shot, imposition of civil penalties, and imposition of cost and attorneys' fees. The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court on February 25, 2005. The defendants are the club and Maryland Department of Natural Resources.


Source: http://www.nradefensefund.org/docs/litigation.html

[Ohen Cepel]

Seems like they have provided a lot of support to MD!!!!

May not be exactly the kind people are looking for, however, they haven't ignored the state.

[Spot77]

True, but they'realso a bit misleading on their website.

Gun Safety Act of 2000 passed; that's where ballistic fingerprinting, internal safety locks, and annual smart gun technology, among other things came from. It was a useless waste of money to sue the head of MSP for legislation he had no hand in passing.

Krasner basically lost. Montgomery County was succesful in keeping gunshows out.

National Capital Skeet & Trap Club, Inc, I thought was closed. I'll have to check on that.

But what have they really done for the other 40,000 NRA members in Maryland is really what I think the original poster was trying to find out. We're surrounded by essentially pro gun states (Delaware being the least friendly around us, and they'll have full ccw soon) but yet the NRA and other gun groups (and obviously tens of thousands of MD individuals) are content letting crappy laws get passed because, "It's Maryland - there's no use fighting until there's a change in things."

Heck, I don't think I saw 5 out of the 75 Maryland THR users at the hearings last week. (and there may be a lot more MD THR users, I've only identified and added to my "buddy list" about 75) That's sad.

Sitting on our arses isn't going to get things changed. The NRA could be a leader but they won't step up. I hope they have a good reason. With NRA HQ being 5 minutes south of the MD border you'd think they would want their backyard to be in order.

[Helmetcase]

Back up there, Clyde. Nobody's saying the NRA hasn't done anything for individuals in the state of MD.

What we're saying is that they've made a collective decision to ignore political and legislative efforts that are being made here. They're not testifying on behalf of progun bills--which is FREE. They're working AGAINST progun delegates on the judiciary committee.

While I appreciate your laundry list of nice things the NRA has done Bart, you're missing the point by a mile. We have a real chance of making some real progress this year, and the NRA and Purtilo are nowhere to be found. Well...I did stand next to them for a moment last week, but they didn't offer a single word of testimony.

And nice rebuttal Spot. Is Keenan codeword for Purtilo? The truth is, the antis would never accept an AWB in trade for CCW even if we were willing to make such a trade, and we're not. That's a vicious lie that's been spread around, and the fact that there are still people willing to be duped into believing that is insane.

Keenan, have you read my site? I have it on good authority from the progun delegates (both Dem and Repub) on the committee that the ONLY reason we're in a position to repeal BFing and that the AWB hasn't squirted through is the mutually assured destruction that our persistent CCW efforts represent. Don't believe me? Call Dels. Smigiel, Kelly, or Dwyer and ask them yourselves. They'll tell you that if there wasn't the threat of a CCW bill every year, the antis would be able to ram through a lot more terrible legislation. The persistent, undeterable efforts of grassroots activists are what is working in Annapolis, not professionals like Palmer and the NRA. If you're sitting on your duff saying "it'll never happen," you're part of the problem. There are millions of gun owners in MD, but only a few people actually doing something about the problem. Which side of the fence are you really on?:confused:

[stsltd]

As the original poster of this thread, it was not intended to indicate that the NRA has not accomplished a great deal of positive work - the New Orleans response comes to mind immediately this year. The point I was making is that they had a specific listing in their email alert which I subscribe to for the Maryland Gun Bill Day breaking down the need to contact the appropriate legislature for specific bills to vote against - AWB, Ballist Fingerprinting.....

There was no mention on the alert or on their web site (even in the special "2nd Ammendment section" of the key positive bills that were to be discussed, CCW, Right ot Bear Arms, etc. that need our support. My question is why not? If they have an agenda - what is it? They have taken positve stands in other states - our nieghbor Deleware come to mind immediately.

I don't think this question is off base and deserves an answer.

[MikeK]

Not to defend the NRA or 'King Jim', the last issue of Tripwire had an article that explained their (NRA and KJ) reasoning on MD gun legislation. It started off pretty well until he went off the deep end on the CCW folks. Some of the posters here have made the same points - trying to get more bang for the buck and only backing legislation that has a reasonable chance of passing - after laying the groundwork. I still receive Tripwire, but havn't sent him a nickel (nor will I ever) since he 'went off' last year. IMHO, KJ seems to be well-connected with the NRA, so in a way the two are synonomous. If only he discussed the CCW issue as he did in the beginning of the article rather than throwing a tantrum and attacking gun-owners, things might be a little more hopeful in MD.

[Spot77]

You're right.

And actions speak louder than words.

