PERMIT APPLICATION RETURNED

Merlin · Apr 18, 2012

esqappellate said:
It's a dumb move on their part, but all these returns are a dumb move. Dumb and dumber. Smacks of desperation, a political agenda, or both.

I know I don't like it, but I don't undestand why you thinik it's a dumb move on there part? I thought the very reason judge Legg's reason for giving the state the stay was so they could (for now) continue to use G&S during this time. What's the point of the stay if they don't conduct business as normal?

Merlin · Apr 18, 2012

peafarmer said:
I wonder if MSP cares about their approval rate. Their response to the OP states that since the stay is in effect, they are bound to enforce the G&S law. I think this is true. What I wonder is if the MSP really endorses the G&S or if they are just being good soldiers and enforcing it. I would think that most MSP officers think more like us than like Gansler...thoughts?

Andy

I can tell you that all of the LEO's I know tell me they feel maryland would be a much safer place if it went shall issue. I guess I have either known or came in contact with 10 or a few more LEO's in my life time and 90% of them feel that way. But there are LEO's that feel they should be the only ones armed.

I'm sure it's the same for the MSP. I think the reason maryland is not an shall issue state is more political then the MSP thinking it's best for safety.

Merlin · Apr 18, 2012

Mark75H said:
They know who signs their paychecks

100 % correct

hairba111 · Apr 18, 2012

The merlin thread continues....................................................

Biggfoot44 · Apr 19, 2012

Despite that ; in this case there is an important point.

This is NOT "business as usual" . Acording to all the anecdotal evidence in the past they would cajole and arm twist the applicants into REQUESTING to withdraw their applications. Now they are skipping any pretense of performing their required duty , and involentarily ignoring applications.

Under the terms of the Stay it is permissable for them to Disprove an application , but they are still required to conduct an investagation , and act upon them. Their legal options are to : Aprove or Disaprove , ignoring or return w/o action is not a possability.

Never mind 2A at this point , this is blatent Due Process and Equal Protection violations of 5A and 14A .

The Stay addressed the portion of ruling adressing 5(ii). Did it also hold in abayence the part providing Strict Scruteny to the permitting process ?

swinokur · Apr 19, 2012

There is the issue of good faith. The stay took effect 3-30. Prior to that all applicants filed their apps in GOOD FAITH expecting them to be processed as required by law. Now the MSP is going to return them? That's not good faith IMO and the court is not going to be happy with their bad behavior. They are digging themselves into a deeper hole IMO

Patrick · Apr 19, 2012

Merlin said:
I know I don't like it, but I don't undestand why you thinik it's a dumb move on there part? I thought the very reason judge Legg's reason for giving the state the stay was so they could (for now) continue to use G&S during this time. What's the point of the stay if they don't conduct business as normal?

The state said they wanted the temp stay so that the legislature could formulate 'solutions'; so that the state could articulate a public safety argument against citizen carry. The judge gave them that time.

But no matter how you slice it, the court said the G&S requirement is unconstitutional. The state still lost. The stay delays federal enforcement of that ruling, but does not make the law any more constitutional than without a stay. The stay does not require Maryland to continue to apply G&S. As a matter of fact, Gansler said in his letter to the judge that Maryland would generally comply with a ruling like this even absent such enforcement mechanisms.

The fact the state is choosing (they do have a choice) to continue to apply laws that are unconstitutional is bad faith. They wish to appeal and that is fine and dandy, but holding onto apps would have been the smarter choice.

This isn't whining on our part. Here's how this is dumb for the state: when the ruling is affirmed on appeal, the state is going to have zero credibility when they say "trust us, we will comply."

The state has already conceded to the court that this action is against their general principles when it comes to civil rights rulings. Toss in the fact that they are violating state law at the same time - by refusing to process lawful applications when presented to them - and we can make a strong case that the state is a bad actor acting in bad faith.

That is why this is 'dumb'. It does not help the state, one bit. It could prove harmful to them in the long run. It strikes me as a tantrum and I would not be surprised to find it was decreed by fiat by someone outside the AG's office. I would also be less than shocked to find out this was a reaction formulated immediately after the state got their asses handed to them during the HB579 ruckus. They are not used to the peons arguing back.

FWIW, we expect to see some more games if a special session is called. We're ready.

X-Factor · Apr 19, 2012

I wonder what Gansler would say if he saw this letter.....as a LAWYER I bet it would make him mad. Would show where he stands on this particular piece of crap. If he shrugs it off then he's a pawn of the state, if he gets pissed then he's just a lawyer pawn. No?

esqappellate · Apr 19, 2012

Merlin said:
I know I don't like it, but I don't undestand why you thinik it's a dumb move on there part? I thought the very reason judge Legg's reason for giving the state the stay was so they could (for now) continue to use G&S during this time. What's the point of the stay if they don't conduct business as normal?

