NYC CCW case is at SCOTUS!

[lazarus]

That wasn't touched in this opinion.

Another court case will be needed for reciprosity.

But I DO very much think the text and history test mentioned here is going to find that reciprocity is a must.

 

[Doctor_M]

Maybe, just maybe, the homicide rate will start declining with more armed good guys on the streets.

 

[lazarus]

For all intents and purposes, unless you're a prohibited person.

Nope, nope, nope. Some other court case is going to have to find that.

The court has not granted such a right to people in this opinion. It said Shall issue is perhaps okay. May issue is not constitutional. But they were very clear that requiring a LICENSE was potentially fine. Other lawsuits will now be needed, or legislative changes, in the states impacted by the ruling. The court is not granting constitutional carrying in this opinion to anyone anywhere.

You must still legally wait until the Governor directs that self-defense satisfies G&S under Maryland law, the legislature changes the law to allow self-defense specifically (or drop G&S are a requirement entirely. Or hey, make us constitutional carry. Fat chance of that). OR another lawsuit and a court instructing the state specifically on what its gonna have to do. Most likely a lawsuit, if the judge followed the SCOTUS opinion, would fairly quickly strike down Maryland's G&S clause in the law and instruct MSP to remove the requirement from wear and carry permit applications. Likely providing some amount of time to comply, like 30, 60 or 90 days.

 

[Inigoes]

But I DO very much think the text and history test mentioned here is going to find that reciprocity is a must.

I agree for us wanderers.

Someone will bring a case about reciprocity, as well as non-resident permits.

 

[KIBarrister]

Maybe, just maybe, the homicide rate will start declining with more armed good guys on the streets.

It doesn't matter what the statistics show. Politicians and the media have no qualms with twisting and outright lying about statistics.

 

[KIBarrister]

Nope, nope, nope. Some other court case is going to have to find that.

The court has not granted such a right to people in this opinion. It said Shall issue is perhaps okay. May issue is not constitutional. But they were very clear that requiring a LICENSE was potentially fine. Other lawsuits will now be needed, or legislative changes, in the states impacted by the ruling. The court is not granting constitutional carrying in this opinion to anyone anywhere.

You must still legally wait until the Governor directs that self-defense satisfies G&S under Maryland law, the legislature changes the law to allow self-defense specifically (or drop G&S are a requirement entirely. Or hey, make us constitutional carry. Fat chance of that). OR another lawsuit and a court instructing the state specifically on what its gonna have to do. Most likely a lawsuit, if the judge followed the SCOTUS opinion, would fairly quickly strike down Maryland's G&S clause in the law and instruct MSP to remove the requirement from wear and carry permit applications. Likely providing some amount of time to comply, like 30, 60 or 90 days.

You have it around backwards. Unless and until Hogan directs that "I want one" is G&S, Maryland's statute is unconstitutional. There is no other law on the books to default to. As such, I expect that anyone charged with carrying without a license between now and when/if Hogan does that (or Annapolis amends the statute) to have their charges dismissed. Again, it won't stop Hogan's brown shirts from charging a person.

 

[TheOriginalMexicanBob]

Frosh is right. More guns means more people will die. Violent criminals will die.

Thinking about it, I actually do expect an initial uptick in shooting deaths as criminals walk into a new buzzsaw of lawfully armed citizenry. Then, I think there will be a sharp decrease as "civility" is rediscovered.

Absolutely...as soon as criminals get the message that they are at risk for trying to do harm they will start behaving...maybe. If they don't...then they'll pay the price for their stupidity.

“An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.”​

― Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon

 

[MigraineMan]

Frosh is right. More guns means more people will die. Violent criminals will die.

Thinking about it, I actually do expect an initial uptick in shooting deaths as criminals walk into a new buzzsaw of lawfully armed citizenry. Then, I think there will be a sharp decrease as "civility" is rediscovered.

Recidivism rates should approach zero ...

 

[Mr Pew]

Wow. Finally! Good news.

 

[MigraineMan]

This goes to my point exactly. They don't care. Hell, this may actually result in more gun control legislation for consideration than there otherwise would have been. They are openly hostile to the SCOTUS - many of them see current SCOTUS as illegitimate because Orange Man Bad and Orange Man Bad's picks allowed this to happen.

And I ask the question again - if these remaining May Issue states don't change a damn thing or do the absolute minimum while increasing costs/training, shortening license times, etc... what will happen to them? Who "forces" them to comply?

In Maryland, it's at the top of the State Constitution:

CONSTITUTION OF MARYLAND​

DECLARATION OF RIGHTS.​

We, the People of the State of Maryland, grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberty, and taking into our serious consideration the best means of establishing a good Constitution in this State for the sure foundation and more permanent security thereof, declare:
Article 1. That all Government of right originates from the People, is founded in compact only, and instituted solely for the good of the whole; and they have, at all times, the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their Form of Government in such manner as they may deem expedient.