"Send me money or else" just doesn't cut it anymore.

Also, real leaders lead from the FRONT. I give way more respect to those that actually go to Annapolis and lobby, and show up to testify at the hearings. One that hides behind a website and cries "the sky is falling, stop these activists before they ruin everything for me," gets a lot less positive things done in a year than I can do in a day.

If the NRA were serious, they'd accept offers to meet and discuss things instead of badmouthing everybody through Purtilo and his website.

[cracked butt]

If I were a space alein reading this thread trying to figure out how the Government of MD works, I would have to come up with the following conclusions based on most of the posters' attitudes:

1. The NRA elects the government of MD
2. The NRA makes the laws in MD, if the NRA is absent, the government acts on its own and creates laws that are not wanted by the people in MD.
3. Gunowners are powerless to do anything by themselves without the NRA in MD.
4. Its the NRA's fault if laws are or are not passed in MD.

Is this about right?:scrutiny:

[Norton]

If I were a space alein reading this thread trying to figure out how the Government of MD works, I would have to come up with the following conclusions based on most of the posters' attitudes:

1. The NRA elects the government of MD
2. The NRA makes the laws in MD, if the NRA is absent, the government acts on its own and creates laws that are not wanted by the people in MD.
3. Gunowners are powerless to do anything by themselves without the NRA in MD.
4. Its the NRA's fault if laws are or are not passed in MD.

Is this about right

No...it's not about right. Let me tell you what this thread is about....frustration.

It about frustration when we see the superhuman efforts that a few individuals are putting in to further the RKBA movement in this state with no support from the so-called 800 pound gorilla.

It's about the frustration of knowing that there are 4000 paid members of the NRA in my county alone and that if the gorilla would give us one simple paragraph in their magazine it would essentially amplify our voices 20,000 times if applied statewide. Like it or not, most gun owners look to the NRA for their marching orders and when the gorilla fails to support a grassroots movement the rank and file members believe that it's because it has no chance of succeeding.

It's about frustration when, failing to actively support us, the NRA representative and their mouthpipe actively work AGAINST us by telling delegates that the grassroots activists are willing to accept trades of AWB for CCW (an absolute lie BTW). Again, like it or not, even pro-gun politicians look to the gorilla for their marching orders.

[Helmetcase]

<Personal insult removed by Art>but let's dive into some of this sophistry disguised as a tongue in cheek NRA-can-do-no-wrong missive:

1. The NRA elects the government of MDI dunno what gave you that idea; the simple undeniable fact is that the NRA, second only perhaps to the AARP, is the most powerful lobby going. When they choose to leave their resources on the sidelines, it sends a negative message to our potential supporters and hands ammunition to our enemies. You don't think it's lost on our enemies that they can simply say "hey, even the NRA goons don't support your bill?" You're darn tootin it matters when you're needing to swing a couple votes to get a bill out of committee.

They don't want to spend money here? Great. <low road removed by Art>3. Gunowners are powerless to do anything by themselves without the NRA in MD.Actually, if you'd ever read anything in the numerous MD centric threads we've had here, or bothered to read up at all on what we're up against, you'd know that the only reason the anti's aren't gaining ground here in MD is because of GRASS ROOTS ACTIVISTS who operate without the support of the NRA. We've been holding the line for the better part of a decade against further encroachment of our rights with virtually no help from the NRA.

Perhaps you should educate yourself about the situation a bit before you launch into an indefensible ramble demeaning the frustrations of the people who actually <> work for freedom (as opposed to making snide comments from sanctity of a keyboard.) Nuff said.

[molonlabe]

Am, I still on the high road??????/////

[Helmetcase]

The highest road is adherence to the truth. We can't expect our enemies to do so, but we should expect as much from ourselves.

[TexasRifleman]

the NRA representative and their mouthpipe actively work AGAINST us by telling delegates that the grassroots activists are willing to accept trades of AWB for CCW (an absolute lie BTW)


I'd like to see some documentation of that if you have it. If you don't, well......

[Helmetcase]

You can call Del. Dwyer in his Annapolis office if you like. The NRA's lobbyist for MD, Jen Palmer went to Dwyer (the author of the CCW bill) and told him the NRA wouldn't support the bill.

Or you can call Jen Palmer directly. Several of my readers called her and confirmed that the NRA will NOT support the CCW bill.

Her number is 703-267-1215. She (or someone in her office) will tell you they didn't want to support it because they didn't think it could get out of committee. Well guess what? We're only a couple votes shy and we're working on it...it's gonna be close. Who knows, maybe they could have helped.

In any event, it is NOT disputed that the NRA doesn't support the MD CCW bill.

