Maryland Gun Ban Bill Revealed. Again.

 

The first time we posted on Maryland’s civilian disarmament proposals, Governor Martin O’Malley had provided a general outline. Since then, the text of the bill has dropped. Click here for Senate Bill 281. There’s a lot to not like. In common with all the unconstitutional civilian disarmament bills rushing through State legislatures in the wake of the Newtown spree killing, SB 218 is both fundamentally flawed and specifically stupid. In this case, the bill bans anyone under the age of 21 (the minimum age for owning or carrying a firearm) from possessing ammunition. In other words, no one under 21 can hunt! Governor O’Malley says his folks will fix that in an amendment. Later. What they can’t and won’t fix: the ban against “possessing, selling, offering to sell, transferring, purchasing, or receiving an assault weapon.” Looks like the lights are going out in the Free State.

 

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

44 Responses to Maryland Gun Ban Bill Revealed. Again.

  1. avatarChuck says:

    I suppose the Governor will volunteer to confiscate them himself?

  2. avatarElwood says:

    I work in Maryland on a daily basis and have been unable to legally carry everyday because of that. I purposely commute longer than I otherwise would have to to avoid living in the People’s Socialist Republic of Maryland. I think they were recently listed as the least free state in the country with regard to for more than Second Amendment rights. Sic Semper Tyrannis.

  3. avatarGov. William J. Le Petomane says:

    The homicide rate in Baltimore last year was 32/100,000. Keeping 20 year olds from hunting should fix that.

    • avatarMauser says:

      I find it interesting that Maryland has relatively strict gun control laws, #7 if you want to go by the Brady Campaign’s ratings, yet consistently ranks between #2 and #4 for the highest overall homicide rate and firearms homicide rate in the country. The firearms homicide rate in Maryland is also around 68% of the total homicide rate, which is average for the US. Clearly Maryland’s gun control laws are not working.

      • avatarKory says:

        I’ve really been thinking about trying to find the correlation between Brady rating and violent crime. I’m guessing the higher the Brady rating the higher the violent crime. It wouldn’t be that hard to do this. Anyone?

        • avatarMauser says:

          Contrary to the Brady Campaign’s claims, there is no correlation between strict state gun laws and lower firearm homicide rates. Yes, 9 out of the 10 states with the highest firearm homicide rate have lax gun laws according to the BC. However, 9 out of the 10 states with the lowest rate also have ‘lax’ laws. There are only 6 states that score a 50 or higher by their rating so, if there were no correlation, you would expect one state with tight gun laws in each of the top 10 and bottom 10.

          California scores the highest with a Brady rating of 81 points. CA also has a higher than average firearm homicide rate of 3.4/100,000, ranking at #12. Texas can be loosely compared to California in a way. It’s a border state with a large diverse population and several large urban areas. It only gets 4 Brady points but has a slightly lower firearm homicide rate than CA at 3.2/100,000, ranking #15 in the US.

          Maryland gets 45 Brady points but has a very high FHR of 5.1/100,000, yet Rhode Island with 44 Brady points has a FHR of 1.5/100,000. Why does RI, with gun laws similar to MD, have a FHR less than 30% of MD’s? New Jersey and New York have very strict gun control laws but have average FHRs at 2.8/100,000.

  4. avatarBrian says:

    The thing us pro-2A folks need to realize is that the antis are playing a long game. They know they can’t achieve their goals all at once on a national level, but the can chip away at the 2A on the state level. By outlawing modern rifles they dry up the pool of potential law abiding owners, who will never be exposed to the weapons in a way where they think they can and should own them. Over time, the type of firearm commonly owned for lawful purposes changes to no longer include modern rifles, and the number of voters with a vested interest in preserving them declines.

    One of the key things the pro-2A needs to do is figure out how to expand the pool of people who can buy and use these guns across the country. It won’t do to have a couple of super 2A friendly states and the rest paying lip service to the 2A but being so restricted the seed of liberty is unable to find purchase.

  5. avatarNWBR says:

    When Martin O’Malley first ran for governor, he promised to do for Maryland what he did for Baltimore. Apparently not a lot of Marylanders had visited Baltimore (or watched Homicide or The Wire)….

    With regard to the proposed prohibition against anyone under 21 possessing ammunition, the O’Malley administration comandeered the list of the Maryland Department of Natural Resource’s newsletter subscribers to send out a email in support of his gun control proposals — on Maryland’s junior waterfowl hunting day.

  6. Hymmmn, a Political Scheme, that Will Guarantee, to “Blow – Up”, in his Face!… [Being a former Annapolitan, and avid Hunter, for years]; Realizing the amount of good Americans, living in that State, that have been Hunting, Fishing, enjoying the “Outoor”, way of life, for Generations; will, Definitely, Vote against him!…

  7. avatarMatt in FL says:

    What’s the status of the MD legislature? Are the measures defeatable, or is it like NY?

