SAF SUES IN MARYLAND OVER HANDGUN PERMIT DENIAL UPDATED 3-5-12

[GBMaryland]

Why doesn't he just qualify under LEOSA? I would think PGCounty is a large enough department that they would be a participant.

I have to admit that I don't know the specifics. But at some point he indicated to me that it wasn't as simple as going in applying for permits and being a former retired law-enforcement officer and having things just work out.

I think the basics really were that he had just simply waited too long after retiring and that that's somehow affected his ability to simply apply for a permit and get one.

I'll ask.

 

[dblas]

Not until after a public outcry following the news story. Nice to see that she got the fines, lost her car, and had to take a remedial drivers course. However, if that had been on of us in the serfdom of the PDR of Maryland, we would have been arrested on the side of the road and spent time in a cell awaiting arraignment on multiple charges.

Not exactly, part of the "fun" of sitting on the Citizens Advisory Committee for PGPD is getting details on certain item. In this case, the officer advised his supervisor of the issue and it went up the chain at the same time it became a news story and the public outcry started. Chief McGraw really doesn't play favorits regardless of who you are. It was decided that there was enough information to write the additional citation and the Chief did that himself and delivered it in person to the good Council Woman at her office in Upper Marlboro.

From what I have seen under this administration, it would appear that to some extent the haves are becoming part of the have nots, and get treated the same with regard to rules of law.

At least on the PS side, the rule is "everyone is the same, if you have a question or concern, boot it up the chain." And this starts with the County Director of Homeland Security, Brian Moe.

 

[Glaug-Eldare]

I don't (can't) give specific legal advice like this. Generally, item 4 means that the application of force must stop when a reasonable man would have perceived that the threat to your life ended. You cannot use more force than necessary to defend yourself. For example, if he is on the ground and offers no resistence (has stopped attacking), you can't keep on shooting. Similarly, armed force is generally not available when the aggressor is unarmed, if a reasonable man in your position could have defended himself without using lethal means. Your medical condition is pertinent in assessing what a reasonable man *in your position* ("to believe himself") would feel to be a threat to your life, viz., items number 1 and 2. The life of an old guy (and I am 61) is more at risk than an 18 year old from some kinds of assault. As is apparent, self-defense is wholly dependent on the circumstances -- it is often a jury question. It is *very* difficult situation, which is best avoided if at all possible. In MD, for example, there is a requirement to retreat before using deadly force (no retreat required in the home or if retreat was not safely available)

If I recall correctly, retreat isn't necessary in the context of a robbery, either. Too bad it's not codified...

 

[JMangle]

“(1) The accused must have had reasonable grounds to believe himself in apparent imminent or immediate danger of death or serious bodily harm from his assailant or potential assailant;
“(2) The accused must have in fact believed himself in this danger;
“(3) The accused claiming the right of self-defense must not have been the aggressor or provoked the conflict; and
“(4) The force used must not have been unreasonable and excessive, that is, the force must not have been more force than the exigency demanded.”

I have a personal interest in this, as I am 64 years old and on blood thinners, which renders me at risk for intracranial bleeding (and subsequent death) from a blow to the head.

In view of this risk, and my age, which seems, to me at least, to provide a basis for disparity of force, I'm wondering whether these factors would make a significant difference in the way I should view a possible encounter with a malefactor. While I'm in favor of defending my life and well-being, would the use (or threat of use) of deadly force in an encounter run afoul of point (4) above?

I feel it ought not to, but I can't help but wonder at how many expensive legal hoops I'd have to jump through before being (hopefully) exonerated.

This is a clear example of your location coming into play. If you were in Texas and someone with my build (young, good shape, rather large) were to threaten you and start to approach you, I'd bet you could get away with just about anything that *a reasonable person in your situation* would have done.

In Maryland, you'd have to try to run away, they hold your fire as the guy beat you, and only shoot right as you started to black out. (Oh, and you'd still end up in jail, I'm sure.)

I'm not really joking all that much, I think we know that this is probably true. I don't know how jury selection is done, but I think a MoCo jury would nail you, and a Washington County jury would give you a standing ovation.

 

[esqappellate]

If I recall correctly, retreat isn't necessary in the context of a robbery, either. Too bad it's not codified...

that's correct, no retreat required in an actual robbery. And you're right, this is all case law (the "common law"). Heck, until 1996 in MD, assault was not codified -- it was solely a common law crime.