Ooops you weren't disputing that. Ok, well look no further than this thread to see that people still are repeating the lie that CCW activists in MD would make the AWB trade.

Purtilo (author of Tripwire and squirreltalk.net) have repeatedly made that suggestion verbally and in print.

[Helmetcase]

Here's Purtilo's site. http://www.squirreltalk.net/

As you can see at the top, he's clearly implying we'd trade AWB for CCW. I don't have it in writing, but Sandy Abrams, the MD Rifle and Pistol Club, and Jen Palmer have all said that MSI would trade CCW for an AWB, and that's simply not true.

[TexasRifleman]

Purtilo (author of Tripwire and squirreltalk.net) have repeatedly made that suggestion verbally and in print.


What you have here is the same mess the good folks in Wisconsin have.

You have 2 "pro gun" camps fighting at crossed purposes, confusing the mess, each offering it's own strategy, and neither group able to get anything done.

Then, it's the NRAs, or someone elses' problem when it doesn't work.

It's unfortunate to see this happening again. This is exactly what killed CCW in Wisconsin. It wasn't the NRAs fault there either.

As long as the state gun groups can't present a united front, the NRA can't do a heck of a lot to make the difference.

You're going to have to come to an agreement internally first before anyone can help.

The antis' see the 2 pro gun groups fighting each other and all they have to do is sit back and relax, they have already won.

[cracked butt]

Helmetcase:

If your MO is to personally attack everyone who doesn't see things your way, I don't have a hard time drawing conclusions as to why you aren't drumming up much popular support for your cause.

The entire point of my last post was to question why everyone blames the NRA for their failures. Do you truely believe that the NRA is going to sway a bunch of antigunners in your statehouse? I know that the NRA is the favorite bogeyman of the antigunners, but now its becoming the favorite bogeyman of progunners? Give me a break.

[Helmetcase]

If your MO is to personally attack everyone who doesn't see things your way, I don't have a hard time drawing conclusions as to why you aren't drumming up much popular support for your cause. Wrong again. I don't personally attack anyone, but I do refuse to not point out arguments (like yours) that are divorced from reality. I'm not saying that to be a meanie head, I'm saying it because it doesn't help our cause to have someone repeating the same old fibs and distortions that have been debunked for a long time. And for the record, our cause outnumbered the enemy five to one on Gun Bill day. If you think I'm a big meanie head because I pointed out that your argument was sophistry...well sorry. But our cause is only moving forward because we've got the balls to call it like it is.

The entire point of my last post was to question why everyone blames the NRA for their failures.What failures? We're doing better this year than we have in the past. I'm simply pointing out that our success is DESPITE of, and not because of, anything the NRA is doing.

I know that the NRA is the favorite bogeyman of the antigunners, but now its becoming the favorite bogeyman of progunners? Give me a break.Hardly what we're saying at all. We're simply pointing out that, in point of fact, they're NOT working with us, and in some cases, working against us.

[cracked butt]

do refuse to not point out arguments (like yours) that are divorced from reality.

Uh duhh. I did preface my post with the whole 'space alien observer' thing, of for that matter how a person from another state might perceive your whining. Its a reading comprehension thing.

[MikeK]

You have 2 "pro gun" camps fighting at crossed purposes, confusing the mess, each offering it's own strategy, and neither group able to get anything done.

Then, it's the NRAs, or someone elses' problem when it doesn't work.

It's unfortunate to see this happening again. This is exactly what killed CCW in Wisconsin. It wasn't the NRAs fault there either.

As long as the state gun groups can't present a united front, the NRA can't do a heck of a lot to make the difference.

You're going to have to come to an agreement internally first before anyone can help.


You nailed that one! Unfortunately it's more than two groups. Having met many of the posters here, I don't think anyone is blaming the NRA for MD not having CCW or fewer gun laws - just a case of severe frustration as Norton pointed out, for failing to provide minimal support and in some cases working against certain efforts. We would certainly welcome any advice or strategies from TX or WI on how to reconcile the differences. Some of us discussed this last night and the only constructive idea (an ombudsman to work with all of the groups) was pretty much laughed down - good naturedly.

MD can also be divided into three major areas geographically and politically. The West - pro-gun, the Eastern shore - mostly pro-gun, but losing ground as the more affluent move there, and the middle part of the state - anti-gun, liberal and most of the population, therefore most of the votes.

[Robert Hairless]

http://www.thinkgeek.com/images/products/front/B-THEBE_solo.gif

[Lemon328i]

Although stalwart gun rights defenders in this state such as John Josselyn and Jim Purtillo have done an outstanding job of protecting what few gun rights we have, the best that the current tactics have done is simply to prevent the anti's from enacting even worse gun rights abuses. With people like Doug Duncan and Martin O'Malley likely to run a successful campaign against Gov. Ehrlich, we can expect that the anti's will continue to erode gun rights in every session.