    • avatarNS says:

      Maryland is practically New York South, and their governor has big political aspirations. Don’t count on anything good coming from this

    • avatarChainsawWieldingManiac says:

      That’s a complex question. We are not nearly in as bad shape as some of the NE states and can still mount impressive rallies, but it’s a deep blue state, and that’s hard to get past.

      The licensing stuff is clearly in trouble due to the nightmarish impact it would have on the poor. There’s a good chance that it’ll die on the committee table.

      The AWB? That’s more likely to happen. There is non-trivial resistance from Republicans and some rural Democrats, but it’s hard to see where the numbers work for us. About the only real possibility I see is Beretta going full-court press and telling the legislature that they’re moving if an AWB passes. That might scare enough legislators to nix it, or at least severely neuter it.

      Mag cap limit? Pretty sure it’s a done deal. For reasons I won’t discuss, the current mag cap limit is an annoyance but not a killer, so this is one place where losing isn’t going to be fatal.

  8. avatarTangledThorns says:

    I have gun owner friends in MD that voted for Obama so they earned this.

    • avatardislexic says:

      I’m not so certain about that. I voted for Obama, but that’s because I viewed him as being the lesser of two evils. It’s easy to say that now, but look at Romney’s record with health care and gun control in his own state and I seriously doubt anyone could tell me with a straight face that things would have gone down any different under a Romney administration.

      Look at the top donors to both the Obama and Romney campaigns…you see the same corporate names on both of them. Our president is becoming more and more marginalized over time by our corporate overlords and their agenda.

      • avatarTangledThorns says:

        So you voted for Obama who during the debates supported a AWB while Romney stated he did not. Congrats, you and others like you who elected like Obama, O’Malley and Cuomo to take away our 2A right. You are a traitor.

        • avatardislexic says:

          Whoa, dude…calm down. You are missing my point and sound like a right-wing extremist when you immediately jump to calling people traitors. You aren’t doing the pro-2a crowd any favors by attacking your own.

          If you had bothered to read my comment beyond my voting preference, you’d have noticed the point I was making was that it didn’t matter which president was in office, Obama or Romney. Romney passed Obamacare in his own state and signed an AWB.

          So instead of jumping to insulting my patriotism, how about you provide a logical argument as to why you think Romney would have handled the situation any differently.

        • avatarTangledThorns says:

          Here’s a simple answer. If you’re pro-2A and have the option of two candidates then you vote for the one (Romney) that was fully endorsed by the NRA and didn’t support a AWB during a debate.

        • avatartdiinva says:

          Another person whose understanding of government ends with the Second Amendment. Romney was a Republican Governor in a deep blue state with a hostile legislature that could override his vetos. He would govern differently with a least one of Congress on his side. You are the kind of low or limited information who put this would be Tyrant back in office.

        • avatarpat says:

          tdiinva, well said. Mitt (at absolute worst) is a moderate RINO. But, Barry……BARRY……BARRRRRRRY, you stupid morons who voted for him, Barry is effing chairman effing Mao compared to Mitt.
          If I could I would bite your stupid ears….just a nip.

      • avatarWilliam says:

        But voting for the “lesser of two evils” reaps evil, does it not? And voting for evil helps evil win. Surely you didn’t want THAT, did you?

      • avatarWiebelhaus says:

        dislexic, your correct and I agree with you, either vote would have garnished this same result, it’s easy for people to blame but then the wrench sandy hook was thrown, everything changed and Romney (according to his history) would have done the same thing but these local politicians don’t even have anything to do with Obama so it’s a mute point.

        • avatarday says:

          “…I agree with you, either vote would have garnished this same result, …” No one said that no matter who was president there would be the current orchestrated attempt to gut the second amendment.
          Obama and Holder were both on record for years, years!, as saying they did not believe that private citizens had the right to own weapons.

        • avatarpat says:

          Um……your a moron if you think Mitt would have PUSHED for an AWB……just a moron.

      • avatarTotenglocke says:

        Obama was not “the lesser of two evils”, he was the equal of two evils and you intentionally chose to ignore other candidates in order to vote for him. Both Obama and Romney have a hard on for gun control and both of them would be giving identical speeches at this point in time. The problem is that, even though you can say it was inevitable that one of them would win (though if everyone who said “I just voted for the lesser of two evils” had voted for who they really wanted, the odds of one of those evils being elected are slim), you could at least have a clear conscience and say that you didn’t vote for a candidate who wants to murder Americans, shred the Constitution, and is anti-freedom.

      • avatarpat says:

        Dislexic, ANYBODY………ANYBODY who thinks Mitt equals BARRY is…..is…..is…..your REALLY didnt see the diff?
        Do you NOW?
        Your young, arent you?
        Please God, tell me you were young and stupid and learned the error of your ways?
        PLEEEEAASE.
        Liberalism is a mental disorder.

