Group-Submission of MD CCW Permits: Self-Defense

[mxrider]

What becomes of your application fee if you are denied? Do they keep it?

Yes

 

[Medshot]

I'm willing to jump in, but am curious about your anticipated approach. Is your plan to have everyone get things together and then show up, as a group, at MSP HQ and drop off our packages or is it just sending them all in at roughly the same time?

I would say just mailing it around the same time; I can't imagine a large group of people showing up at the MSP HQ would really have the desired effect.

I expect at the very least to draw a lot of attention to this subject within the MSP. Having a large group of applications for the same exact thing for the exact same reason is going to have SOME sort of effect...whether that's good or bad, we'll just have to find out. That last part regarding the same reason is of key importance in my opinion; I'm hoping that we can (and we can start this now) all agree to the same exact language (or at least damn near identical) in our reasoning of of using self-defense as our G&S reasoning. Now of course if someone has additional documentation, that should be added, but otherwise, this group of submissions should be uniform in reasoning.

I'll ask Gryphon what he used since he's the first wave, and we can all choose do go around that, modify it until we're all comfortable, etc.

Bottom-line: We should start thinking about language and statements that we can all agree on so we can be as uniform as possible in our reasoning when we submit. In about an hour or two I'll start staring at the forms and start with that.

 

[Bertfish]

Yes

Should've known that when I asked the question

 

[TxAggie]

I currently have a Utah non-resident, so on my application I will put something to the effect of I am licensed to carry in 31 states and I would like the ability to carry in my state of residence.

 

[TxAggie]

You can always refrence the sticky " HOW to apply for a Maryland Permit " .

Thanks, I remembered that thread right after I typed that, I even saw there is basically a quick list.

 

[Medshot]

I currently have a Utah non-resident, so on my application I will put something to the effect of I am licensed to carry in 31 states and I would like the ability to carry in my state of residence.

Makes sense; we should all have a similar base, with additional details that we can add if they apply, like other CCW permits held.

 

[mxrider]

One thing that everyone will need to keep in mind with this. You will need to articulate your "reasonable apprehension of danger" with your "Self Defense". That is law and nothing can be done about that administratively. If you just put in Self Defense and all Lawful Purposes, you will likely get denied. If you put Self Defense and list some crime stats for the state or area that you live in, you might have a chance. I don't have any inside info, so this is only speculation and my personal viewpoint.

 

[Straightshooter]

When the 365+ applied post Woollard, it was generally agreed to use "Personal Defense and all legal purposes" as the G&S. MSP did notice and kept those separate.

 

[mxrider]

When the 365+ applied post Woollard, it was generally agreed to use "Personal Defense and all legal purposes" as the G&S. MSP did notice and kept those separate.

Yes, but post Woollard was different with regards to the fact that the G&S was found to be unconstitutional. Here, we are trying to get Self Defense to be an acceptable G&S.

 

[Straightshooter]

One thing that everyone will need to keep in mind with this. You will need to articulate your "reasonable apprehension of danger" with your "Self Defense". That is law and nothing can be done about that administratively. If you just put in Self Defense and all Lawful Purposes, you will likely get denied. If you put Self Defense and list some crime stats for the state or area that you live in, you might have a chance. I don't have any inside info, so this is only speculation and my personal viewpoint.

I think you're reading too much into self defense. If self defense becomes acceptable, the apprehended danger part goes out the window.

 

[Straightshooter]

Yes, but post Woollard was different with regards to the fact that the G&S was found to be unconstitutional. Here, we are trying to get Self Defense to be an acceptable G&S.

Weather it's done by the courts or the Superintendent makes no difference other than the permanency.

 

[navycraig]

I would say just mailing it around the same time; I can't imagine a large group of people showing up at the MSP HQ would really have the desired effect.

I expect at the very least to draw a lot of attention to this subject within the MSP. Having a large group of applications for the same exact thing for the exact same reason is going to have SOME sort of effect...whether that's good or bad, we'll just have to find out. That last part regarding the same reason is of key importance in my opinion; I'm hoping that we can (and we can start this now) all agree to the same exact language (or at least damn near identical) in our reasoning of of using self-defense as our G&S reasoning. Now of course if someone has additional documentation, that should be added, but otherwise, this group of submissions should be uniform in reasoning.

I'll ask Gryphon what he used since he's the first wave, and we can all choose do go around that, modify it until we're all comfortable, etc.

Bottom-line: We should start thinking about language and statements that we can all agree on so we can be as uniform as possible in our reasoning when we submit. In about an hour or two I'll start staring at the forms and start with that.

Really? I think that a group showing in person would have the exact desired effect; Apply and send the message that we are united in our cause. Word of a big group showing up is much more likely to get back to the superintendent than a bunch of applications being received by mail on similar, but still random days. In person makes the statement, IMO, but I'm not leading this charge so I'll defer to your judgment.

