CCW ?

[3rdRcn]

Sounds like a plan. No matter what the law is it is a horrible idea to drink while carrying. Especially in a place like MD.

 

[swinokur]

COMAR stands for Code of MD Regulations. It is not the actual statute. It, as posted, is written by state agencies to codify how actual statutes will be enforced.

 

[lx1x]

Who takes a sip anyways? Lol


Disclaimer: I too don't like to mix alcohol and guns.

 

[jc1240]

I'm not a lawyer and I'm not taking sides, but to me any governing body could make things clearer if they use accurate terminology.

It seems to me that "under the influence" should be defined (for any purpose) as a subjectively tested condition (BAC at some level for example). If the state doesn't want people to have ANY alcohol while carrying a firearm, then the law should state just that - "shall not consume alcohol in any quantity."

Imagine how much easier things would be if in general, our esteemed members of the Md. Gen. Ass. would write laws plainly instead of trying to be all fancy with their lawyer-speak.

In this case, it leaves open the interpretation of "under the influence" vs "no alcohol." Which was the intent?

 

[swinokur]

The ambiguity is intentional IMO. Gives them more latitude to selectively enforce some laws.

 

[3rdRcn]

COMAR stands for Code of MD Regulations. It is not the actual statute. It, as posted, is written by state agencies to codify how actual statutes will be enforced.

That's kinda what I'm not understanding, if the purpose is to define how the law will be enforced and not the actual law then why is it what is always what is referred to when speaking about maryland statute.

I'm not a lawyer and I'm not taking sides, but to me the any governing body could make things clearer if they use accurate terminology.

It seems to me that "under the influence" should be defined (for any purpose) as a subjectively tested condition (BAC at some level for example). If the state doesn't want people to have ANY alcohol while carrying a firearm, then the law should state just that - "shall not consume alcohol in any quantity."

Imagine how much easier things would be if in general, our esteemed members of the Md. Gen. Ass. would write laws plainly instead of trying to be all fancy with their lawyer-speak.

In this case, it leaves open the interpretation of "under the influence" vs "no alcohol." Which was the intent?

I couldn't agree more.

The ambiguity is intentional IMO. Gives them more latitude to selectively enforce some laws.

I absolutely agree. The biggest problem I have is that the MSP gets to interpret things the way they want. I just went through this with a subsequent permit vs. a renewal permit. Two separate boxes on the application, two separate meanings in the dictionary, nothing in the law that says a subsequent permit requires training but according to 1st Sgt. Casey they are both the same and both require training to get.

 

[Indiana Jones]

Being perfectly legal doesn't make it a very smart thing to do but to each his own. Having a beer with a meal while carrying doesn't sound like a danger as long as one sticks a "A" beer and not a few beers I think.

A few beers will automatically make anyone near a firearm act crazy and kill everyone....





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[redeemed.man]

The ambiguity is intentional IMO. Gives them more latitude to selectively enforce some laws.

Exactly in case a member of the GA or retired MSP is carrying and drinking. They don't "have to" enforce the law in those situations because it is ambiguous.

 

[swinokur]

COMAR and the statute should agree. An example of MSP abuse is that the HQL statute makes no requirement for live fire. MSP arbitrarily added it to COMAR. There seems to be no way to correct this besides a court case.

 

[Reptile]

The ambiguity is intentional IMO. Gives them more latitude to selectively enforce some laws.

That may be true, but it is more likely that the lawyers who wrote the law are actually creating jobs for the lawyers who will defend the people who may or may not have broken the ambiguous law.

 

[Blaster229]

Just throwing this in here for the pot

So, what is the difference between carrying and drinking at a bar/restaurant or being at home and drinking if it came down to a shooting?

 

[redeemed.man]

COMAR and the statute should agree. An example of MSP abuse is that the HQL statute makes no requirement for live fire. MSP arbitrarily added it to COMAR. There seems to be no way to correct this besides a court case.

Yep. I wonder if sh1t like this happens in free states? WTF!

 

[swinokur]

Yep. I wonder if sh1t like this happens in non corrupt free states? WTF!

FIFY

 

[3rdRcn]

Yep. I wonder if sh1t like this happens in free states? WTF!

Probably not, their laws are based on common sense, unlike ours.

 

[Straightshooter]

A few beers will automatically make anyone near a firearm act crazy and kill everyone....





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Doesn't even take that. According to the trooper who interviewed me and my wife when we applied, she stated that "guns make good people do bad things".

I asked her "what have you done bad lately, because I'm assuming you are a good person and you have a gun?"

I got the "You know what I mean" line and the subject changed.

 

[3rdRcn]

Doesn't even take that. According to the trooper who interviewed me and my wife when we applied, she stated that "guns make good people do bad things".

I asked her "what have you done bad lately, because I'm assuming you are a good person and you have a gun?"

I got the "You know what I mean" line and the subject changed.

That is exactly the kind of biased shit I'm talking about. Who the hell is she to say something like that. This state pisses me off so bad sometimes with not keeping their state police in check and allowing them to do as please.

 

[Pinecone]

You lost me on this, so what you are saying is that the annotated code of maryland is not the law and you should disregard what it says because it isn't the law? That all lawyers who refer to this for legal briefings etc. should throw their COMAR library away because it isn't what the law says and therefore makes them useless?

There is a different between a law and regulation.

And you have been spouting off about how you are an instructor and teach the law, and then mention the COMAR.

COMAR is NOT law. It is regulations. And if you are teaching this, you should know the difference.

SB281, as passed and signed is now LAW. From that MSP writes regulations on how to apply that law. Same with other laws and other agencies.

Regulations can be changed much easier than laws.

 

[Pinecone]

COMAR and the statute should agree. An example of MSP abuse is that the HQL statute makes no requirement for live fire. MSP arbitrarily added it to COMAR. There seems to be no way to correct this besides a court case.

Or a new head of MSP having them go through the process of changing the regulation. Which is a WHOLE lot easier than changing the law.

 

[swinokur]

Oh yes. Changes to COMAR (like the handgun roster) are proposed by the enforcing agency n the MD Register and then a 30 day period to allow public comment. After that it can simply be adopted.

Much easier than a change to a statute.

 

[pilotguy299]

Just throwing this in here for the pot

So, what is the difference between carrying and drinking at a bar/restaurant or being at home and drinking if it came down to a shooting?

One is more baderer than the other?

One will always be seen as contributory to the use of firearm, even if it really wasn't. The other at least has a chance of being seen as almost reasonable.

In reality it is either a good shoot or it isn't. The rest is just chaff...