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

[Hopalong]

So, random question. Does anyone know if Mr. Wollard has actually received his permit yet? I would think that if the state doesn't process that re-application in a timely fashion, there could be Hell to pay....

 

[esqappellate]

Good point for sure, but after seeing their performance to date, and now this latest statement requesting clarification, I don't know that we are still "estimating".

These papers are well done as a matter of legal tactics. Don't think these guys are dumb. They are not

 

[jmcgonig]

the only issue i have is that i have the paperwork in my hand and i was going to make an appt. to get printed, but now I'm going to (have to?) wait till I see if a stay is granted. Wish I'd have hopped on the bandwagon earlier. i have only myself to blame. However, if we get a stay pending appeal, maybe i'll send the money to MSI instead

Why the rush? Am I missing something? I don't see the applications submitted before the stay will have some magical window of being approved. They will either be held or rejected, right? I thought the point of applying was to remove the 95% approval argument BS.

 

[pcfixer]

So, random question. Does anyone know if Mr. Wollard has actually received his permit yet? I would think that if the state doesn't process that re-application in a timely fashion, there could be Hell to pay....

According to the "Stay" the state wants to determine if Woollard is
still eligible for his 2A rights.

 

[esqappellate]

Why the rush? Am I missing something? I don't see the applications submitted before the stay will have some magical window of being approved. They will either be held or rejected, right? I thought the point of applying was to remove the 95% approval argument BS.

Right!

 

[pcfixer]

These papers are well done as a matter of legal tactics. Don't think these guys are dumb. They are not

I'm pretty Judge Legg see's thru all the tactics and manuvering.
Is it political tactics or real law tactics?

 

[swinokur]

It's both

 

[Boondock Saint]

The ruling semi implied Constitutional Carry. I hope that is what is clarified.

The ruling did no such thing. It struck "good and substantial" while specifically mentioning that such a reason could be required for concealed carry, presumably implying another manner of carry (OC?) would have to be freely available.

 

[jkray]

The ruling did no such thing. It struck "good and substantial" while specifically mentioning that such a reason could be required for concealed carry, implying that open carry would have to be freely available.

I think what he is referring to is the "the rights existance is all the reason he needs" line of the ruling. When taken out of context that can be seen as a constitutional carry line. however if taken with the rest of the ruling, where Judge Legg says the rest of the permitting scheme of MD is lawful it leads one away from constitutional carry.

 

[esqappellate]

I'm pretty Judge Legg see's thru all the tactics and manuvering.
Is it political tactics or real law tactics?

For sure political in the sense they feel it necessary to defend a state statute. That is to be expected. But also as a matter of legal tactics too. The motion for clarification is well founded legally as the issues identified are legitimate --they don't go to the merits of the constitutional holding but rather to the scope of relief. Thats fair.

As a practical matter they have to ask for a stay if they are going to appeal. They did a good job of setting out their view of the world. That's what they are supposed to do as lawyers. Surely no one here thought the state was just going to throw in the towel? There is a long road ahead and success is not guaranteed. Deep breath everyone

 

[MRA]

I think we need to thank all of the lawyers/legal eagles for helping to keep this in perspective and explain the process to us.

Right now, esqapellate is answering our questions and concerns. Thank you, you're doing a great job!

 

[eruby]

Like many things involving the Maryland government, I find the application appalling and over-intrusive.

I don't want my employer to know if I have a permit or not (I'm not sure if you have to put your current employer info on the continuation sheet if you'bve been there for more than 5 years). And this have you EVER been arrested, charged, etc is bullcookies. Even car insurance apps only go back so far.

I'd like to see an app like the FLA non-resident, where if you passed the NICS check (I believe) and could show proper training, you get the permit. Of course I'd like to win the lottery and get a snarlin' from Jessica Alba, just as folks in Hades would like ice water.

 

[FrankOceanXray]

Dems argued against a recent bill in PA requiring voters to show valid ID. Argument is this restricts thousands without valid ID, intended to strip them of rights, attacks a large chunk of dem support.

Change the argument. Dems don't want folks to have guns because they are ? They complain and cry for one thing but when you try and apply the same ideas to another idea, put on the brakes.

Just ranting. I cannot stand people who talk out of both sides of their mouth. If you stand for something.... Then stand for it.

 

[vector03]

http://delegatemike.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Motion-for-Stay-Final-as-filed-11.pdf

Page 4

1. An order permanently enjoining defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, and all persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of the injunction, from enforcing Maryland Public Safety Code § 5-306(a)(5)(ii);

(ii)has good and substantial reason to wear, carry, or transport a handgun, such as a finding that the permit is necessary as a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger.

What happens if someone brings the apprehended danger to me rather than putting myself in a situation of higher apprehended danger?

I'd venture to guess most carjackings don't take place in an area with high apprehended danger.
How about armed robber in a convenient store?



2. An order permanently enjoining defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, and all persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of the injunction, from denying a permit to carry firearms on grounds that the applicant does not face a level of danger higher than that which an average person would reasonably expect to encounter.

How much danger should I expect to encounter in my daily life?
I don't EXPECT to get in a car accident but I carry insurance just in case I do.



Page 9

5-306(a)(ii) was enacted as part of a comprehensive effort by the State legislature to deter crime and protect citizens from handgun violence, violence which tragically results in hundreds of shooting deaths and hundreds more shooting injuries every year in Maryland.

Are they implying people who qualified for a CCW permit prior to March 4th 2012 have been involved in "violence which tragically results in hundreds of shooting deaths and hundreds more shooting injuries every year in Maryland"?

 

[Mike OTDP]

Some observations.

If it were just average citizens going thru the application process, then I could see the state just shifting into glacial speed. But it's not. (cut) The total permits outstanding is listed above . Excusing my brain fade it was around 18,000 IIRC . Three year renewals. Then figure high percentages of new hires and surrenders in Security Industry , and some of the politically connected dieing , retiring , etc. So guess maybe 8-10,000 applications per year that are now straining MSP manpower.

Nationwide in shall issue or defacto shall issue states issuence runs between apros 1% to 5% of population , varrying for multiple factor. In Md we have a week tradition of carrying guns(legally) , and substantal urban populations , balanced by the fact that just about any carrying or transporting on (other than current exceptions) would require a permit.(As opposed to KY , where pistols may be carried loaded in glove compartments or openly anywhere in the state w/o permit many people will make do with that.) So our percentages would be boosted.

Do the numbers . We will be having 50-100,000 applications. That would require a 10 fold increase in investagative and administrative staff just to maintain present slow pace on a conservative estimate for first year.

This is a good point. This has the potential for several outcomes. One of which is to force full Constutitional carry because of the impossible backlog of CCW applications.

The smart thing to do would be for the state legislature to direct the MSP to honor non-resident permits held by MD residents for the next three years. This would give enough time to work through the backlog.

 

[Mike OTDP]

Like many things involving the Maryland government, I find the application appalling and over-intrusive.

It is. But that is another lawsuit.

Gura's going to have a career...until he's appointed to the Supreme Court. (not a joke, take a look at the career of Thurgood Marshall)

 

[fightinbluhen51]

how can they say it's legally unmapped when all md's surrounding states allow concealed carry? Md seems like that kid in the class that refused to pay attention to directions because they were busy picking their nose and now wants the teacher to tell emm what they're supposed to be doing while everyone else is hard at work. "look around you at what everyone else is doing" seems like a good response.

Not to mention that it is legally mapped. There is a process. The process worked to their advantage for 25 years. Now, it's a hindrance and they want to weasel. Oh well.

 

[pcfixer]

For sure political in the sense they feel it necessary to defend a state statute. That is to be expected. But also as a master of legal tactics too. The motion for clarification is well founded legally as the issues identified are legitimate --they don't go to the merits of the constitutional holding but rather to the scope of relief. Thats fair.

As a practical matter they have to ask for a stay if they are going to appeal. They did a good job of setting out their view of the world. That's what they are supposed to as lawyers. Surely no one here thought the state was just going to throw in the towel? There is a long road ahead and success is not guaranteed. Deep breath everyone

Thank you for your insight. Much appriciated in trying to diserne
how the AG thinks and why AG thinks a fundamental right that does exist
outside the home is overruled by the need to protect public safety.
Seems to me that most Americans do want to protect themselves and don't need the state or federal govenment to protect us. JMHO

 

[Klunatic]

How quickly will the 4th decide the appeal? Chances of getting cert this year if the 4th overturns Legg?

 

[fightinbluhen51]

The ruling semi implied Constitutional Carry. I hope that is what is clarified.

If that's the case, it's a HUGE ruling. Though I don't think many read it as that. The judge did not strike the whole permitting process.