Victory in Maryland! - Page 3

Victory in Maryland!

This is a discussion on Victory in Maryland! within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; This is the only case I'VE seen where a judge brought up the definition of "milita." Anti gun people always use the national guard as ...

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 77
Like Tree2Likes

Thread: Victory in Maryland!

  1. #31
    Ex Member Array 1hogfan83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    fayetteville AR
    Posts
    33
    This is the only case I'VE seen where a judge brought up the definition of "milita." Anti gun people always use the national guard as a milita force but they are two different people's. Milita are untrained civilians who are not paid, provide their own weapons and quarter. I dont even think I've seen any pro gun polititians show the definition of "militia." Atleast this judge shows he has knowledge of civil rights. Again, this is what I have seen and heard, some may have seen or heard otherwise.


  2. #32
    Member Array scott625's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    174
    The judge was appointed by George HW Bush in 1991. Just reinforces the point about the presidential elections and the lasting judicial impacts they have.

  3. #33
    Member Array mrjam2jab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Levittown, PA
    Posts
    427
    Quote Originally Posted by Pro2A View Post


    Good one. Even if they are forced to go shall issue, I doubt that they will 1. Sign reciprocity agreements 2. Issue non-resident permits and 3. even if they did they will make it as expensive and difficult as possible.
    They currently already issue non-resident permits....assuming the applicant meets G&S reasons....and it's currently just about the same cost as FL.

    (notice I said "currently" both times? )

  4. #34
    Ex Member Array Toorop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Somewhere out there.
    Posts
    1,312
    This is wonderful news. Hopefully Maryland will become shall issue in the near future. It helps the cause to see more of these may issue states become shall issue.

  5. #35
    Senior Member Array highvoltage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    NH
    Posts
    1,121
    Well said:

    Maryland‘s goal of ―minimizing the proliferation of handguns among those who do not have a demonstrated need for them, is not a permissible method of preventing crime or ensuring public safety; it burdens the right too broadly

  6. #36
    Senior Member Array swinokur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Bethesda, MD
    Posts
    939
    The state has appealed and asked for as stay. Not unexpected. The state must prove harm in order to get a stay. That's doubtful.

  7. #37
    VIP Member Array Smitty901's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    3,482
    Who is to say as a result of the ruling the the State just repeals any CC law .
    They passed it with an understanding they could get away with the game they were playing . Now the game has changed.
    So if you live there you better get ready.

  8. #38
    Member Array abandonhope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    21
    I agree. As a temporary denizen of this fascist, intrusive state, I suspect the legislature will eliminate the CC permit rather than move to a "shall issue" system. The rich and politically connected will just have to buy their way out of a conviction instead of buy their way into a permit.

    AH
    "it is better to have lived one day as a tiger than a thousand years as a sheep"--tibetan proverb

  9. #39
    Senior Member Array swinokur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Bethesda, MD
    Posts
    939
    MD is appealing to the 4th Circuit and asking for a stay.

    The fight goes on...

  10. #40
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036

    Thumbs down

    Quote Originally Posted by swinokur View Post
    MD is appealing to the 4th Circuit and asking for a stay.

    The fight goes on...
    As fully expected!

    OTOH
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  11. #41
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036

    Question Anyone planning to join me -- if they don't get a stay ?

    Not too terribly a steep a price -- $112.25 to file the application. They are hyping their low refusal / declination rate -- keeps claiming they approve 90% of applications the receive. I suspect that is because they discourage applications and folk have given up.

    So why not put that to the test?

    MD State Police Firearms Permit page: Maryland State Police > Organization > Support Services Bureau > Licensing Division > Handgun Permit

    The bottom right hand of page above has a link to the application, which can be downloaded, printed out and filled in. There are 13 pages, 2 of which need to be notarized. Most of the pages are related to private investigators and security guards and such. I plan on entering N/A or Not Applicable or ignoring everything related to showing "good and sufficient reason" and / or, fill in "Self Defense and all other lawful purposes."

    MD treats residents and non-residents the same. There is no residency requirement and no resident-vs-non resident issues.

    MD does NOT have a training or competency requirement.

    Fingerprints are required. MD. It appears that accept only electronic or Live Scan fingerprints, -- however MD State Police web site isn't clear as to when this becomes effective.

    The licensing division page is here: Maryland State Police > Organization > Support Services Bureau > Licensing Division

    Fingerprint rules are here: http://www.mdsp.org/Portals/0/Users/...%20Rules.A.pdf

    List of electronic fingerprint providers in MD is here: Fingerprinting Services / Fingerprinting Courses

    You must provide 3 references not related to you (page 12 of the application) and they state the references WILL be contacted.


    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  12. #42
    Senior Member Array highvoltage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    NH
    Posts
    1,121
    Here's where they get you:

    Personal Protection: There must be documented evidence of recent threats, robberies, and/or assaults, supported by official police reports or notarized statements from witnesses.

    If they don't see that, they throw it out.