 

[eyesinpines]

I recall that last Friday there was much anticipation that Judge Leggs decision re stay would be released on Pacer. Doesn't seem to be that tension yesterday or today.

Can this happen on ANY day, or is it a Friday only thing?

 

[esqappellate]

I recall that last Friday there was much anticipation that Judge Leggs decision re stay would be released on Pacer. Doesn't seem to be that tension yesterday or today.

Can this happen on ANY day, or is it a Friday only thing?

Any weekday. And folks are tired of the anticipation, I think.

 

[MJD438]

I recall that last Friday there was much anticipation that Judge Leggs decision re stay would be released on Pacer. Doesn't seem to be that tension yesterday or today.

Can this happen on ANY day, or is it a Friday only thing?

I believe it can happen at any time of day, and any day of the week due to the electronic nature of PACER. It will be released to PACER within 24 hours of the Judge applying his signature to the documents, based on past history of this thread.

 

[rambling_one]

Any weekday. And folks are tired of the anticipation, I think.

I need a pick me upper!

Am awaiting the judge's decision, my FTF interview (90 days today), approval as a collector (application mailed 4/5) and an AZ carry permit.

 

[esqappellate]

I need a pick me upper!

Am awaiting the judge's decision, my FTF interview (90 days today), approval as a collector (application mailed 4/5) and an AZ carry permit.

yes, me too. I had my FTF (favorable), got my VA non-resident permit. Waiting for my Florida permit. Waiting for MD. And have a rapt interest in Moore in the 7th Circuit.

 

[Mr H]

Is it soup yet?!!

HUH??!

 

[Inigoes]

I recall that last Friday there was much anticipation that Judge Leggs decision re stay would be released on Pacer. Doesn't seem to be that tension yesterday or today.

Can this happen on ANY day, or is it a Friday only thing?

It's a Friday thing.

The anticipation grows throughout the week, cresting on a Friday...

 

[pablo]

yes, me too. I had my FTF (favorable), got my VA non-resident permit. Waiting for my Florida permit. Waiting for MD. And have a rapt interest in Moore in the 7th Circuit.

Why not Utah? Just curious.

 

[esqappellate]

Why not Utah? Just curious.

VA is easy, it is next door and I live a stone's throw away and my son goes to college in VA. FL is easy, as I go to Florida a bunch and VA isn't good in FL, AL, or GA, and FL non-resident covers all three of those states (neither covers S. Carolina). With VA and FL, I am pretty well covered with reciprocity -- UTah gives me MN (not covered by FL or VA), but Utah doesn't cover FL or Kansas or NM, the latter two being covered by FL. And I don't go much to MN.

 

[Jerzee Transplant]

For the legal eagles; does the passing of time from the final brief until Judge Legg's decision favor us, the State or neither...

 

[esqappellate]

For the legal eagles; does the passing of time from the final brief until Judge Legg's decision favor us, the State or neither...

IMpossible to tell at this stage.....

 

[Patrick]

For the legal eagles; does the passing of time from the final brief until Judge Legg's decision favor us, the State or neither...

Time favors the patient.

 

[jkray]

Time favors the patient.

Even the State must be growing a little impatient at this point don't you think?

 

[Patrick]

Even the State must be growing a little impatient at this point don't you think?

Some, yes.

Remember, MSP is just following law right now. If the law changes, they will also follow that. The AG is arguing law and the Governor is...not running for President while stumping in New Hampshire.

 

[ffemtreed]

“(4) The force used must not have been unreasonable and excessive, that is, the force must not have been more force than the exigency demanded.”

Having served on a jury where this came into play, I can say you don't want to take the chance. There are always those people who watch too much TV and come up with their own versions of he/she should have could have done that, they should have just shot the gun out of their hands, or shot him in the leg. Trust me, we argued for an hour on nonsense like that and it wasn't even firearm related. Lets just say someone broke into your house after getting into a verbal battle outside, the owner used a weapon to defend themselves inside their own home (women homeowner -- man was the person breaking in). We heard all kinds of stories about how she could have run out the back door, locked herself in a room, stayed on the opposite side of the kitchen table and kept going around it while waiting for police.

I really wanted to tear my hair out by the end of those deliberations.