The temp stay was issued to allow briefing on whether a perm stay pending appeal should be entered. Part of the inquiry on that is the effect a stay would have on others. The more you appear arbitrary in rejecting apps on g&s grounds the more people are affected and unfairly at that. The inquiry depends on equitable discretion. A fundamental precept in the law is that those who seek equity must do equity. See?

dlmcbm · Apr 19, 2012

@Patrick--Thanks you really summed that up nice. I was always wondering why it was considered a "bad move" by the state. You helped me understand.

I thought a special session was only for budget issues??

Patrick · Apr 19, 2012

dlmcbm said:
@Patrick--Thanks you really summed that up nice. I was always wondering why it was considered a "bad move" by the state. You helped me understand.

I thought a special session was only for budget issues??

Increasing the cost of training and permits is budget related. So is introducing new fees.

The temp stay was issued to allow briefing on whether a perm stay pending appeal should be entered. Part of the inquiry on that is the effect a stay would have on others. The more you appear arbitrary in rejecting apps on g&s grounds the more people are affected and unfairly at that. The inquiry depends on equitable discretion. An fundamental precept in the law is that those who seek equity must do equity. See?

What he said.

I left out the the effect part when I posted.

The state is essentially proving Gura's point: that a permanent stay will harm people because the state will use the time to deny them a constitutional right. It is one thing to say , "let is all ride", quite another to deny outright.

I get the sense the state does not expect to get their stay, or are so confident of getting it they figure they can do whatever they want. It's gotta be one or the other extreme. They certainly are not making it easier on themselves if they thought it was an on-the-fence decision.

We'll see what the state says in their briefing due today.

Merlin · Apr 19, 2012

peafarmer said:
I wonder if MSP cares about their approval rate. Their response to the OP states that since the stay is in effect, they are bound to enforce the G&S law. I think this is true. What I wonder is if the MSP really endorses the G&S or if they are just being good soldiers and enforcing it. I would think that most MSP officers think more like us than like Gansler...thoughts?

Andy

At the end of the day I personally think the MSP could not care less about the approval rate. It was brought up only brought up because they will use everything and anything if they think it may help them.

But I do not think anyone at the MSP is loosing sleep over the approval rate changing from what they claimed.

The ONLY things org's like the MSP care about are issues that may cut their budget.

JMangle · Apr 19, 2012

I really can't stand the tactics in this state.

I hope that somehow word of this is getting to the judge and to Gura.

Especially if the state is going to use that 97% argument BS again.

I assume that someone from MSI is bumping this information along, yes?

FRISteve · Apr 19, 2012

Merlin said:
(Except on a plane where the sky marshals have to carry special rounds that will not go through the side of the plane.)

Air Marshals do NOT carry special rounds. They, of all the silly things, carry 357Sig 125gr JHP.

Mr H · Apr 19, 2012

Today's "punch a wormhole through space" question...

How does it affect the State's case to have refunded a non-refundable permit fee?

navycraig · Apr 19, 2012

FRISteve said:
Air Marshals do NOT carry special rounds. They, of all the silly things, carry 357Sig 125gr JHP.

Yes they do, it was on CSI and therefore must be true.

Honestly, to my simple mind, it would seem smart if they did carry a round that was not going to T&T a perp and then penetrate the aircraft as well.

Thread drift, sorry. Now back to our regularly scheduled program.

esqappellate · Apr 19, 2012

mr h said:
Today's "punch a wormhole through space" question...

How does it affect the State's case to have refunded a non-refundable permit fee?

Just makes double clear that they are refusing to accept the application.

cad68m_m · Apr 19, 2012

Got my Postal return receipt of my appeal to the Handgun Permit Review Board of my post stay Non-processed denial.

Inigoes · Apr 19, 2012

cad68m_m said:
Got my Postal return receipt of my appeal to the Handgun Permit Review Board of my post stay Non-processed denial.

Good luck

hvymax · Apr 19, 2012

cad68m_m said:
Got my Postal return receipt of my appeal to the Handgun Permit Review Board of my post stay Non-processed denial.

Bravo!!! Now lets see where the poop flies.

PERMIT APPLICATION RETURNED

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

XGMG2

Ultimate Member

In a State of Bliss

MSI Executive Member

I don't say please

President, MSI

Ultimate Member

MSI Executive Member

Ultimate Member

Handsome Engineer

Active Member

Banana'd

Ultimate Member

President, MSI

Member MSI, SAF, NRA

Head'n for the hills

Banned

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics