The Maryland AWB of 2007

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well...

My interview is at 1:30 p.m., not 11:30 a.m. as I originally thought (the 11:30interview is wednesday :banghead: ), so I will not be making it this year.

Hopefully one of these jobs work out and then I can contribute to MSI and add a few EBR's to the collection.

Good luck and God Bless.

Oh yeah, and keep us updated as much as possible.
 
Good luck to everyone. I wish I could be there.

I sent all the judiciary members emails of opposition, hope that helps.
 
I'm going to take my laptop and try to snag a wireless connection and provide live updates.
 
Work is interfering again. I'll send another round of emails this morning and hope it gets through. Good luck guys and thank you. I'm sorry I can't make it.
 
Good luck from Muscat, Oman

I wish I could be there, please keep us updated. Hit 'em hard guys...
John Rhines
Muscat, Oman
Coming home soon
 
Latest news: O'Malley being called on to support Ban

http://www.washingtontimes.com/metro/20070226-115010-1147r.htm

ANNAPOLIS -- State lawmakers attempting again to ban assault weapons in Maryland are hoping Gov. Martin O'Malley will give his support as hearings on the issue begin today.
"That's what we think is very different this year than in the past," said Sen. Michael G. Lenett, Montgomery Democrat and chief sponsor of the bill. "We have a governor who is very committed to public safety."
Mr. O'Malley, a Democrat, pledged his support for the proposed ban while campaigning last year for governor.
The Democrat-controlled General Assembly has failed four straight years to pass such legislation, and members think Mr. O'Malley's support this year might make the difference.
"Realistically, what it's going to take is for Governor Martin O'Malley to get strongly behind it," said former Delegate Neil Quinter, a Howard Democrat and chief sponsor of the legislation from 2003 to 2006.
Mr. O'Malley is not expected to testify at legislative hearings like he recently did for a repeal of the state death penalty.
The bill would effectively reinstate at the state level the federal ban on assault weapons that lapsed in 2004.
"If it wasn't good enough for the federal government, why should the same law be enacted on the state level?" National Rifle Association spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said yesterday. He said Congress did not reauthorize the ban because there was no conclusive proof that it reduced violent crime.
The legislation would prohibit Maryland residents from owning three types of assault weapons: an assault long gun, an assault pistol and a copycat weapon.
Opponents of the bill say the ban would infringe on their constitutional rights.
"I'm hopeful there is no momentum to pass additional restrictions on my constituents' Second Amendment rights," said Delegate Christopher B. Shank, Washington County Republican and member of the House Judiciary Committee.
Legislation to impose a ban has died in the committee four straight years with the help of Delegate Joseph F. Vallario Jr., Southern Maryland Democrat.
"Vallario is no fan of gun legislation or death-penalty legislation, for that matter," Mr. Quinter said.
The Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee, which will hear testimony on the bill today, likely will submit the key vote.
Lawmakers and political observers say the swing vote will be from Sen. James Brochin, a Baltimore County Democrat who frequently splits with his party on social issues.
"He is certainly one of the people who is a critical vote on the committee," Mr. Lenett said.
The committee's four Republicans and Sen. Norman R. Stone Jr., Baltimore County Democrat, are expected to vote against the proposed ban.
Mr. Brochin said last night that he would vote against the bill.
"If it gets killed in the Senate, yes, it will be done in the House," Mr. Quinter said.
 
"If it gets killed in the Senate, yes, it will be done in the House," Mr. Quinter said.

Now see, that can be taken 2 different ways...

Does he mean that if it dies in the Senate, that it will not go through the House.

OR

If it dies in the Senate, it will be pushed through the House......

:cuss: IF IT DIES, LET IT DIE.... THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN.... LEAVE MY STUFF ALONE !!!!!
 
Nighthawk - I'm hoping it's the former. I can't believe this has been up and voted down so many times, it's like that movie groundhog day where the same day keeps repeating, and repeating...

You'd think folks'd take the hint already!
 
If Brochin actually votes against SB43, I guess I'll have to send him a "thank you" card!

When I called his office I was told by an aide he wasn't sure on how he would vote, then I heard he would vote against it. To see it in print that he will definitely vote against SB43 takes care of the doubt I had. (well,most of it)


Is there anyway to find out how the Judicial Committee votes without reading it in the papers first?
 
