Discussion in 'Legal' started by Norton, Jan 17, 2007.
Note that the contact information for all of the sponsors and co-sponsors is listed at the bottom of the page.
So it finally began.
Any word as to whether it contains a grandfather clause?
Find your legislator:
This is a Senate bill so that it where your efforts should be directed.
can't say about grandfathering yet
The bill was just introduced, so it takes a day or so to get text posted online.
It wasn't up last night when I checked.
It probably will be like the last few years' bills and have grandfathering, but you never know.
Edited to add:
It's only got 21 co-sponsors out of the 47 senators. Not a majority, but close. Notice the new JPR chair (Frosh) and co-chair (Gladden) are sponsors. Also notice the hand-picked Brady candidates Raskin and Rosapepe are co-sponsors.
What is really disappointing is to see Kramer on the list. She didn't sponsor the last one; I actually thought I had made some progress with her.
(mikeH this is not directed at you personally, as you may agree)
:banghead: grandfather clause? This is one clause which really steams me up, because I want to give my guns to my grandkids, and I don't even have kids yet. Accepting a grandfather clause is just as bad as accepting an outright ban because that is what it is 30 years down the line. DC had a grandfather clause in it's 1976 handgun ban, now look at DC. All a grandfather clause does is eliminate resistance to a bill, to allow it to pass. sorry for the rant...
pure speculation, but grandfathering seems likely
Since this AWB modifies MD law 4-303 (covering grandfathering of "Assault pistols" if owned by a certain date) there probably is grandfathering of so-called "assault weapons":
But there is no guarantee.
Prior Year Introduction As: HB 1367/06 - JUD
email sent to Senator Colburn. With the way the political climate is, it's going to be a long governership.
One thing to point out to your representatives:
According to the FBI, Maryland had 551 reported homicides in 2005. All rifles COMBINED accounted for only 4 of them.
Then ask them why banning popular civilian rifles with handgrips that stick out is so important, since they're almost never misused.
learn2shoot, no offense taken at all. Just so that we don't misunderstand each other, I asked about grandfather clause to measure how much the MD antis want to play hardball. If they think they won't meet too much opposition, they'll probably put down something like California's, or even worse not at all.
On the flip side, this is something MD gun owners can consider as damage control. It's a foregone conclusion that the Dems will be in control for at least the next 4 years. Certainly, we should not accept the ban without a big fight, but at some point in time we have to cut our losses and try to win later.
here is the link to the 2006 HB1367
Features of the 2006 bill:
"Assault weapon" = listed firearm OR magazine fed centerfire rifle + one evil feature (but uses the expansive "can accept" language in the definition)
Grandfathering if owned before Oct. 1 and registered with MSP by Dec. 1.
Can leave to heirs if owner dies
Dealers can sell off stock on hand as of Oct. 1
Edited to add
Five of the eleven JUD cmte members are co-sponsors of the 2007 bill:
Frosh Gladden Forehand Muse Raskin
Six are not:
Brochin Haines Jacobs Mooney Simonaire Stone
I mean no offense, but can you show me one place in the legislative history of MD where gunowners have "cut their losses" and regained any ground after that?
We've been playing defense for 40 years and it's gotten us nowhere. I, for one, will not accept compromise in any way, shape or form. An AWB is an entry point for the banning of all firearms. They will attempt to convince the "sportsman" that assault weapons are all they want to ban. Then they will come for the handguns, then they will get around to those pesky "sniper" rifles and shotguns.
They will attempt to divide us and then defeat us.
Norton, I went back to read my own post, and it did sound like I was saying we should all just roll over and take one in the posterior. I don't blame you at all for your reaction.
There is no question that we have to fight the AWB with all we got. I'll definitely join in the letter campaign. What I was trying to say earlier was to leave the grandfather clause alone. If that makes me a defeatist, I guess I'm guilty as charged.
Thanks for the clarification I wasn't trying to bust your balls, but the compromise crowd has really hurt us in years past and it's a sore spot for me.
Is this only for Crappyland, er....Maryland? Or is it for the whole damn country?!?
Maryland, for now. Just remember that states like MD, CA, NJ, NY and IL are the test cases for gun legislation that will soon be exported to a state near you.
Well that does it. I'll be buying at least 2 lowers before October. And, my senator has an email waiting in his inbox.
edit: Purtillo has a blurb on his page about it and seems to think it won't get out of committee. Who wants to bet that if it does pass, he blames MSI?
One of many possible scenarios, I'm afraid.
Mike Miller is key
He let the Chris Van Hollen Handgun Ban get an end run around the JUD cmte back in 2001. The CVH-HB was sucked out of the committee and brought directly to a floor vote through some sort of parliamentary maneuver.
But Miller wouldn't let the AWB supporters use the same "cheat code."
Also, don't forget Garagiola tried to get stealth AWB's through other committees and failed. He is now on some other committee besides JUD, so we will need to keep an eye out for the same dirty trick.
Of course, if the AWB "cheat code" is used this year, expect to see platitudes of "brilliant stategery." If the same happened for a CCW bill, we wouldn't hear the end of the "underhanded tricks" screeching.
Y'all realize this is nearly a carbon copy of the California AWB... right down to the 'capacity to accept a detachable magazine' and 'use of a tool' language... with a few new additions, namely the threaded barrel part. Othewise, its a photocopy of what we are stuck with in CA.
Y'all may want to start looking into the mag locks we use in CA... have a peek at Calguns later.
With all due respect, I'm not looking into anything other than defeating this silliness.
Sounds like they are drinking the same koolaide they did here in CA with SB-23. If you guys are looking for ammunition to help defeat this bill, talk to anyone in california law enforcement and ask them to define what an "assault weapon" is. This should show that laws have become so complex that even cops can't figure them out.
Agreed with much of the sentiment expressed by some of you. Legislators really only spend time enacting new laws, they rarely ever go back and revise any of the stupid crappy laws they pass. As a result of this, there are still laws about how high you can pile maneuer(sp?) just about everywhere except state capitols and Washington DC.
Fight this thing to the best of your ability. I like to think that if enough of you sit around and constantly tie up the phone lines of your elected officials deluge their e-mail and mail rooms you might hopefully get some traction. If you give an inch, they will take a mile, and you would likely be better off trying to hope it snows in hell than they repeal one of these silly laws.
Good luck Gentlemen (and ladies), you may need it, you may not. In the mean time pray for us folk out here in CA, now they want to give drivers licenses to illegals again.
Damn straight. And while I'm at it, I plan to make a few people look like the side of the horse that they really are.
Got an email back from both Colburn and his Chief of Staff stating he is against the bill. Hope it means something good.
Separate names with a comma.