Group-Submission of MD CCW Permits: Self-Defense

[bbgunn177]

New twist in the previous post about retroactively applying the standards in place at time app is submitted. Will have to think the ramifications. This *might* point towrds waiting and watching.

* Notwithstanding above developement , this is what I intended to write instead. *

At some point we need to quantify our degree of optimism. At the most wildly optimistic, merely writing down Self Defense will automaticly reflect reasonable fear of aprehended danger. Below that would be "some" reason specific to the applicant , but judged against a different standard as current. Hypothetically could be 99% of the way to Shall Issue , 99% of current scheme , or anywhere inbetween.

Everything BBGun177 sugguested is 100% true, but will still translate as " Self Defense and Lawful Purposes "

( Holding final paragraph in abayance pending further insight into the game changer of back dating MSP criteria.)

I agree it still translates to Self Defense and Lawful Purposes. I was trying to come up with an example of why Self Defense was needed and what better way to show that than the MSP and all other policing agencies in the state have no duty to protect the citizen.

I don't know if this will fly or if some other wording can be developed. I recognize that it's a crap shoot going in. I know it's like hunting you don't get a chance at any game if you are sitting on the sofa. I figure it's time to get off the sofa.

 

[Medshot]

I agree it still translates to Self Defense and Lawful Purposes. I was trying to come up with an example of why Self Defense was needed and what better way to show that than the MSP and all other policing agencies in the state have no duty to protect the citizen.

I don't know if this will fly or if some other wording can be developed. I recognize that it's a crap shoot going in. I know it like hunting you don't get a chance at any game if you are sitting on the sofa. I figure it's time to get off the sofa.

I think that your example was great for a layout; we all just need to include personal aspects that distinguish our applications.

All in all, I think at the very LEAST this will make some noise...or at least help people get training accomplished.

My initial prediction still stands in that we will not receive any definitive information regarding the process even when we're well into May. At that point, we'll be able to have more people with the training requirements checked off, and we'll be able to get more information from our actions.

 

[montoya32]

I actually applied last week with "Self-Defense". I got a call by the end of the week asking for clarification. The Sgt. politely explained GS and I informed him that I understood Maryland law and had testified to change it. He explained it will be denied for lack of GS but it doesn't negatively affect me for applying later. He also stated that if things change down the road to make sure that the change is in full effect because they will process it based on the law/policies on the application date. I should receive a letter in about 90 days.

And now when you apply/re-apply for out of state permits, you must disclose that you were denied in MD. This is the major point of contention for applying and being denied.

 

[Medshot]

And now when you apply/re-apply for out of state permits, you must disclose that you were denied in MD. This is the major point of contention for applying and being denied.

While on the surface I do view that as an issue, I would expect most states that are more, let's say "sensitive" to citizen's rights regarding CCW permits would understand the circumstances upon investigating. All they would have to see would be the reason for denial, and that it would have nothing to do with a crime committed. When I applied for my UT permit, I had many questions regarding the fact that MD didn't recognize any state's permit, and the UT BCI seemed well aware of the ridiculous policies here in MD.

 

[montoya32]

While on the surface I do view that as an issue, I would expect most states that are more, let's say "sensitive" to citizen's rights regarding CCW permits would understand the circumstances upon investigating. All they would have to see would be the reason for denial, and that it would have nothing to do with a crime committed. When I applied for my UT permit, I had many questions regarding the fact that MD didn't recognize any state's permit, and the UT BCI seemed well aware of the ridiculous policies here in MD.

You and I understand that, but "reason for denial" is not on the other state's applications, just were you denied.

 

[Medshot]

You and I understand that, but "reason for denial" is not on the other state's applications, just were you denied.

True...hmmm...well, I suppose that all rests then on whether or not they would make the choice to investigate. That's an additional factor that we won't know what really happens until we hear from someone with experience...well, if all of this goes through and I'm denied, I'll figure it out when I renew my UT CCW.

 

[TxAggie]

I think mine is still in the "pipeline" hence letter in 90 days but it isn't going to be processed, i.e. interviews. He didn't specifically mention this it seemed implied.

What if you would have asked for it to proceed with interview, even knowing that it was a very long shot.

 

[Stoveman]

You and I understand that, but "reason for denial" is not on the other state's applications, just were you denied.

Another good reason to get all the NR permits you think you might ever need now. Just start collecting them like baseball cards.....

 

[Medshot]

Another good reason to get all the NR permits you think you might ever need now. Just start collecting them like baseball cards.....

Very expensive baseball cards...

 

[Schipperke]

Very expensive baseball cards...

 

[ironpony]

About $200 from what I've experienced.

