Brill
SOF Support
You can't even rent a gun or go to a pistol range without a permit here in MD.
United States & Gun Control discussion.
- Thread starter Diamondback 2/2
- Start date
You can't even rent a gun or go to a pistol range without a permit here in MD.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 4,305
Ah I see. I re read.
I will modify. To merely purchase a firearm one should go through a background check. I would consider training to ensure that the buyer knows how to handle said firearm.
To carry one must go through a training course.
I will stick to the redneck states like the one I live in.
Brill
SOF Support
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...8fa-11e3-96ae-f2c36d2b1245_story.html?hpid=z3
The crux of the article, which doesn't make any f'ing sense to me, is based on the premise that the author KNOWS what the framers intended:
As a result of the rulings in Heller and McDonald, the Second Amendment, which was adopted to protect the states from federal interference with their power to ensure that their militias were “well regulated,” has given federal judges the ultimate power to determine the validity of state regulations of both civilian and militia-related uses of arms. That anomalous result can be avoided by adding five words to the text of the Second Amendment to make it unambiguously conform to the original intent of its draftsmen. As so amended, it would read:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the Militia shall not be infringed.”
The crux of the article, which doesn't make any f'ing sense to me, is based on the premise that the author KNOWS what the framers intended:
As a result of the rulings in Heller and McDonald, the Second Amendment, which was adopted to protect the states from federal interference with their power to ensure that their militias were “well regulated,” has given federal judges the ultimate power to determine the validity of state regulations of both civilian and militia-related uses of arms. That anomalous result can be avoided by adding five words to the text of the Second Amendment to make it unambiguously conform to the original intent of its draftsmen. As so amended, it would read:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the Militia shall not be infringed.”
I read this article yesterday, I had two reactions:
1) "Yep; let's just add words into the Constitution to fundamentally change the parts we don't politically agree with! Where's the harm in that?" :-/
Don't like the Constitution? We have a process to change it. Use the process to make a change, or deal with Constitution as written.
2) Even if those five ridiculous words WERE added to the 2nd Amendment, there's still that pesky US code that states every military-aged male citizen is part of the militia. So those five words wouldn't change a thing.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311
3) People like to harp on this "well-regulated" bit. In this context, "well regulated" doesn't mean "tightly controlled by the government." While it can mean this, in this instance well-regulated also means "to function properly." You can't just pick up a gun and use it effectively when the time comes if you haven't been properly trained on its use.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/regulated
So, to recap, every military-aged male citizen (and females in the armed services) are part of either the organized or unorganized militia. In order to ensure proper function of the militia when it is activated "against all enemies, foreign and domestic," they have to train with firearms. To train with firearms, the people have to have access to firearms. Hence, the Second Amendment.
comrade-z
Unverified
Maybe I don't fully know exactly what legal situation you are referring to, but I have never found that to be the case. I have rented pistols before, as have people with me from out of state, at MD shooting ranges with nothing more than a driver's license and a signed form for the rental of a pistol.
http://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/state-laws/maryland.aspx - NRA link, saying that MD doesn't require a permit for many things - however no specifics here or on another few sites I saw on the laws about gun rentals at ranges.
Brill
SOF Support
As of Oct 1 2013 you do. (unless you're military)
"Unless otherwise exempt, as of October 1, 2013, a Maryland resident must possess a valid Handgun Qualification License before he/she may purchase, rent, or receive a handgun."
https://www.mdsp.org/Organization/S...ion/Firearms/HandgunQualificationLicense.aspx
A person may not purchase, rent, or receive a handgun after October 1, 2013 unless they possess a valid Handgun Qualification License (HQL) issued by the Maryland State Police or qualify for exemption status.
Exceptions to possession of the HQL License
- A Licensed Firearms Manufacturer.
- Active law enforcement officer or a person retired in good standing from a law enforcement agency of the United States, the State, or a local law enforcement agency of the State.
- Active or retired member of the United States Armed Forces or National Guard and possesses a valid military identification card.
- A person purchasing, renting or receiving an antique, curio or relic as defined in federal law.
- Maryland licensed firearms dealers.
comrade-z
Unverified
.....well f*ck. :wall:
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 4,305
http://rare.us/story/new-unpreceden...citizens-to-arm-themselves-like-never-before/
Governor Nathan Deal (R-Ga.) Wednesday will kick off legalization of House Bill 60, a new gun bill that may go down as the most expansive in history, with an old-fashioned barbecue.