Preliminary Report

I left around 4:00. The anti's had finished and the good guys were getting atarted. About 13 pages of people signed up to testify for us. i was on page 10 or 11 so whatever I had to say would have been said.

Observations in no particular order:

I think we had all of the seats in the gallery. Great turnout with many standing outside the room.

Almost all of the anti's were questioned on the once every 48 hour assault weapon stat. The state police, who testified in favor of the bill this year, do NOT track that data.

Ceasefire MD said it was based on 789 uses of their definition of an assault weapon in a crime in MD over a 4 year period. They 'researched' each incident and claimed it was probably higher since the data was a couple years old. I guess if you're gonna lie - make it a big one!

Brochin did appear to be on our side based on his questions.

Sue Pecham(?) of CM gave her same spiel. Forehand waved and smiled sweetly at her. Frosh finished her testimony for her after her time was up and just about kissed her a**.

They drug out some young woman whose father, an FBI agent, was killed in the line of duty in '94 by an assault weapon - in DC IIRC, where guns were banned. Lots of tears. I do not mean to make light of the woman's tragedy, but as one of our guys testified - he lost his father at a young age to a car accident. Does he want cars banned?

Semi's are more dangerous than full auto's, spray from the hip with that pistol grip or thumbhole stock etc.

None of the anti's were opposed to the 2A, they just wanted reasonable gun control.

My impressions were that Jacobs (great questions as usual), Mooney, Haines, Brochin, Simonaire and Stone(?) are against the bill.


I'm sure those that stayed later will have more to add and correct any misinterpretations I may have had.

A fun day again.
 
Last edited:
MikeK - Thanks for the breakdown! Those were just the happenings up to 4:00, huh? seems like we're doing pretty good. The comments you made about Forehand and Frosh made me sick, to think about how blatant their stance on the matter is. Tacky to say the least. Props to the State Police for backing us again. Maybe the folks who keep sponsoring these garbage bills will finally wise up.:neener: Well, one can hope. :D :D

Once again, thanks for the update! I hope we get some more before too long.
 
At 5:00pm I refuted the anti's "No sporting use" claim by distributing written testimony that included my wife and young kids shooting rifles that would be banned under this bill.

Left for dinner and the short ride home. I suspect that they MIGHT be wrapping it up right about now.

Unofficial count of pro gunners: 210 :evil:
 
My recap:

I made around 100 or so buttons and they went like the gift wrap sale at Wal-Mart the day after Christmas. I actually had to go around and ask some folks that had multiple pro-gun adornments to give some up.

The working pro-gun count....210. The antis had NO ONE other than the girl whose father was shot to testify in favor of the bill that was not a Ceasefire or Brady board member.

I went after a few points that hadn't been hit:

1. The Ceasefire jerks say that 71% of MD residents support the ban. Where were they today?

2. Law enforcement supports the ban. Then why is it that the Fraternal Order of Police, which represents the line duty officers, opposes the ban.

3. The MD State Police supports the ban this year, yet the VERY SAME officer sat their and testified against the bill. :banghead:

4. We have SB43, which will prohibit the law-abiding citizens of MD from owning a huge class of firearms, yet one of the sponsors of this bill is simultaneously sponsoring a bill that will grant convicted drug dealers the right to obtain the VERY SAME FIREARMS that SB43 wants to ban. :banghead:

Apparently I got a very stabbing glance from Senator Gladden, the sponsor in question, when that point came out.

Senator Jacobs came out as we left and congratulated me on my testimony. (Aw shucks).
 
After 2 Guinesses and a corned beef sandwich, I'm ready for the next round.

Here's what you need to do:

The vote, if it occurs, will probably happen on Friday of this week accoring to Frosh. You MUST send follow up letters, emails and calls. We've got them on the run but have to keep the pressure up.