 

[Apd09]

I think my biggest concern is that many stores will now put up no gun signs.
Less than reputable members of society will be camped out in parking lots to watch which person takes out their gun and where they put it in the car.
Let’s be realistic, people are inherently lazy and I don’t see everyone getting a lock box to put in their trunk.
Even if they do, car break ins and thefts are potentially going to be going up and lots guns could be put on the streets used in crimes.

Im on all your side and ecstatic about the ruling but just concerned with potential private property owners creating this haven for stolen weapons and damage to vehicles.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GrimReaper]

Just signed up for the wear and carry permit class at Freestate

 

[AC20814]

I think my biggest concern is that many stores will now put up no gun signs.
Less than reputable members of society will be camped out in parking lots to watch which person takes out their gun and where they put it in the car.
Let’s be realistic, people are inherently lazy and I don’t see everyone getting a lock box to put in their trunk.
Even if they do, car break ins and thefts are potentially going to be going up and lots guns could be put on the streets used in crimes.

Im on all your side and ecstatic about the ruling but just concerned with potential private property owners creating this haven for stolen weapons and damage to vehicles.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Why would you remove your gun in response to a "no gun" sign on a store rather than merely make sure it's adequately concealed? What's the worst that can happen- they ask you to leave?

 

[BrianS]

What a mule kick to the nuts this must for the Marxist trash nationally along with the MD politburo. First a strong affirmation of 2A rights and then a potential ruling saying abortion isn't a right. If I was of the Left I would probably jump off a cliff... no really.. jump of a cliff..

 

[Rabu Rabu]

Why would you remove your gun in response to a "no gun" sign on a store rather than merely make sure it's adequately concealed? What's the worst that can happen- they ask you to leave?

Yep. The only time those signs carry legal weight is if you refuse to comply with being asked to leave.

 

[XCheckR]

I think my biggest concern is that many stores will now put up no gun signs.
Less than reputable members of society will be camped out in parking lots to watch which person takes out their gun and where they put it in the car.
Let’s be realistic, people are inherently lazy and I don’t see everyone getting a lock box to put in their trunk.
Even if they do, car break ins and thefts are potentially going to be going up and lots guns could be put on the streets used in crimes.

Im on all your side and ecstatic about the ruling but just concerned with potential private property owners creating this haven for stolen weapons and damage to vehicles.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Store putting up a sign does not make a law. It only means they have a right not to serve you...if you go in with no shirt and sign says shirt required you aren't arrested. You're asked to leave.

And if it's concealed no one will know.

 

[smokey]

In response to md's anti-2a crowd, be sure to find their social media and point out that as carry laws have been liberalized, violent crime has gone down. Evidence does not support their claims.

 

[sundaeman]

Curious - what does this do to the fingerprint requirement of the Maryland CCW permit process. Also, they have my prints on file due to my HQL - do they need them again?

Yep, different "office".

 

[PO2012]

Nope, nope, nope. Some other court case is going to have to find that.

The court has not granted such a right to people in this opinion. It said Shall issue is perhaps okay. May issue is not constitutional. But they were very clear that requiring a LICENSE was potentially fine. Other lawsuits will now be needed, or legislative changes, in the states impacted by the ruling. The court is not granting constitutional carrying in this opinion to anyone anywhere.

You must still legally wait until the Governor directs that self-defense satisfies G&S under Maryland law, the legislature changes the law to allow self-defense specifically (or drop G&S are a requirement entirely. Or hey, make us constitutional carry. Fat chance of that). OR another lawsuit and a court instructing the state specifically on what its gonna have to do. Most likely a lawsuit, if the judge followed the SCOTUS opinion, would fairly quickly strike down Maryland's G&S clause in the law and instruct MSP to remove the requirement from wear and carry permit applications. Likely providing some amount of time to comply, like 30, 60 or 90 days.

Yes, requiring a license is fine. Requiring that "proper cause" be shown to be issued that license is not fine. Maryland has one licensing scheme and that licensing scheme is unambiguously unconstitutional as of this morning.

To be clear: I'm not referring to people who are prohibited from carrying a handgun based on age, a prior felony conviction etc. I'm referring to free adult citizens who meet all the criteria for licensure save for what Maryland refers to as a "good and substantial" reason to carry a concealed weapon.

Can a Police Officer still arrest you for wear, carry, transport? Sure. Would I? Absolutely not. Unless the person is prohibited or otherwise engaged in a crime (i.e. burglarizing a warehouse) there is no viable statute to prosecute under.

Frosh is posturing. I expect MSP to create a revised shall-issue application within the next 30 days or so. He has no other recourse unless he wants to face crushing civil law suits and possible criminal prosecution down the line. MD will do what DC did and create a licensing scheme that complies with the Court's ruling.

 

[XCheckR]

Also...quick buy stock in CCW insurance companies.