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

[MDFF2008]

Ummm, you do realize the review board and MSP are two entirely different entities?

One has nothing to do with the other, other then the Superintendent and the Review Board members are appointees of the Governor.

Review board is entirely made up of the governors appointees. Elections matter.

 

[dblas]

Review board is entirely made up of the governors appointees. Elections matter.

View attachment 62911

THIS!!!!!

 

[Boondock Saint]

Review board is entirely made up of the governors appointees. Elections matter.

View attachment 62911

Where on earth did you get that idea?

 

[swinokur]

Review board is entirely made up of the governors appointees. Elections matter.

View attachment 62911

Truth

 

[Broadside]

I still expect them to make him go through the application process. They might be able to issue the permit the day they receive the application and should. The background investigation still likely has to take place.

When "they" say they can issue in the same day, I put that in the same category as "they can carry long guns for self defense". One of the guys in my company (former state trooper) went to the AG's office and the MSP to get one of those emergency permits. He was accompanied by a DOJ staffer that was encouraging that he do this. The DOJ had uncovered during a mob investigation that there was a fresh price on his head for his believed involvement in the prosecution of a big-time mobster whom we all know of. MD said no dice (I guess no G&S). Later that day, he ended up getting sworn in as a US Marshall just so he could carry in self defense.

Special cases for a special few. However I do believe that Mr. Woollard might get the benefit of some special treatment and should.

The injunction issued by Judge Legg's instructed the MSP to collect whatever information necessary to issue Raymond Woollard his permit.

Due to the length of time since Raymond submitted his renewal and now, I would suspect they will have him come to MSP headquarters to get LiveScan printed and ask him to bring two passport type photos. His references may have changed their contact information. So he will most likely have to resubmit that.

Of course, all this may have been done already anticipating that the stay be lifted. So they may just hand him his permit on August 8th.

 

[Hopalong]

They have had that opportunity all along, simply by lawfully interpreting g&s. Instead, they have chosen to support thier political masters at the expense thier ultimate employer.

It is not the duty of the MSP to interpret the law, nor is it a good idea. When there is ambiguity in the law, we want them to defer to judges and elected officials. They're cops, not constitutional scholars. (And, for the record, that is not a derogatory statement.)

Our goal is to make the laws non-ambiguous, not to turn the MSP into our advocates. They're doing their jobs, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[csanc123]

It is not the duty of the MSP to interpret the law,

Isn't that what they have been doing? I recall during one of the legislative sessions one of the MSP reps stating "We know it when we see it" but when asked for a definition of G/S they couldn't offer one. (or maybe it was just their way of refusing to offer a definition...you know...politics and all)

 

[Ethan83]

Isn't that what they have been doing? I recall during one of the legislative sessions one of the MSP reps stating "We know it when we see it" but when asked for a definition of G/S they couldn't offer one. (or maybe it was just their way of refusing to offer a definition...you know...politics and all)

That would be their interpretation of G&S, not the 2A. While the G&S legislation was deliberately left pretty open-ended, the fact that it is a requirement by law, and that self-defense without documented threats clearly is defined as NOT being a G&S reason.... well, they don't have much flexibility there.

 

[dlmcbm]

Isn't that what they have been doing? I recall during one of the legislative sessions one of the MSP reps stating "We know it when we see it" but when asked for a definition of G/S they couldn't offer one. (or maybe it was just their way of refusing to offer a definition...you know...politics and all)

In that case they really had no choice because "good and substantial reason" was not defined in the law.

 

[csanc123]

In that case they really had no choice because "good and substantial reason" was not defined in the law.

That's the gist of it. Lack of clear documented direction vis-a-vi the law itself leaves it open to interpretation. Someone, at some point, said "self defense" is not sufficient. Someone, at some point, said "carry large amounts of cash" is sufficient.

 

[eyesinpines]

Review board is entirely made up of the governors appointees. Elections matter.

View attachment 62911

If I knew how to PM I would have PM'd you on this....I just LOVE that graphic! Care to share where to get it?

 

[saberwuf]

If I knew how to PM I would have PM'd you on this....I just LOVE that graphic! Care to share where to get it?

http://www.addletters.com/bart-simpson-generator.htm

 

[FRISteve]

Not business days...90 days. Doesn't make a difference at this point in time, but it will later on.



Here's the actual letter for referral

Utah does their own background check and, if you pass that, they issue the permit BEFORE the FBI background results are returned to them.

 

[ToneGrail]

That's the gist of it. Lack of clear documented direction vis-a-vi the law itself leaves it open to interpretation. Someone, at some point, said "self defense" is not sufficient. Someone, at some point, said "carry large amounts of cash" is sufficient.

Add "political crony" to that list.

People have been denied self-defense permits even when they have had documented threats. The only guarantee that you could get a "personal protection" permit was if you had political connections.

 

[esqappellate]

To the legal guys:

When the court gets a response, does each individual justice read it, do they a clerk read it and provide cliff notes, do they all get together and have it read to them by a clerk? What's the process?

Once they have the info, by whatever means, do they then get together and discuss it to come to an agreement or do they each make up their minds individually and then come together for a "vote"?

How does this stage of the process work?

TIA

Every judge does his work differently. On a motion like this, it will go to 3 judges and their clerks. A judge may ask his clerk to read and prepare a summary. Another judge may read it personally. I have spoken with lots of court of appeals judges. I think *most* judges read the briefs themselves. They will then read the key cases and the lower court's opinion and come to an initial decision. If the case is going to oral argument (this stay motion won't) then the panel hears argument and meets and decides the case by vote at the end of the day in conference. Here, unless the panel is otherwise in the same place (unlikely), the panel may confer by phone and the senior judge in the majority will assign a judge (himself or another judge in the majority) to write the order. No decision is final until the opinion or order is released.

 

[Elliotte]

Here, unless the panel is otherwise in the same place (unlikely), the panel may confer by phone and the senior judge in the majority will assign a judge (himself or another judge in the majority) to write the order.

Well that seems odd to me. Why wouldn't the judges all be in the same place (unless you mean same office/conference room)? Aren't they all based in the same courthouse? So unless someone's on vacation wouldn't they all be together?

 

[esqappellate]

Well that seems odd to me. Why wouldn't the judges all be in the same place (unless you mean same office/conference room)? Aren't they all based in the same courthouse? So unless someone's on vacation wouldn't they all be together?

Judges' chambers are not all located in Richmond, but are located in cities all over the 4th Circuit. They all have offices in Richmond where they sit for argument but they don't have argument every day or even every week. They otherwise live where they live and have chambers in that city's federal courthouse. Electronic filing makes it very easy to distribute briefs to a panel of judges, regardless of where they are. See duty station below

Current composition of the court
Active

As of April 16, 2012, the active judges on the court are as follows (chief judge in bold)[1]:
# Judge Duty station[2] Born Appointed Chief Appointed by
38 William Byrd Traxler, Jr. Greenville, SC 1948 1998 2009–present Clinton
29 J. Harvie Wilkinson III Charlottesville, VA 1944 1984 1996–2003 Reagan
32 Paul V. Niemeyer Baltimore, MD 1941 1990 —— G.H.W. Bush
37 Diana Gribbon Motz Baltimore, MD 1943 1994 —— Clinton
39 Robert Bruce King Charleston, WV 1940 1998 —— Clinton
40 Roger Gregory Richmond, VA 1953 2000 —— Clinton/G.W. Bush[3]
41 Dennis Shedd Columbia, SC 1953 2002 —— G.W. Bush
42 Allyson Kay Duncan Raleigh, NC 1951 2003 —— G.W. Bush
43 G. Steven Agee Salem, VA 1952 2008 —— G.W. Bush
44 Andre M. Davis Baltimore, MD 1949 2009 —— Obama
45 Barbara Milano Keenan Alexandria, VA 1950 2010 —— Obama
46 James A. Wynn Raleigh, NC 1954 2010 —— Obama
47 Albert Diaz Charlotte, NC 1960 2010 —— Obama
48 Henry Franklin Floyd Pickens, SC 1947 2011 —— Obama
49 Stephanie Thacker Charleston, WV 1965 2012 —— Obama

 

[pcfixer]

Well that seems odd to me. Why wouldn't the judges all be in the same place (unless you mean same office/conference room)? Aren't they all based in the same courthouse? So unless someone's on vacation wouldn't they all be together?

you'd think so!! maybe like my job, we have a cubicle with one door and no windows... Judges would like that.

 

[Elliotte]

Judges' chambers are not all located in Richmond, but are located in cities all over the 4th Circuit. They all have offices in Richmond where they sit for argument but they don't have argument every day or even every week. They otherwise live where they live and have chambers in that city's federal courthouse. Electronic filing makes it very easy to distribute briefs to a panel of judges, regardless of where they are.

Interesting, had no clue about that, I just figured it was like the Supreme Court, all in one place.

 

[2ndCharter]

Looking at that list, I'm concerned about drawing a leftist majority.