The shop I took Utah charges $300 classroom + $200 range time for the MD, is that to be expected? Includes fingerprints, app, pic, pin ....

 

[press1280]

And now when you apply/re-apply for out of state permits, you must disclose that you were denied in MD. This is the major point of contention for applying and being denied.

I still have yet to find a concrete case where this has actually prevented someone from obtaining a permit they would have otherwise gotten.

I specifically disclosed on my Maine NR application that I had been denied in NJ for lack of "justifiable need". I received the permit with no further clarification needed.

 

[EarnestT]

In! training exempt

 

[brownspotz]

Has anyone directly told the msp that they will hold them directly responsible via a lawsuit that denial of a carry permit falls squarely on their shoulders and when said citizen is harmed because they couldn't defend their self they will see them in court? Just an idea.

 

[twan]

Has anyone directly told the msp that they will hold them directly responsible via a lawsuit that denial of a carry permit falls squarely on their shoulders and when said citizen is harmed because they couldn't defend their self they will see them in court? Just an idea.

Do you think they care? I think not.

 

[Gryphon]

Gotcha, what I meant more-so was I am curious if Gryphon was contacted like you were.

First, my application is already pending, and I don't have a decision yet so I really don't have much to offer and therefore not a lot to say.

Second, my application is somewhat different than Vgplayer describes his own. I have previously suggested and still suggest articulating the basis for your assertion of self-defense, being as thorough as possible. But that is just my opinion. I have no inside knowledge.

I am applying to find out for myself how serious Hogan and Pollazzi are about fundamental rights, and if Hogan's claim they are 2A supporters is true or not. Hogan got my vote and financial support, and I intend to find out if that was the right decision and be vocal about.

Third, I did speak with my initial reviewing Trooper a while back. He was somewhat skeptical, but cordial. He suggested that the time consuming "personal reference" checks for applications based on nothing more than "self-defense" (as a matter of right) might be temporarily deferred in favor of personal reference checks on applications that might have a better chance of ultimate approval. But he did not say those applications would be held up or summarily disapproved. He said they can always go back and close the loop on the reference checks, even if initially denied, and then reconsidered during an informal review, or even during an appeal to the Board.

I am not too concerned about what Vgplayer might have been told, as far as I know an application remains viable until you have exhausted your administrative remedies, and even pending a petition for judicial review. Just don't miss your deadlines at each step.

During the initial screening (early in the transition) the Trooper stated he had not received any direction to change the standard of review, and didn't know if or when he might receive a change in orders. He did not say a pending application couldn't be reviewed on anything other than the standard being used on the day of submission, and I suggest anyone that said that was overstepping their authority. Does anyone think the interviewing/processing Troopers will do other than they are told from above?

I have very good reason to believe my application is still being processed, but that I will not hear back in much less than 90 days. BTW, if the MSP was going to summarily deny my application it shouldn't take them 90 days to lick a stamp.

I am convinced that different initial reviewing Troopers have different levels of experience with the process, and may take the liberty of making definitive sounding statements that may not actually be true. Be careful about taking something one Trooper may have said about one application and applying it to all others as being the Gospel.

The only way you will ever find out for sure is to apply. Good luck fellow dissidents and patriots!

 

[Gryphon]

And now when you apply/re-apply for out of state permits, you must disclose that you were denied in MD. This is the major point of contention for applying and being denied.

Uh, Montoya32 are you arguing against others joining us in the pool? Seriously, I have spoken to several instructors teaching out-of-state permit classes including Utahs, and they have all said a Maryland denial doesn't present and issue. Also, how ironic that Maryland also asks if you have ever been denied! I wonder if that is a basis for a denial a second time around once we get some sanity in our Legislature. Come on in boys the waters warm!

 

[vgplayer]

I don't want my comments to discourage people from applying. I applied because I could. Next year when I testify I can point and say here is my denial that self-defense is not considered GS.

 

[montoya32]

Uh, Montoya32 are you arguing against others joining us in the pool? Seriously, I have spoken to several instructors teaching out-of-state permit classes including Utahs, and they have all said a Maryland denial doesn't present and issue. Also, how ironic that Maryland also asks if you have ever been denied! I wonder if that is a basis for a denial a second time around once we get some sanity in our Legislature. Come on in boys the waters warm!

I am just stating that other states ask if you've been denied and they may or may not investigate as to the reason. If the MSP won't give the applicant a reason for the denial, why would they give an out of state agency a reason?

 

[Gryphon]

I don't want my comments to discourage people from applying. I applied because I could. Next year when I testify I can point and say here is my denial that self-defense is not considered GS.

Well, you haven't actually been denied yet, but I do understand your rationale! Thank you for testing the waters - its the only way to know for sure, and its another chip at the block.