Baltimore Police Issue 2nd Amendment Decal Warning

Baltimore Police Issue 2nd Amendment Decal Warning

2nd Amendment Decal
2nd Amendment Decal
Associated Gun Clubs of Baltimore
Associated Gun Clubs of Baltimore

Maryland –-( On May 29, 2011, the Baltimore Police Criminal Intelligence Section issued an “Intelligence Bulletin” warning officers about persons displaying the 2nd Amendment decal pictured here. The bulletin contains the following caption in bold red letters:

“….while the individual who is displaying the symbol may not be armed, the presence of the symbol provides an early warning indicator that you MAY be about to encounter an armed individual.”

It apparently never occurred to the Intelligence Section that perhaps we the people could use a warning that the presence of a badge provides an early warning that we are about to encounter an armed individual. While this may seem a bit sarcastic, it is certainly not unfair for Maryland citizens to have reason for concern when they are approached by an officer.

This is especially true when the officers are overly tense because they have been warned that a citizen with a decal or patch MAY be armed.

This Association asked James H. Green, of the Baltimore City Police Department to explain why the Baltimore City Police Department feels the need to profile persons who choose to support the U.S. Constitution.

Mr. Green responded with the following statement:

“I have spoken with our Criminal Intelligence Section and the bulletin was created in response to a number of recent inquires asking about the decal and its meaning and information generally provided to law enforcement about officer safety. All law enforcement agencies attempt to inform our officers or citizens as appropriate when inquiries such as this arise.

I certainly disagree with your characterization of “profiling.” Clearly the bulletin is informational and does not remotely suggest a suppression of Constitutional rights. In fact, as you are aware, many law enforcement personnel are members of the NRA or affiliated organizations.

As you are also aware, traffic stops are the single most dangerous encounter for law enforcement. It certainly is practice for law enforcement to ask operators about weapons for safety reasons only. The presence of a decal is NOT justification in itself for a traffic stop.

I hope that this addresses your inquiry and clears up any confusion about the bulletin.”

Note: “ WRTAC” stands for “Washington Regional Threat Analysis Center”

This Association has already submitted a Public Information Act request for information regarding similar bulletins involving NRA decals, patches and license plates.

It is quite interesting that the Washington Regional Threat Analysis Center and the Baltimore Police believe that showing support for the U.S. Constitution is considered a threat to police officers.

The actual Baltimore City Police Bulletin

Baltimore Police Issue 2nd Amendment Decal Warning
Baltimore Police Issue 2nd Amendment Decal Warning

Click here to purchase a 2nd Amendment support decal.

Associated Gun Clubs of Baltimore, Inc. (AGC), located in Marriottsville, Maryland. The Associated Gun Clubs of Baltimore, Inc. was formed on July 1, 1944 when a number of World War II veterans in the Baltimore, Maryland area began looking for a place for recreational and competitive shooting. They organized with several other Baltimore area shooting clubs to form the “AGC” Visit:

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I just looked at our department bulletin history. Couple of points. This one was not generated at the local or regional level but at DHS which then sent it to regional “Fusion Centers” like WRTAC. WRTAC was not the only one to get this so it was not generated by a BPD inquiry, but rather top down with other gun rights bumper stickers. WRTAC and other regional/state “Fusion centers” are mandated to coordinate on terrorist activity and national gangs. The problem is the fusion centers mainly work with data collection and data mining and this bulletin and the way it… Read more »


“UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO” .. really, guys? Classification markups? First they play military, now they’re playing intelligence? Does the Baltimore Police have any “TOP SECRET//SCI//FGI GBR//REL TO FVEY” documents? That’d be entertaining. 9_9 I can’t wait for a police department to refuse to release information via FOIA or something because it’s “classified”. Police departments aren’t classification authorities. They probably should reconsider playing like they are.


“Bruce Grant on June 8, 2011 at 8:25 PM said: I understand Maryland is the only state that does not include the right to keep and bear arms in their constitution. What do you expect from the police forces of a people’s republic?” It doesn’t have to Bruce. Article 2 of the Maryland declaration of Rights (the first part of our Constitution states: “Art. 2. The Constitution of the United States, and the Laws made, or which shall be made, in pursuance thereof, and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, are,… Read more »


20 years as a big city police officer 10 years as a S.W.A.T operastor. I saw this warning about a year ago, and was like WTF. now with recent events I just ordered 3 stickers (for both cars and for my motorcycle)


Nanjing03: VERY true. More than "some".

Henry Bowman

Ha ha ha ha! I'm sorry, you had me at "Baltimore Police."


Most rank and file law enforcement officers support the right to keep and bear arms. It is some of the law enforcement administrators and political appointees that you have to watch out for.

— 17 Years of Law Enforcement


Nice ideal. Really. … But does displaying this type of decal negate the whole reason and legal basis for C o n c e a l e d C a r r y? Wouldn't the decal compromise a legally CCW-permitted citizen into essentially…. being perceived or interpretted by a well-intending LEO as someone who is O p e n C a r r y i n g? … Which may not be legal depending on what state you're in.


This goes right along with the FBI's release to Police around the country of what to look for concerning "domestic terrorists". Some of the things that concern the FBI and police that someone might be a domestic terrorist are, but not limited to: NRA (or other pro-gun, pro Second Amendment) stickers on a vehicle, third party candidate stickers, stickers the show support of the Constitution, any person who quotes the Constitution or the Founding Fathers a lot, someone who quotes the Bible a lot, VETERANS, abortion protesters, those who protest the government or it's policies, and the list goes on… Read more »


I vaguely remember back in the late eighties that Maryland banned the "Baby on Board" window hangers in cars. The official reason was that they obstructed a driver's view. But before the law was passed, there was more chatter about the spoof window hangers, like ".357 on Board."

