Skip to main content
... gun laws for a long time.
You say the requirements are "far too strict." Of what you listed, what/which of these would you do: reduce the cost, cancel the fingerprint requirement, reduce or eliminate that required class, cancel the mental health disclosure, shorten the waiting period?
The one I have the most trouble with, frankly, is that health disclosure. But mental health is commonly cited by gun advocates as a better and more productive area to devote money and energy to, than gun control and regulation measures. This suggests to me that even gun rights advocates would concede some connection of mental health reporting to gun transactions.
I ask not to be argumentative, but to understand whether your key position is to relax and improve Maryland procedures or whether the combination is so burdensome that it should go in its entirety or nearly so.
2014 IS COMING. Build up the Senate. Win back the House : 17 seats. Plus!
by TRPChicago on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 07:03:32 PM PST
[ Parent ]
It involves a challenge to Maryland's so-called "good cause" requirement for a concealed carry permit. Just 3 weeks ago, the Supremes declined to review the law.
Concealed Carry Law Petitions SCOTUS - Woollard v. Gallagher DENIED cert
I thought Mr. Woollard was a pretty sympathetic plaintiff but I guess the Supremes aren't ready to take on concealed carry permit laws yet. They declined to review NY's "good cause" CCW law last Spring, Kachalsky v. Cacace.
"They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003
by LilithGardener on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 07:16:21 PM PST
Firstly end MSP being Point of Contact for background checks and submit mental health records to NICS on a weekly or better basis.
Secondly, require any hunter or firearm safety class for any firearms purchase. This means NRA, IWLA, etc. If the legislature wants specific requirements, create a sample curriculum.
Third, require a 72 hour waiting period on the first purchase transaction for a through background check but not on subsequent transactions as you already own a gun. I don't know how that will work with MSP not being POC for NICS checks.
Fourth, add an affidavit to the 77R declaring that the firearm is not being purchased on behalf of another person. Or that it is being purchased on behalf of another person with a spot to write in their name and other relevant information for the background check. This will make prosecuting straw purchases very simple.
This will be much simpler and provide an equal level of public safety protection while reducing the burden on the general public.
I'm a 4 Freedoms Democrat.
by DavidMS on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 08:45:26 PM PST
and streamlined plan. To start from scratch, do you mean just for Maryland or would you support a federal law with the steps that you describe? I'm talking about a national law and process that would replace the complicated patchwork of rules in each state?
Isn't there a catch-22 of the effect of Heller? We usually think a constitutional right should be the same throughout the whole country. As I understand it, implementing what you describe would require a few states to amend their constitutions, right?
by LilithGardener on Wed Nov 06, 2013 at 09:20:50 PM PST
if its an MD only project and that has to do with how the BATFE processes applications to implement the 72 hour waiting period for the first purchase.
There is nothing to stop states from implementing protections of basic rights differently. For instance, voting though not explicitly protected in the Constitution is viewed as a basic right but within limits each state can chose how to draw districts, finance campaigns, select voting machines, etc.
Alternatively going all federal would be interesting but I can't see anyone liking the outcome.
by DavidMS on Thu Nov 07, 2013 at 10:05:51 AM PST
by you on soon
Or you may make changes below and Preview again, or Cancel this comment.
Donate to support Daily Kos.
© Kos Media, LLC Site content may be used for any purpose without explicit permission unless otherwise specified
“Kos” and “Daily Kos” are registered trademarks of Kos Media, LLC