Trying to pass a CCW law here will not happen with a single bill. It will not happen in a single legislative session. It will not happen when the pro-gun rights forces are seen as the drive behind it.

I completely understand why the NRA doesn't bother to visibly fight here. Their money would be wasted and it would only help the anti's get more visibility.

Maryland needs an entirely new way to fight: We need to split the anti-gun rights forces. A new organization (non-gun rights related) should be formed that stands for two to three major issues that resonate with liberals: 1) Self-defense is a fundamental right. 2) Your home is your castle (castle doctrine and eminent domain issues) and 3) Women cannot rely upon the police for protection.

By getting feminists to pull away from the anti-gun rights folks, we weaken them. By getting self-defense to be the major issue instead of gun rights, we can enhance rights incrementally over time.

Comments?

[Helmetcase]

<Irrelevancy removed by Art>

Trying to pass a CCW law here will not happen with a single bill. It will not happen in a single legislative session. It will not happen when the pro-gun rights forces are seen as the drive behind it. One thing is for certain, it certainly won't be passed if we sit on <back> and wait for it to happen via black magic or dumb luck. Our persistence is the only thing that'll make it happen.

I completely understand why the NRA doesn't bother to visibly fight here. Their money would be wasted and it would only help the anti's get more visibility.Here I have to take you to task, and disagree vehemently. Nationwide and statewide, most people favor CCW rights, and exposure to the issue of any kind only helps our case. The anti's arguments are based on lies, rhetoric, and emotion, while we're grounded in fact. The more light we can bring to the discriminatory policies of MD the better. The more light we shine on the antis the better.

But I do like your divide and conquer tactics, and it's why I'm angry at the NRA because they're actively participating in perpetuating the schism in the gun rights movement by playing hand in hand with the guy who seems to enjoy trying to stake out gun rights as his exclusive sandbox.

[Lemon328i]

Here I have to take you to task, and disagree vehemently. Nationwide and statewide, most people favor CCW rights, and exposure to the issue of any kind only helps our case. The anti's arguments are based on lies, rhetoric, and emotion, while we're grounded in fact. The more light we can bring to the discriminatory policies of MD the better. The more light we shine on the antis the better.

But I do like your divide and conquer tactics, and it's why I'm angry at the NRA because they're actively participating in perpetuating the schism in the gun rights movement by playing hand in hand with the guy who seems to enjoy trying to stake out gun rights as his exclusive sandbox.
Unfortunately, it is not possible to say that most people favor CCW rights anymore than it is possible to say most people favor abortion. It is a split issue, but here in Maryland it is pretty clear that it is not a split issue. If it were possible to put up a single referendum to decide once and for all whether MD should have "shall-issue" CCW, are you 100% certain that we would win? I'd have to rank most Marylanders as being less bright than San Franciscans (and those idiots aren't as bright as Brazilians!).

I submit that MD needs to destroy the anti's by removing those who support them politically. One method that would truly do it, but would be very, very painful for many Marylanders, would be to push through a bill that requires the police and government to be financially responsible for any failure to protect the individual. As soon as you entrench this idea among the poor, it will take on a life of its own. Once the state is completely bankrupted by this, I predict a wave of ultra-conservatives will be swept into power.

[Spot77]

By getting feminists to pull away from the anti-gun rights folks, we weaken them. By getting self-defense to be the major issue instead of gun rights, we can enhance rights incrementally over time.



MSI contacted MCASA (sorry I can't remember what the acronym represents, but it's basically a womens' rights/ anti domestic abuse group) and they would not support women having better options for protection like ccw. Great idea, just no movemement forward yet. I like your thinking.

I submit that MD needs to destroy the anti's by removing those who support them politically

MSI is in the process of setting up a PAC that allows us more flexibility in campaigning for the right candidates. Right now, as a non-profit MSI cannot publicly endorse any candidate. there are several good challengers to some of the most rabid anti's this year.

I completely understand why the NRA doesn't bother to visibly fight here. Their money would be wasted and it would only help the anti's get more visibility.

There's thousands of NRA members in MD paying their dues. I don't think it's too much to ask for a little support and to respond to our requests to meet with them to discuss strategy. I do understand putting money where it's most effective, however what we're asking for would cost virtually nothing. The NRA is actively working against Gov Ehrlich (through Tripwire) and Delegate Don Dwyer, the MOST pro gun legislator we have (and it's a strange coincidence that Del. Dwyer beat the MD NRA Rep's father out in the last election....think there's any hard feelings there?)Certainly Gov Ehrlich has been a letdown as far as advancing gun rights, but does anybody actually think the leftists Duncan and O'Malley would be BETTER?