    • avatarWilliam says:

      To be more precise, they ASKED for it.

      • avatarBill in IL says:

        You guys clearly had NO idea just how bad Obama is. Yes, Romney wasn’t much better, but he was better. I guess the MSM helped cloud your perceptions, but living here in the Chicago area, we know about Obama. His links to Bill Ayers and the far left radicals, him being a red diaper baby and some of the nefarious things in his past that came out in the local press. His record as a State senator and his record, or lack thereof, as a US senator. I have a very pro 2nd friend in SC who also voted for him and I just can’t wrap my brain around this mindset.

  9. avatarFrank Dio says:

    We all pay lip service but I feel these day’s it’s time to act. I think some Maryland residents need to start an impeachment process if they cannot get at least 275000 signatures it’s a lost cause.
    In fact every state and every gun club in a State should get together to coordinate efforts to impeach all these unconstitutional governors. Phone, Door to door or signs in every place you frequent with contact info. If you can get donations the leaflets on every car or TV adds.
    It must be done and some attorney’s who believe in the Constitution should be helping to get a movement organized and coordinated with every state. PRO BONO

    If the NRA cannot legally help, they can give such a movement a lot of publicity.

  10. avatarJim D says:

    Being in Wi, we know the impact a recall or impeachment can have in the political environment. Trust me, it is huge, so I say go forth and do it! Make the bastards pay for their failure to adhere to the fact that they are the servants of us, not the masters.

  11. avatarDavis Thompson says:

    The lesson is clear: states run by Democrats are, one by one, banning semi-auto rifles. No gun-rights advocate can ever vote for any Democrat ever again. Period.

    • avatarTangledThorns says:

      Eh, I wish that we’re true. Most gun owning Obama voters are too ignorant to understand this. You wave ‘gay marriage’ and ‘abortion rights’ in their face and they’ll forget about the 2A, again.

      • avatartdiinva says:

        +1

        Had that exchange yesterday

      • avatarjerry says:

        No point in arguing with some of these people tangled. Believe Obama and Romney were the same. Whatever. Keep voting democrat . Whatever. An AWB will not pass at the federal level, but those of you in blue states, like Maryland (and a host of others) u may well be screwed. But vote democrat, whatever.

    • avatarjerry says:

      This fact seems lost on so many people who are on “our side” Every single example thus far has been a state controlled lock, stock, and barrel by democrats.

  12. avatardwb says:

    that section also says you cannot have ammunition if you are.prohobited from owning a regulated firearm. does that imply background checks for ammo?

    • avatar40&2000 says:

      Thats unclear from what I’ve seen. It mostly adds an age restriction. You cannot own a “regulated” firearm until age 21.

  13. avatarRalph says:

    Maryland’s motto should be: “Once a slave state, always a slave state.”

  14. avatarPhydeaux says:

    It’s been widely reported that O’Malley has ambitions for national office. A lot of Dems who have expressed interest in running for president in 2016 have gone all gun control crazy – O’Malley and Cuomo currently the most infamous.

    I think it’s interesting to note Hilary’s silence on gun control. Through Bubba’s experience as Prez, she knows that gun control is the kiss of death when national office is concerned. It seems that a number of Democratic governors are likely damaging themselves irretrievably with these gun control shenanigans. For a lot of voters, this is not an issue on which politicians can “pivot,” speaking out of both sides of their mouths.

  15. avatarLance says:

    Grassroots activism worked in Illinois can work here remember over 2000 protesters in Annapolis can make a difference.

  16. avatarOldLawman says:

    Got to agree with the “pick the lesser of two evils” argument. Otherwise, why bother voting at all. Really, has there ever been a perfect candidate (at least for pro-2A/libertarian-conservative types) ? I have no problem being a single-issue voter.

    BTW, we in MD have had the full text of this bill for several weeks now. That’s why I and several thousand of my closest personal friends attended a pro-2A rally two weeks ago. The largest crowd in Annapolis for any reason while the legislature was in session for many years. More to come.

  17. avatartdiinva says:

    As a Virginian I have some interest in the bill. Does it prohibit the possesion of standard self defense ammunition? Maryland is my primary route west and I always carry when I travel. While I always have my weapon secured when drive up route 70 or 68 I have magazines loaded with JHP. My only alternative route is through Kentucky. It is a more scenic route but adds time and distance to the trip.

  18. avatarDaveInMD says:

    The 2A crowd in MD is fairly large, even some of the Dems are not behind this push but remaining silent. A lot of residents are really fed up because they know this is O’Mally’s attempt to thrust himself into the national spot light all this being said the anti-gun bills still stand a chance of being passed.

    The irony of this whole thing is that one of the major Democrats in the MD state legislators has personally pointed a gun at me (he is a CCW or should be) over a misunderstanding. Do as I say not as I do.

  19. avatarJesse says:

    SB281 has been written for a while now, we had our rally to testify against it in Feb 6th.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.