  13. #43
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036
    Quote Originally Posted by highvoltage View Post
    Here's where they get you:

    Personal Protection: There must be documented evidence of recent threats, robberies, and/or assaults, supported by official police reports or notarized statements from witnesses.

    If they don't see that, they throw it out.
    As I understand the court's decision ( http://tinyurl.com/6skd73l ), that (and the like) is what was overturned.

    SNIP

    The requirement that a permit applicant demonstrate
    “good and substantial reason” to carry a handgun does not, for example, advance the interests of
    public safety by ensuring that guns are kept out of the hands of those adjudged most likely to
    misuse them, such as criminals or the mentally ill. It does not ban handguns from places where
    the possibility of mayhem is most acute, such as schools, churches, government buildings,
    protest gatherings, or establishments that serve alcohol. It does not attempt to reduce accidents,
    as would a requirement that all permit applicants complete a safety course. It does not even, as
    some other States’ laws do, limit the carrying of handguns to persons deemed “suitable” by
    denying a permit to anyone “whose conduct indicates that he or she is potentially a danger to the
    public if entrusted with a handgun.”

    SNIP

    Rather, the regulation at issue is a rationing system. It aims, as Defendants concede,
    simply to reduce the total number of firearms carried outside of the home by limiting the
    privilege to those who can demonstrate “good reason” beyond a general desire for self-defense.


    SNIP

    A law that burdens the exercise of an enumerated constitutional right by simply making
    that right more difficult to exercise cannot be considered “reasonably adapted” to a government
    interest, no matter how substantial that interest may be. Maryland’s goal of “minimizing the
    proliferation of handguns among those who do not have a demonstrated need for them,” id. at 40,
    is not a permissible method of preventing crime or ensuring public safety; it burdens the right too
    broadly.

    SNIP

    At bottom, this case rests on a simple proposition: If the Government wishes to burden a
    right guaranteed by the Constitution, it may do so provided that it can show a satisfactory
    justification and a sufficiently adapted method.
    The showing, however, is always the
    Government’s to make. A citizen may not be required to offer a “good and substantial reason”
    why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right’s existence is all the reason he
    needs.


    SNIP

    The Court finds that Maryland’s requirement of a “good and substantial reason” for
    issuance of a handgun permit is insufficiently tailored to the State’s interest in public safety and
    crime prevention. The law impermissibly infringes the right to keep and bear arms, guaranteed
    by the Second Amendment. The Court will, by separate Order of even date, GRANT Woollard’s
    Motion for Summary Judgment and DENY Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment.
    Dated this 2nd day of March, 2012
    /s/
    _______________________________
    Benson

    [emphasis added by me]
    Last edited by DaveH; March 7th, 2012 at 05:51 PM. Reason: emphasis added
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  14. #44
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036

    More good discussion as to self-defense being all the reason you need

    The Volokh Conspiracy Licenses to Carry Guns, Protection Against Robbery, and Protection Against Rape

    Eugene Volokh • March 7, 2012 4:28 pm

    When states have (or had) discretionary gun carrying license system, they have often provided that people who engage in “business activities that involve heightened risk, such as the need to carry cash or other ‘street valued’ commodities” should generally get licenses. (See this post, for instance, about the Maryland scheme.) The theory is that these people are at heightened risk of robbery, and the loss to them from the robberies is likely to be especially grave. And this theory seems factually plausible. To my knowledge, no-one has quantified how great the risk tends to be, or required such an empirical showing to justify creating such a category, but it’s certainly reasonable that the danger faced by someone who routinely carries lots of valuables is greater than that faced by, say, me.

    But women, especially young women, are particularly likely to be targets of rape. See, e.g., table 4 of this document reporting 2008 data and table 4 of this document reporting 2007 data, reporting an aggregate approximately 0.5% per year rate of attempted or completed rape or sexual assault for women age 20 to 24. This is likely not as high as the attempted or completed robbery rate for men who carry valuables, but it might well be comparable when you multiply probability of the crime by the gravity of the damage to the victim.

    SNIP

    Thus, the licenses given to people, mostly relatively rich and mostly men, to defend against robbery will lead to less gun carrying than licenses given to young women to defend against rape. But is that basis enough to allow the money-carriers guns to defend against a less serious crime, but to deny the young women guns to defend against a more serious crime?
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  15. #45
    VIP Member Array SpencerB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Fort Bliss, Texas/Mesa, Arizona
    Posts
    4,485
    Awesome news!
    Operation Enduring Freedom Veteran

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

concealed carry in md.
,
concealed carry maryland
,

concealed carry maryland 2012

,
gun issue permits on a discretionary basis massachusetts
,
maryland ccw 2012
,
maryland citizens defense league
,

maryland concealed carry

,

maryland concealed carry 2012

,
maryland concealed carry laws unconstitutional
,

maryland concealed carry permit 2012

,

maryland concealed carry stay

,

maryland concealed carry unconstitutional

,
md concealed carry permit 2012
,

md concealed carry permit unconstitutional

,

nj concealed carry 2012

Click on a term to search for related topics.