[Lemon328i]

MSI contacted MCASA (sorry I can't remember what the acronym represents, but it's basically a womens' rights/ anti domestic abuse group) and they would not support women having better options for protection like ccw. Great idea, just no movemement forward yet. I like your thinking.
The problem was that MSI made the contact. The MD Coalition Against Sexual Assault likely would have given the same answer to any of the gun rights organizations. That is why a pseudo organization (let's day the "MD Family Society") should have made the overture. We can't get them to see our point of view on firearms rights, but we can tailor our message in ways they can understand and get on board with.

Imagine if MDFS went to them with a bill that protected a woman from criminal and civil prosecution in proven cases of self-defense? What if you went to them with a petition to add to the MD Constitution "The fundamental right to defense of home, family and self shall not be infringed"? No added frills, no mention of firearms. Who could campaign against it? Anyone who did would literally be ending their own political career.

Now imagine that coupled with that bill, a poison bill were introduced simultaneously making law enforcement and government financially responsible for failure to protect the population? Anti-gun rights politicians would be pushed into a corner. They either support self-defense rights or they bankrupt the state. Fighting against both positions would be nearly impossible to reconcile.

Since MDFS would not be a "gun rights" organization, the anti's could not pull the regular old bull of "there go those gun nuts again".

There's thousands of NRA members in MD paying their dues. I don't think it's too much to ask for a little support and to respond to our requests to meet with them to discuss strategy.
The main question here is with whom should the NRA meet? Is there any one organization that can really speak for Marylanders? MSI, MCSI, AGC, MDRSP, Tripwire, etc? All are too specific and for too long associated with advancing only gun rights. We have been marginalized by having too specific a message. We can't now expand that message because we have been marginalized.

That's why a new organization needs to be created that is not a "gun rights" organization, if only to create pressure from a different direction for the anti-gun rights politicians. Could you imagine Doug Duncan or O'Malley being forced saying "I don't think Marylanders should have the right to self-defense, because the government can protect them and when we fail to, we will pay them cold, hard taxpayer cash."?

[Spot77]

The problem was that MSI made the contact

True. But nobody approached them in the past, so it was worth getting an official postion from them.

MDRSP is allegedly the official MD contact group, but the general consensus is that Tripwire at al is the unofficial and preferred contact.


All of your other points are duly noted and will be discussed with the powers that be. :) I doubt we would set up a psuedo group, but if you're offering to set up the MDFS, I can get a ton of people to sign on to the idea. It certainly sounds interesting....especially if it draws more female and minority members. I suspect the legislature is getting tired of seeing the same white guys testify every year.

[Lemon328i]

All of your other points are duly noted and will be discussed with the powers that be. I doubt we would set up a psuedo group, but if you're offering to set up the MDFS, I can get a ton of people to sign on to the idea. It certainly sounds interesting....especially if it draws more female and minority members. I suspect the legislature is getting tired of seeing the same white guys testify every year.

Well, hopefully we'll be able to build a consensus. I do happen to be in a very liberal place that would be ideal for the establishment of something like MDFS, but the key would be to maintain control with folks "in the know", without being seen as a front for gun rights. I'll have to feel out some of the fringe anti groups to see who might sign onto it.

I did sign up to testify last year and I thought that as a minority member I might actually get heard, but alas it was not to be. Unfortunately I couldn't get down to Annapolis this year. I might better serve the gun rights community by remaining relatively anonymous so that I can continue to infiltrate the anti groups and establish a pseudo group like MDFS.

[MikeK]

Lemon - You have some good ideas. There are plenty of groups (too many) that you can get involved with. Drop one or more of us a PM and we'd be more than happy to hook you up. Assuming MDRSP is the MD State Rifle and Pistol Association (MSRPA) based on my experience they're worthless when it comes to legislation. One annual meeting a year, occasional newsletter, not much on E-mail or getting the 'word' out. They had a brief spurt of energy a couple of years ago and showed some promise. I have let my membership lapse, so perhaps they're really making big changes now. (I do gamble and will take wagers on this.) MSRPA is the official NRA group in MD. At one time the idea of taking them over was discussed. I have met several of the past/present officers and they were all very nice people. Unfortunately they didn't seem to have the passion of a Spot, Norton, helmetcase and others. I'm not including myself in that group.