The bill’s signing, which should double as a Second-Amendment rally, will open up gun rights in ways never before imagined in Georgia.
Under the new bill, police officers will not be allowed to ask someone to present a license if they are carrying a firearm; schools will have the option to choose to arm teachers and administrators; guns will now be allowed in many government buildings, bars and churches.
Governor Nathan Deal (R-Ga.) Wednesday will kick off legalization of House Bill 60, a new gun bill that may go down as the most expansive in history, with an old-fashioned barbecue.
The bill’s signing, which should double as a Second-Amendment rally, will open up gun rights in ways never before imagined in Georgia.
Under the new bill, police officers will not be allowed to ask someone to present a license if they are carrying a firearm; schools will have the option to choose to arm teachers and administrators; guns will now be allowed in many government buildings, bars and churches.
So it will be like Texas?
Brill
SOF Support
policemedic
Verified SWAT
To SCOTUS or not to SCOTUS?
I'll bet a case of Knob Creek the District appeals this ruling.
If only your redneck state and my redneck state would collaborate so that our redneck firearms were carryable across the state line...
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2008
- Messages
- 1,068
Is it an affront to civil liberties that you need to get a license before you can legally drive a car? After all, it's practically essential to exercise freedom of movement in this day and age.
Have gun owners been hurt by the compulsory tests for concealed carry permits? If not, then why would it be wrong to develop a 'lite' version of such tests -- intended for basic gun ownership?
I suspect that opponents of this idea are mostly worried about the methods for implementing it (i.e., the introduction of gun licenses could be used to develop some kind of registry to keep track of 'dangerous' people). But putting all those concerns aside, you have to admit that it makes SENSE to ask people to prove that they have a minimum level of proficiency and knowledge before they can wield something incredibly lethal. You don't join the military and get a loaded weapon on day one... You have to prove that, at the very least, you're not a total tard.
The question isn't if there should be some kind of test, IMO. The question is how to implement it without the possibility that it could be used against gun owners in the future.
That's a much deeper issue, and I don't claim that there's a way to do it (nor do I claim that there isn't a way to do it -- I simply don't have the time to think about it long enough).
Have gun owners been hurt by the compulsory tests for concealed carry permits? If not, then why would it be wrong to develop a 'lite' version of such tests -- intended for basic gun ownership?
I suspect that opponents of this idea are mostly worried about the methods for implementing it (i.e., the introduction of gun licenses could be used to develop some kind of registry to keep track of 'dangerous' people). But putting all those concerns aside, you have to admit that it makes SENSE to ask people to prove that they have a minimum level of proficiency and knowledge before they can wield something incredibly lethal. You don't join the military and get a loaded weapon on day one... You have to prove that, at the very least, you're not a total tard.
The question isn't if there should be some kind of test, IMO. The question is how to implement it without the possibility that it could be used against gun owners in the future.
That's a much deeper issue, and I don't claim that there's a way to do it (nor do I claim that there isn't a way to do it -- I simply don't have the time to think about it long enough).
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 4,305
What question or comment are you addressing?
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2008
- Messages
- 1,068
No one in particular -- was just reading some recent comments. Mostly just addressing some thoughts I've had about this.
Obviously, there's a concern that 'licenses' or 'tests' could hurt gun ownership, but my POV is that this isn't necessarily obligatory. I'd like to think that there's a way to address this without hurting gun owners. I don't claim to have the solution. Just that it should be thought about in a bit more detail.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 4,305
I am for universal background checks to purchase to create one more barrier for the criminals or those with a record who should not be able to buy guns.
I could see a baseline test to ensure one is trained on the weapon. Go to the range at least.
Brill
SOF Support
Which active shooter incident acquired a gun illegally? Conversely, how many criminals acquire guns legally? (Point being, that background checks don't defer gun violence. You seriously think a felon would go through the hustle and expense of a check to purchase an over-priced gun vice buy a stolen one from an associate?)
What is the ratio of fatal vehicle accidents of licensed vs. unlicensed drivers? (Training and proficiency are not the same.)
You might as well research how many hijackings TSA has thwarted!
It's all security theater.
What is the ratio of fatal vehicle accidents of licensed vs. unlicensed drivers? (Training and proficiency are not the same.)
You might as well research how many hijackings TSA has thwarted!
It's all security theater.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 4,305
I agree. I wish I had answer!