Agree 100% with exact language idea, but as mentioned elsewhere, we do need more than just self defense as G&H. The guidance online is clear and until those rules are changed we are likely just throwing money away.

When considering a "go" date, keep in mind that livesscan prints are only good for a short time, I think.

Much coordination needed to pull this off as desired.

 

[navycraig]

One thing that everyone will need to keep in mind with this. You will need to articulate your "reasonable apprehension of danger" with your "Self Defense". That is law and nothing can be done about that administratively. If you just put in Self Defense and all Lawful Purposes, you will likely get denied. If you put Self Defense and list some crime stats for the state or area that you live in, you might have a chance. I don't have any inside info, so this is only speculation and my personal viewpoint.

Agreed. Overlook this at our own peril.

 

[fightinbluhen51]

Agreed. Overlook this at our own peril.

So, if you live in Cecil county, 100' inside the border of both PA and DE, you will probably be denied because your crime rates are almost non-existent. Yet if you live in Bloodymore or the surrounding counties, you stand a better shot?

This state sucks when it comes to this.

 

[Medshot]

Really? I think that a group showing in person would have the exact desired effect; Apply and send the message that we are united in our cause. Word of a big group showing up is much more likely to get back to the superintendent than a bunch of applications being received by mail on similar, but still random days. In person makes the statement, IMO, but I'm not leading this charge so I'll defer to your judgment.

Agree 100% with exact language idea, but as mentioned elsewhere, we do need more than just self defense as G&H. The guidance online is clear and until those rules are changed we are likely just throwing money away.

When considering a "go" date, keep in mind that livesscan prints are only good for a short time, I think.

Much coordination needed to pull this off as desired.

Agreed with all, as for the group-in-person aspect, I suppose that just boils down to my...less than courteous interactions with the MSP; I know of good men and women within its ranks, but any time I've had an extended interaction with them...well, no matter.

Here is what I suggest: we have two separate components; we all have busy schedules I am sure, but if we can get a good amount of us to submit in person at the same time, I'm all for it. Everyone else can submit via mail at the same time.

That said, who would be willing to do this in person? (Assuming we can all agree on a date.) As Craig stated, coordination is key, and we don't have to worry about rushing this.

 

[TxAggie]

Agreed with all, as for the group-in-person aspect, I suppose that just boils down to my...less than courteous interactions with the MSP; I know of good men and women within its ranks, but any time I've had an extended interaction with them...well, no matter.

Here is what I suggest: we have two separate components; we all have busy schedules I am sure, but if we can get a good amount of us to submit in person at the same time, I'm all for it. Everyone else can submit via mail at the same time.

That said, who would be willing to do this in person? (Assuming we can all agree on a date.) As Craig stated, coordination is key, and we don't have to worry about rushing this.

I could probably make it in person, depending on timing.

 

[Medshot]

I will update the first post to streamline things a bit.

 

[Magnumst]

Interested, need training and willing and able to hand deliver.

 

[bbgunn177]

Here is some verbiage that I have though about. IANAL but I think we need to deal in fact and not because we have "rights", we see daily how our rights are trampled. Woollard ring a bell? Anyway what are your thoughts on this approach.

As the Maryland State Police (MSP) are well aware based on various court cases some of which are listed below, there is no duty for the Maryland State Police, any of the 24 Sheriff Departments in the State and the numerous County and Municipal Police Departments to protect it citizens. We the taxpayer.

Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005)

Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. Ct. of Ap., 1981).

DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services (109 S.Ct. 998, 1989; 489 U.S. 189 (1989)).

Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64, 82 L.Ed. 1188)

It is incumbent that the MSP since they are charged by the law to administer the licensing of Concealed Carry Permits, permit it’s citizens that are so inclined the ability to Carry Concealed Weapons (CCW) for personal protection against all potential threats and all lawful purposes since every police organization in that State Of Maryland has no duty to protect the individual citizen. The individual citizen needs to be able to protect themselves.

Based on the above please find my completed application for a Maryland Concealed Carry Permit.

End of Statement

Editorial
This is the ultimate Catch 22 situation. There is no duty by the police to protect us and there is very little in the way that we can protect ourselves for lack of police protection.

I have thick skin. I would like to know if you think an approach like this has any better chance than the others mentioned. Does it need to be expanded? Is it too much? What could make it better.

Thanks

 

[montoya32]

Thanks for the wake up call to reality;

https://www.mdsp.org/Organization/SupportServicesBureau/LicensingDivision/MainLicensingPage/LicensingandRegistration/Firearms/WearandCarryPermit.aspx

Be sure to go to the bottom and read; Cases Referencing Good and Substantial Reason

Wow, read the two denials. I can't come anywhere close to the reasons they gave, and they were denied. Put a fork in it for me, in Merryland.

Isn't it odd that a government agency which is regulated by laws and legislation would need to cite court cases for a process supposedly conducted according to legislated commands?