As discussed in this thread and the other current MD threads, our greatest enemy is ourselves. The only person that I know of that has made an effort to bring the groups together, and has the connections, is the current chairmen of MCSM. King Jim (purtilo) seems to want to create friction among the groups. Perhaps because no one kissed his ring before advocating an issue? He may have done some good in the past, but in the last year he's undone whatever he accomplished and then some - IMHO.

Last I heard there were 50,000 NRA members in MD. Many of the clubs and associations are active. It seems a shame that there isn't some way to mobilize a force of this size and get them on the same page at least on a few issues.

I don't mean to sound negative, but I guess I was. Time for a beer or two.

Keep in touch.

[Helmetcase]

Well Lemon while I took you to task in the other thread, I have to like what you're saying here. You're onto something Bob Culver, the MSI board, and I have been thinking for a while--we're better off as a many headed hydra with various different organizations working in concert than with one large organization being the single point of failure in the gun rights movement. We can be more things to more people this way.

I think we need to expand on the gun rights and CCW issue as a woman's issue, a gay rights issue, a civil rights issue, etc. We do need to do more work to bring in moderate and liberal voters who appreciate the civil libertarian approach (hence my website).

You're on to something here. The main thing I think we need to be doing now is focusing a bit on CCW as it's the issue that gets people outta bed in the morning, and at the same time working on appealing to a broader range of civil rights and liberty minded organizations.

[MikeK]

we're better off as a many headed hydra with various different organizations working in concert than with one large organization being the single point of failure in the gun rights movement. We can be more things to more people this way.


Great idea - I agree! Not to beat a dead horse, but who has some plan to get these groups in concert? I certainly don't expect all of us to be sitting around the campfire singing 'Kumbya', but it would be nice to reduce the infighting, backstabbing , power-mongering etc.

[Helmetcase]

My plan is simple--continue to have the heads of MSI, MCSM (well, I'm part of both of those so I'm biased), MD Alert, MCRKBA, MD Rifle and Pistol, AGC of MD, etc. meet regularly and stay on the same page to avoid more of the "they'd trade this right or that" bullshyte from spreading around...and it'll make sure we work in concert.

Working each others booths at gun shows will help.

Ignoring Tripwire when it offers that sort of lie isn't a bad idea either. ;)

[Lemon328i]

Helmetcase, I responded to your taking me to task in the other thread, but there is one thing that I wish to emphasize; While we must pull support from women and civil libertarian types, we cannot do so under the rubrick of gun rights. It is simply still too polarizing in this state. There are still way too many people who see firearms as "bad".

I proposed that new organizations be created, even if only in name, to shift fundamental self-defense and government accountability for crime to the forefront of the debate in addition to arguing for CCW and gun rights.

We should have a message that resonates with the average Marylander i.e. do you think you have a right to protect your home, your family and yourself or do you think the police should do it? If the police fail to do it, should they or the government be held financially responsible? No mention of firearms, RKBA or CCW. It would still serve our cause because having a basic self-defense framework would be a legal foundation to build lasting CCW on.

[molonlabe]

Ignore tripwire and to alienate a whole segment of the MD gun crowd.

I tried to mediate this a year ago and got nowhere. I still have all my PM's. Continue the infighting and go down together. I can always move to another state. Jim firmly believes that the offer to trade the AWB for CCW (I don't think this is true and the delagate may have been feeding him a line). As an outside observer not seeing msi getting behind it makes me wonder. The proof is in the actions.

[Spot77]

What you have to remember is that MSI is focused on ccw. It doesn't mean that everybody didn't testify AGAINST the awb. But there's plenty of groups (like Tripwire) passing the gospel about the AWB. MSI usually includes info on the AWB and what to do to fight it, but not always.

Just like Glocktalk focuses on Glock (or one would think) and a 1911 forum focuses on 1911's, MSI focuses on ccw. Fighting AWB's is not any less important, it's just not the focus.

You had questions last year about who was in charge of MSI and the like. Last year that couldn't really be answered because at the time it was just a website that kept people interested in ccw connected. Since then, Henry has taken it a step further by getting the non profit status and electing a board of directors. NOW there's people "in charge" if you wish to speak to them. Last year there never really was a way to make "official" statements....everybody was encouraged to do whatever they could. It was just a loosely organized group of people with the same interests. And that goes to reinforce what I've been saying; there was no way anybody could offer a "trade" of ccw for an AWB. It just couldn't happen. MSI didn't have anything to offer in trade. What delegate or senator would have said, "Hey, here's a website full of gun guys that just showed up out of nowhere, maybe we should fear them and offer them a trade!"

Now, with some organization and over 1200 members signed up for the ccw alerts, and dozens of Executive Members (people who have donated significant time and money) and a Board of Directors (that will need to be elected again next year) MSI is on par or surpassing some of the other groups like MCDL, MSCM, etc. Those have all been outstanding groups, but the people who ran them gave so much to the cause with such little support from the masses that they seemed to burn out.

