The Maryland AWB of 2007

Status
Not open for further replies.
First REPLY to my Emails

Rob Garagiola's admin assistant responded to my email today - here's the text of her response:

"...Senator Garagiola is a co sponsor of this legislation. Senator Mike Lenett is the lead sponsor and has all the research for this bill. The Attorney Generals office will respond to this request.

Diane Yaeger
Administrative Assistant
Senator Rob Garagiola
301-858-3169
301-858-3607 (fax)"


So it looks like the co-sponsors will be able to duck responding with anything substantive - am I interpreting this correctly?

I sent versions of the same email to ALL of the co-sponsors on Friday and Saturday, I'll post any responses here as well.

Michael
 
I'm surprised there is ANY research for this bill.
The problem is that their idea of researching the issue is probably just browsing the Ceasefire MD and Brady Campaign websites for their statistics.
 
What does the attorney general have to do with this?

Does anyone have more info on the MPIA so that we can figure out a way to keep them from weaseling out of the requests? Asking for copies of email correspondence (assuming it's fair game) seems like it would be a more direct request and therefore, harder to sidestep.
 
Attorney General

Nico -

I'm guessing this may just be standard procedure, to ensure that PIA requests are met in some sort of standard manner. IF that is the case, we may be able to follow up with emails or letters to the co-sponsors, politely asking them why they are supporting a bill that won't meet their and our joint goal of reducing crime.

But, I'll wait until someone who has gone through this before weighs in....

Michael
 
the AP list has specific handguns (UZI, Tec-9) :

Title 4. Weapon Crimes
Subtitle 3. Assault Pistols and Detachable Magazines (Refs & Annos)

§ 4-301. "Assault pistol" defined

In this subtitle, "assault pistol" means any of the following firearms or a copy regardless of the producer or manufacturer:

(1) AA Arms AP-9 semiautomatic pistol;

(2) Bushmaster semiautomatic pistol;

(3) Claridge HI-TEC semiautomatic pistol;

(4) D Max Industries semiautomatic pistol;

(5) Encom MK-IV, MP-9, or MP-45 semiautomatic pistol;

(6) Heckler and Koch semiautomatic SP-89 pistol;

(7) Holmes MP-83 semiautomatic pistol;

(8) Ingram MAC 10/11 semiautomatic pistol and variations including the Partisan Avenger and the SWD Cobray;

(9) Intratec TEC-9/DC-9 semiautomatic pistol in any centerfire variation;

(10) P.A.W.S. type semiautomatic pistol;

(11) Skorpion semiautomatic pistol;

(12) Spectre double action semiautomatic pistol (Sile, F.I.E., Mitchell);

(13) UZI semiautomatic pistol;

(14) Weaver Arms semiautomatic Nighthawk pistol; or

(15) Wilkinson semiautomatic "Linda" pistol.

The catch is that the "handgun roster board" gets to decide if a handgun is legal for sale in MD, and the board rejects the sale of any handgun that might conceivably count as a "copycat assault pistol," which is why some Hammerli .22lr Olympic-class pistols are banned for sale (because they look too much like a Tec-9 :eek: ).
 
For the most part the people in annapolis politics have never seen, and mostly have never heard of any of these, too bad i never got the chance to talk to one, to explain things like that an mp-5 uses small pistol ammunition, works great for target shooting and will not peirce a bullet proof vest, but unlike a pistol is larger and harder to conceal, makes about as much sense as any gun law they have passed so far.
 
at risk of thread drift:

The HB228 PDF is on-line, and yes it is CCW reform.

It looks like it* removes the "(need a) good and substantial reason" language from the current law but adds some language about letting MSP charge whatever additional application fee it wants. This fee is to be put into the General Fund, and starting in 2009 the Governor is to spend an equivalent amount on "programs designed to combat criminal gang violence." If it is what it takes to get CCW in MD . . .

Link to PDF

*Disclaimer: Since I am not a MD lawyer, this is only my impression as an interested citizen of what this bill is trying to do.
 
some language about letting MSP charge whatever additional application fee it wants. This fee is to be put into the General Fund, and starting in 2009 the Governor is to spend an equivalent amount on "programs designed to combat criminal gang violence."

Why not tack on a fee to getting prescription drugs from the pharmacy and use it to combat illegal drug use?

@!#%@#$ers!:cuss:
 
you see this is a case of a brilliant and informed politician. before you ask ***? it is well documented by both the FBI and states that have shall issue and RTC laws there is a dramatic reduction in confrontational crime second to few other measures. Knowing this they synchronize a low puplicity law with high priced permts to a Dramatic and charismatic and public all encopasing crime bill that will be 1/2 financed by marylanders paying to excercise a constitutional right and will APPEAR to work, afterall the people actually changing the statistics will be quiet behind the scenes, and even financing the public and possibly innefective face of the crime bill, ensuring re-election by the politician riding it's publicity BRILLIANT!!!
 
sorry im at work now, a little tough to proofread, but basically from what I read on the CCW reform bill it looks like the powers that be may have seen the published numbers on the effeciveness of CCW carriers to prevent and stop crimes, therefore by charging an astronomical fee for the permits and using the "proceeds" to pay 1/2 of a to be named later peice of legislation, is a statistical cover, the crime stats should go down, and those who pass the unnamed legislation can claim that it is effective and reaon to re-elect them the less public means of crime control that is effective goes largely unnoticed by the general public so the MD ANTI's can still appear to be pro gun control, basically we pay, we reduce crime as statistics show, they take the money and credit for it, about the best you could expect in MD, hope this helps clear up my previous rant.
 
So does shall issue concealed carry have any chance of passing this year? or any chance of even being voted on, for that matter?

in short, no. But, I think it might make a good poison pill for the AWB.

For folks more in the know, not that the GA is all that receptive to CCW, but does using an issue like that weaken its credibility? ie: if a pro-gun legislator attaches shall issue CCW to the AWB bill and successfully kills it, would it have an effect on how standalone CCW bills are viewed in the future?
 
The trouble with lighting up the AWB with CCW is that they can always strip it off later on and pass the AWB clean. We should never presume that we have the legislative mojo to push through a poison pill.
 
Oh, I know that any pro-gun idea doesn't exactly have widespread support in the GA. I was thinking the poison pill thing would be more of a last resort thing to make passing the AWB more of a hassle. Hopefully, it won't get out of committee and we won't have to worry about other ways to stop it. . . until next year:uhoh:

Another thought I had today is that the GA and omalley are already talking about how there isn't money to pay for things that have gotten more publicity than the AWB. Hopefully, with a deficit in our future and omalley's love for spending other people's money, at least some legislators won't want to spend the money on an AWB
 
Relevant Quote

For writing to that fascist twit who wants to "lead" you:

"It is not the function of the government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the government from falling into error." - U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top