Howard Blair

Having a 2nd Amendment decal only means that that person is a follower and believer of the Second Amendment. Not that he/she is carrying a weapon. Baltimore police is sending the wrong message to it's officers. Although, the police do have to be cautious whenever they do a stop. It is a shame the police have to be so pumped up for a stop. But this society has gone in that direction. I do feel that our police departments are our friends, and the majority of the citizens would back a good cop. If you are a CCW, when stopped… Read more »


"…while the individual who is displaying the symbol may not be armed, the presence of the symbol provides an early warning indicator that you MAY be about to encounter an armed individual." I don't see anything in that statement that suppresses the second amendment. It's not like the decal outright says "support the second amendment" or something along the lines of that, its pretty obscure. I don't see anything wrong with letting police not only know the meaning of the decal, but that the person displaying the decal may be armed. It's pointing out the obvious that this person supports… Read more »

Bruce Grant

I understand Maryland is the only state that does not include the right to keep and bear arms in their constitution.

What do you expect from the police forces of a people's republic?


To Mimi from Don: You asked me "who loves war"? Now Mimi, I did not mean for my personal example above to get you or this conversation way off track. But to answer your question I will say that it is many governments of the world, corporations, central bankers, and the UN – among others – who love war. Now as far as you saying that I should grow up, I will tell you Mimi that I am a disabled Vietnam-era vet, and I did my growing up a LONG time ago. You wrote, "Go right ahead kum ba yahing… Read more »


What ever happened to" I will uphold , support and defend the Constitution of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AGAINST ALL ……etc."


So sorry – the above was for Chris Morgan and his pal Larken. (I would love to know how one can tell who is an "average citizen"). For Don – Who loves war? (save some folks inside the Beltway – but we know many of them are whack jobs). Go right ahead kum ba yahing your way through life – though I sure wouldn't want your kind to have my back- but the real concern, if I cared about you, is the one you advertise about yourself. If you're going through your teenage angst stage of growth and development, knock… Read more »


Don: "I do solemnly declare upon my honor and conscience that I will act at all times to the best of my ability and knowledge in a manner befitting a police officer. “I will preserve the dignity and will respect the rights of all individuals. “I will discharge my duties with integrity and will promote understanding and conciliation. “I will exercise my authority as a police officer in the manner intended by the law. “I will faithfully obey the orders of my superiors and will be ready to confront danger in the line of duty. “I will act with honesty,… Read more »

Geoffrey Transom

Here's what I don't get: per Cockrum (cited above by 'Don') it appears absolutely clear that the right to bear arms is innate; it does not derive from the State (or state), and – per the 2nd Amendment – must not be infringed. Not 'must not be infringed except if we decide it must' or anything of that nature. The text is absolutely clear and only a whip-licker would try to embroider in wiggle room for the State. So why do people persist in talking about 'legal' permits? (I'm looking at you, 'heather') Any entity that requires a permit to… Read more »


What's particularly ironic here is that the VAST majority of 2A supporters are also very strong LE supporters.


I have spoken to a number of friends who prefer to keep their disgust of government to themselves and not advertise their disgust with vehicles stickers, bumper or otherwise. As Mr. Swiontek stated above, to do so might "invite unwanted attention." For the last eight years I drove a small all white hatchback car. On each of its four sides (hood, rear liftgate, drivers door, and the passenger door) I had 10" diameter matching bright blue peace signs with an anti-US-war slogan imprinted on each one. I was never pulled over even once, however, if I had been I would… Read more »

John J. Swiontek

I will not put any sticker on any vehicle I own. Doing so just invites unwanted attention.


the "Criminal Intelligence" section seems aptly named. obviously clear thinking and rationality are not welcome there.


They should be worried about the vehicles without gunrights stickers. Im sure most criminals and thugs with illegal handguns arent members of the NRA or any other group!

Chris Morgan

Right on Larken! Besides the police have no requirement to protect citizens at all, this has been repeated at the Supreme Court level and in over twenty state court hearings. These rulings states that the 'police job is to arrest code breakers.." In review of Coumbine and other actions where police response was warranted, they took the non action of waiting for SWAT Teams and other special units to arrive. These actions clearly show that those court rulings were in fact correct, becuase if they are to "serve and protect" this lack of action would result in them being sued.… Read more »

Larken Rose

The mentality of "He has a gun, so be careful!" is slightly akin to "He's wearing a seat belt, so he may intend to crash into you!" The notion that the mercenaries of the state have the right to know if you're armed, know where your gun is, and disarm you by default "for their protection" is fascist bunk. The idea that the king's guards should ever be armed when the peasantry is not, though currently popular, is the mentality of slaves and tyrants. And to be blunt, if you are doing a job that makes you scared that the… Read more »


In Ohio, LEGAL gun carriers can be identified by running our license plate. If you have a LEGAL permit to carry a gun, your licenses will be linked. I find it interesting, because the ILLEGAL gun carriers are more likely to open fire on a cop. the LEGAL carriers know their information has already been identified.

Joe in MD

I was wondering if Mr. James H. Green or someone at AGC or Ammoland misused “you” instead of “your” twice and got the plurality wrong in “address” for the posting on

• I certainly disagree with [you] characterization of “profiling.”

• I hope that this [address you] inquiry and clears up any confusion about the bulletin.


– Fixed, glad you have our backs..