I welcome the chance to work with every gun owner in Maryland regardless of which group they choose to support. I don't care who gets things done as long as they get done.

I also encourage people who have an interest in setting a plan of action for MSI to become a member and run for a Board of Director seat next year.


The proof is in the actions.

I agree 100%. How many Tripwire subscribers were at the hearings this year? Where was the NRA Rep? Where was Jim Purtilo? Not to beat a dead horse, but as you said, the proof is in the actions. There were dozens of MSI members at the hearings; most with written and verbal testimony to submit. Now I realize that there's more to do than show up at hearings and that a lot of people have been putting time and sweat into this mess for a loooong time. And I realize that I don't see or know everything that goes on. But one thing is certain; NOBODY can justly criticize my actions or claim MSI is inactive.

[MikeK]

Ignore tripwire and to alienate a whole segment of the MD gun crowd.

I tried to mediate this a year ago and got nowhere. I still have all my PM's. Continue the infighting and go down together.

Alienate Tripwire? Isn't that what tripwire has tried to do to the rest of us? King jim seems to be tripwire, but he made no effort to discuss whatever strategies he may or may not have with anyone in the MSI group or you.

We discussed your mediation efforts via email and in person, and I applaud your efforts, but was kj willing to listen to any ideas but his own? As far as I'm concerned the guy is over the edge and I don't think he can pull himself back up.

If the tripwire people are gullible enough to follow him blindly then will alienating them make any difference?

I would really like to see the infighting stop, but I don't think it will until some of the old guard is replaced. kj would be the first on my list.

[molonlabe]

Actually I would like a face to face with Jim someday. I hear he works in my neck of the woods. I do know he has been at this a long time fighting for Maryland gun rights and Spot77 is correct about my efforts to find a unified voice from msi last year. In fairness to msi the both times I was in Annapolis msi was the major presence there.

My attempts to get Jim to take down the squirrel talk website as a peace jester failed and I could not get him past his rhetoric. I do know Maryland gun owners need a unified voice and an effective strategy that works in politics. I go by actions as will most Maryland gun owners.

Last year the thread was shut down under protest by me. The only way Maryland gunowners can make an informed decision is to hear both sides and for dialog to be kept in the open. If one party refuses dialog then as I said actions speak louder than words. Using terms such as KJ are not conducive to dialog anymore than a website called squirrel talk is.

I would like to believe that Jims intentions are good and he has the interest of Maryland‘s KBA in mind. Apparently the folks at the NRA believe so.
That’s my 2 cents.

[Spot77]

Amen to that brother.

It's been an interesting year, and we've made some advancements in the big picture.

Next year, I fear, will be the real mofo of a year if we don't at least hold our ground in the elections.

I think that's certainly something that all gunowners in MD can agree on; we NEED to all work to make sure people like Senator Gianetti and Del Dwyer get re-elected, or at least somebody as favorable to gun rights takes their places (Although I think we owe it to them to do everything we can to keep them in office. They've certainly done plaenty for us.)

Del Quinter has a pretty good challenger by way of a fellow named Rick Bowers. I went to his campaign kick off event and spoke to him about gun rights and he's on board with us. Hell even Chuck Schumer would be better than Quinter!

District 30 shows 3 promising candidates. If we can keep Del McMillan in office (I had a VERY nice conversation with him last night by the way) and pick up another Delegate's seat (All three challengers are pro 2A) then we'll be moving forward.

So in another two weeks we can start this up again trying to hatch a plan for our survival through the elections.

[Lemon328i]

I for one would be glad to see Quinter go. I was at a meeting of Ceasefire last year where I met him and he seems religiously brainwashed into thinking that gun control can actually reduce crime. I guess he hasn't heard about Great Britain's and Australia's woes. I almost barfed having to listen to him, but someone has to keep tabs on what the anti's are doing from the inside.

[Spot77]

You do know that Quinter worked for Senator Feinstein and still receives contributions from her, right? :barf:

[Greg M]

All I know is that I wouldn't be the activist I am if it were not for the existence of Maryland Shall Issue http://www.marylandshallissue.org/ or a similar group focused on the Right to Carry.

I read Tripwire when I first got involved with gun issues and didn't know very much. The NRA, Jim P. and his followers lie about MSI. MSI has taken the high road by choosing to ignore the attacks (some, very personal as in the squirrel talk site). I am proud to be associated with MSI.