You can find the sponsors and the Judicial Committee members here:

http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=697
 
I just got back from the hearing, we had about 200 people show up and 13 pages of witnesses sign up to speak, there were about 5 or so antis that spoke including the prez of the bradys :barf: and ceasefire maryland :barf: they kept presenting the same things over and over, the DC sniper, the Hollywood shootout, the "every 48 hours" report and even our pal Zumbo's statements. they pretty much got shut down and debunked on all of them, they wouldn't answer if this ban would have prevented any crimes, but basically portrayed it as a matter of "public safety". I was handing out stickers and spoke to about a half dozen reporters. the funny thing was that the reporters in trying to remain "objective" kept looking to find people against the bill to interview and couldnt find them. This was my first appearance at a hearing like this and I have to say I am very happy that I went, I wish it could have been under better circumstances but I met a lot of cool people and it makes me feel good that I pesonally have fought for my rights. Norton had the antis sweating with his testimony and l think his calling out Gladden was great. I found a couple news sites that wrote about it
http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=25&sid=1073808 http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/politics/bal-weapons0227,0,7764495.story?track=rss and this has to be the highlight of the hearing:
Sen. Nancy Jacobs, a Republican who represents parts of Harford and Cecil counties, questioned how the bill would prevent gang members from acquiring and using the weapons.


"I've never known them to obey the law," she said, evoking applause from opponents of the bill and causing Sen. Brian Frosh, the committee chair, to call for order and remind the audience that the hearing "was not a basketball game."
 
Glad to see a large turnout of progun folks today. It was upsetting to hear when the anti's started throwing up lies upon lies when at the podium. I was getting more and more angry especially when the Brady hack was talking.:fire: I almost made a booboo in my testimony when I said I'm against this bill and this bill angers me at the end of my testimony. I almost said this bill just pisses me off.:evil: Glad I caught myself in time.
 
SWEET!!!!

This is amazing, thank all of you for actually being there and shutting down these fools! I'll keep doing my part, sending those letters out and calling as much as I can.

The part about the reporters not being able to find an anti to interview is hilarious. Frosh sounds like a sweetheart.:barf: :barf:

Quick question - In writing a follow-up, what should I say? I'm still learning the art of short-and-sweet, without too much babble in between. And any particular folks I should be extra sure to send it to?

MOLON LABE!!
 
Gentlemen I would like to thank all of you that took the time to go to Annapolis today.......you are appreciated. I had a doctors appointment at 1:30 PM today in Glen Burnie, I left the doctors office a little after 3:00 PM and stopped by Scott's gun store only to find it closed with a sign on the door that read "Gone to Annapolis to oppose the gun ban bill".
 
Scott's gun store only to find it closed with a sign on the door that read "Gone to Annapolis to oppose the gun ban bill".

OUTSTANDING.


kingpin: In your follow up, just say something like, "Now that you've heard from the overwhelming number of constituents who oppose this bill, I'm sure you've made up your mind to oppose it too."

ps: stickers went in the mail last week. I didn't know you'rereal name so they're addressed to "kingpin008"
 
Damn....I really want my rifle back from Scott's, but at least the delay was for a good cause :p

There were two gun shops there today then.....OC Outdoors in Dundalk and Scott's Gunsmithing. I might just have to consider buying a gun from Scott for his support.
 
Spot77 - Thanks, I figured my User ID would suffice, as long as the address is rght.

Yea, I'm busily crafting my replies as we speak, but so far the winner has to be this one:

Dear Senator _____ -

I sincerely hope that the testimony given tonight in regards to SB - 43 will serve as a notice that the law-abiding citizens of Maryland will not stand for this ridiculous and unfair legislation. The facts are simply not in support of an Assault Weapons Ban, and those who wish to support it, while well-meaning, are unable to prove the ban in question will have any positive effects on the rate violent crimes are committed in Maryland. The testimony given tonight supports those who aim to defeat this bill, and by standing in opposition to those citizens fighting to retain their rights, you effectively make yourself an enemy of those who support you. This bill, and similar versions of this bill have
come up at least four times in years past, an have been consistently voted down. The Maryland State Police have testified multiple times as to the ineffectiveness of this bill,
and in fact support those in opposition of SB - 43.

In closing, Senator - I advise you to consider your stance on this matter carefully, and with the true facts in mind. Consider those gun owners among your constituency, and the danger you will subject them to when their rights and safety are not only in jeopardy from criminals on the street, but their own elected representatives.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Jay Brady Kristensen
Howard County

...currently being sent, with variations here 'n there to all the Senators on my email list. :D :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top