PERMIT APPLICATION RETURNED

Merlin said:

But don't you think if Woollard had his own attorney that was just working on just getting his ccw renewed, and after this case got to the point where you could see where it was heading, don't you think the deals would be made between the attorneys in the back room?

Click to expand...

Patrick said:

Although the state seems to have an uphill lcimb to justify a stay using the same logic that failed them in the actual ruling, the simple fact is that it is up to the courts.

Big Changes (tm) could come with a stay. Federal Courts are loath to overturn a state law, especially one defended so energetically by the state. A judge could stay his decision on that reason alone - that in the interests of federalism he does not want to enforce a law change on his ruling alone. He could simply say, "Pretty sure I am correct, but the change is large enough to demand more than me saying it."

Gura/Hansel would probably argue that the judge need not worry what the 4th will think, because they can think for themselves and the state will go to them if the district court does not grant the stay. So "extra eyes" would surely review the case and the effect would not rest solely on this judge.

You cannot handicap these things. We've got an uphill climb of our own.

Click to expand...

Merlin said:

I had said at one time the state is hoping for a gun hating judge, or at least a ccw hating judge along the way.

Click to expand...

This Board was established in 1972 (Chapter 13, Acts of 1972) to review Maryland State Police decisions regarding handgun permits.

Any person whose application for a handgun permit, or renewal of a permit, has been rejected or limited, or whose permit has been revoked may ask the Board to review the decision of the Superintendent of the Maryland State Police.

Click to expand...

Patrick said:

Nobody knows so no need to guess.

Click to expand...

Seagrave1963 said:

me thinks Merlin is really Doug Gansler on a fishing trip!

Click to expand...

Seagrave1963 said:

me thinks Merlin is really Doug Gansler on a fishing trip!

Click to expand...

Seagrave1963 said:

me thinks Merlin is really Doug Gansler on a fishing trip!

Click to expand...

Patrick said:

He is not. He is a new member who happens to not know all the ins and outs of forums and the internet. He is an avid member and supporter of our community and just happens to be new at this social networking thing. Not every generation grew up with the internet. I'll leave it at that.

I'd rather not chase off good people just because they don't get all the internet memes, forum tricks or are new to the internet etiquette game. I haven't seen Merlin do/say anything rude, untoward or disrespectful of others. I have seen an awful lot of swipes at him, though.

Click to expand...

Patrick said:

that crackpot asshat beind the gunstore counter who always knows everything, tells you that you are always wrong and won't let you look at the gun you want because you are not worthy.

Click to expand...

esqappellate said:

The only thing that remotely makes sense is that the State is desperate to deter and get rid of as many pending apps as possible. The number of applications filed immediately after the ruling must be in the 1000s. Must be a bit overwhelming to the MSP not accustomed to such a volume. Returning the apps means they don't have to devote resources (manpower) to processing them with interviews and the like. That saves money (I doubt that the $75 even begins to cover the true cost in manpower it takes to process). Returning the apps also deters more applications, as they are counting (correctly) on this new return policy becoming widely known. Saves more money and it keeps evil guns out of the hands of the State's subjects (sorry, citizens).

Maybe that is just it, viz., that they have really NOT thought through how it affects their pending stay motion. OR, Maybe they figure they will lose the stay motion anyhow so returning the apps now *might* just have a plus factor (in their minds) of discouraging reapplication or new apps. OR, Maybe they think they will win the Stay and the appeal for sure and thus this is the cheapest way to go about issuing denials. OR, Maybe they are just clueless. Notice that they don't list Board review as an option in the form letter, so they probably don't think it will impact the Board (no one will take a 5-312 appeal), or, if it does, that is the Board's problem, not the MSP's problem (separate budgets).

Click to expand...

​

MJD438 said:

Once they get past the stay in front of Legg, they are no longer in a single-judge environment. At a minimum, from what I understand (IANAL), they face a panel of at least three judges at CA4.

Click to expand...

esqappellate said:

The only thing that remotely makes sense is that the State is desperate to deter and get rid of as many pending apps as possible. The number of applications filed immediately after the ruling must be in the 1000s. Must be a bit overwhelming to the MSP not accustomed to such a volume. Returning the apps means they don't have to devote resources (manpower) to processing them with interviews and the like. That saves money (I doubt that the $75 even begins to cover the true cost in manpower it takes to process). Returning the apps also deters more applications, as they are counting (correctly) on this new return policy becoming widely known. Saves more money and it keeps evil guns out of the hands of the State's subjects (sorry, citizens).

Maybe that is just it, viz., that they have really NOT thought through how it affects their pending stay motion. OR, Maybe they figure they will lose the stay motion anyhow so returning the apps now *might* just have a plus factor (in their minds) of discouraging reapplication or new apps. OR, Maybe they think they will win the Stay and the appeal for sure and thus this is the cheapest way to go about issuing denials. OR, Maybe they are just clueless. Notice that they don't list Board review as an option in the form letter, so they probably don't think it will impact the Board (no one will take a 5-312 appeal), or, if it does, that is the Board's problem, not the MSP's problem (separate budgets).

Click to expand...

Patrick said:

He is not. He is a new member who happens to not know all the ins and outs of forums and the internet. He is an avid member and supporter of our community and just happens to be new at this social networking thing. Not every generation grew up with the internet. I'll leave it at that.

I'd rather not chase off good people just because they don't get all the internet memes, forum tricks or are new to the internet etiquette game. I haven't seen Merlin do/say anything rude, untoward or disrespectful of others. I have seen an awful lot of swipes at him, though.

Folks, it takes all kinds and we are attracting all kinds of people who would normally never venture into the public sphere of this stuff. We need to be nice to the newbies or end up acting like that crackpot asshat beind the gunstore counter who always knows everything, tells you that you are always wrong and won't let you look at the gun you want because you are not worthy.

Click to expand...

USAFRavenR6 said:

Do you mind sharing the letter you attached to your application when sending it requesting an appearance in front of the review board? I am about to complete mine and send it off but I am not as knowledgeable as all the rest when citing specific reasons with in the MD code. I am not going to take this letter verbatim but I did plan on using it as a reference when constructing my own to send off sometime this afternoon. Anyone for that matter? Thanks.

Click to expand...

sailskidrive said:

This is why the permit process is BS. If you're politically connected you get one; if you're a normal everyday citizen, forget it. This idiot didn't even lose his permit.

http://www.abc2news.com/dpp/news/cr...t-mariner-ceo-detained-for-gun-at-bwi-airport

Click to expand...

bpowers said:

Subject to his permission, MSI should throw a Banquet in honor of Woolard.

Invite Woolard, as the guest of honor, to sit on a dais with Del Smigiel and all the other preeminent 2A supporters.

Attendees might pay ~$50 for a prime rib dinner - and get a commemorative, limited edition MDShooters T-shirt.

All proceeds would then be donated to SAF and MSI.

Hell, you could even hold the first annual Brian E. Frosh Assault Rifle Raffle at $25 per ticket with all proceeds donated to Brian E. Frosh handgun training scholarship fund or whatever.

Click to expand...

cad68m_m said:

I went with something along these posts:

http://ns2.md-shooters.net/showpost.php?p=1608370&postcount=221

and then modified it to include reference to 5-311 per this post:

http://ns2.md-shooters.net/showpost.php?p=1608382&postcount=225

Click to expand...