Greg

[Norton]

It would seem Maryland isn't the only state foresaken my the NRA-ILA:

Thirty-Nine

Kim du Toit

March 23, 2006

11:34 AM



...is the number of states which now allow concealed carry of firearms. From my Kansas Readers Iceberg and English Kanigit (who is going to have his own personal Ammo Day celebration—and why not?) comes the news that both houses of the Kansas state legislature passed CCW legislation by veto-proof majorities. The GFW Governess of Kansas duly vetoed the bill, as she has done every time before, but this time the bill sustained its super-majority, which means that when the law takes effect in January 2007, Kansas can join the rest of the United States, on this issue at least.

Here’s what Iceberg had to say on a related topic:

Note also that this measure was introduced, debated, passed and has come this far without any N.R.A.-I.L.A. presence visible to the naked eye. We fly under their radar on most such issues. I think Kansas’ population of 2.5 million contains too small a pool of gunowners to bother with, seeing as there are far fewer Kansans than there are N.R.A. members, notwithstanding that we probably have as large a percentage of citizens who are members as any other state.
Actually, I would suspect that the reason that the NRA didn’t get involved was that they thought the legislation wouldn’t pass, or at least survive the expected veto from the Governess. The NRA only works where they think they have a good chance of winning. In this case, however, the good citizens of Kansas did all the work themselves, and congratulations are in order.

But Iceberg has even better news:
Nebraska is considering a similar measure during this session of their unicameral legislature; with a bit of luck, we might be putting +2 in the good-guy column this year.
I’m not so sanguine about this one. Although the Nebraskans I’ve met are about as conservative a bunch as can be found anywhere in Red America, the legislature is dominated by the liberal bastion of Lincoln, so a CCW law may not be that easy to pass. Nevertheless, we can but hope. 40/50 is a much easier percentage to calculate than 39/50, after all…

[Baron Holbach4]

Let's face it, folks. CCW is not going to happen in MD any time soon. We can do a long term education campaign, and keep voting the right way, and maybe, some day. But meantime, let's not s**t in our own nest pushing for something we won't get.


The goal should be to amend Maryland's constitution to include specifically the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Once that happens, then CCW will follow. Maryland residents need to be reminded that its state constitution does not mirror the Second Amendment of the Federal Constitution.

[K-Romulus]

http://www.mdarchives.state.md.us/msa/mdmanual/43const/html/00dec.html
MD Declaration of Rights


Art. 28. That a well regulated Militia is the proper and natural defence of a free Government.

and
Art. 7. That the right of the People to participate in the Legislature is the best security of liberty and the foundation of all free Government; for this purpose, elections ought to be free and frequent; and every citizen having the qualifications prescribed by the Constitution, ought to have the right of suffrage (amended by Chapter 357, Acts of 1971, ratified Nov. 7, 1972).

Yep. Maryland people ought to be free.:rolleyes:

The above two declarations seem really rediculous in light of this one:

Art. 6. That all persons invested with the Legislative or Executive powers of Government are the Trustees of the Public, and, as such, accountable for their conduct: Wherefore, whenever the ends of Government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the People may, and of right ought, to reform the old, or establish a new Government; the doctrine of non-resistance against arbitrary power and oppression is absurd, slavish and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.

Maybe people should resist arbitrary power by lobbying those holding the power . . .:rolleyes:

[Baron Holbach4]

Amend Article 28 of the Maryland state constitution to read:

Art. 28. That a well regulated Militia is the proper and natural defence of a free Government; the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

[SB88LX]

Question, what does it matter what the states constitution says. THe Federal constitution over-rules the states, does it not?

[Lemon328i]

Question, what does it matter what the states constitution says. THe Federal constitution over-rules the states, does it not?

Nope, the US Constitution only puts boundaries on Congress' actions, not the states. While the states cannot pass a law directly in opposition to the Constitution, banning a religion or re-establishing slavery for example, they can regulate so called "moral" issues like alcohol, firearms and abortion rights.

Technically speaking a state without a Second Amendment equivalent in the State Constitution could ban firearms within their own borders. Such a law might not stand up to a commerce clause challenge, but then again it might.

My personal take on Maryland is that there is little support to put RKBA into the state constitution, but that there would be overwhelming support to codify a pure self-defense amendment. CCW could then be logically argued in court as being covered under such an amendment, especially if one states that self-defense is the primary reason for carrying a firearm.

[Harry Tuttle]

CONSTITUTION OF MARYLAND

ARTICLE IX

MILITIA AND MILITARY AFFAIRS.

SECTION 1. The General Assembly shall make, from time to time, such provisions for organizing, equipping and disciplining the Militia, as the exigency may require, and pass such Laws to promote Volunteer Militia organizations as may afford them effectual encouragement.