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

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Status
    Not open for further replies.

    rambling_one

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Oct 19, 2007
    6,725
    Bowie, MD
    MD doesn't have a list like we are discussing because they haven't had to compile one. Everyone is restricted.

    They will make one. A big one.

    The requirement to have a permit will almost surely pass strict constitutional muster, as long as the process fulfills an overriding interest of the government (restricting guns from dangerous people, etc.), is narrowly tailored, and is the least restrictive way of meeting the need. MD will need to tow that line. You can ponder what that line looks like and probably argue forever on the details (NC can issue a permit the same day...why can't MD?, etc.)...but at the end of the day there will be no "Constitutional Carry" the way many of you think of it (no permit, no restrictions).

    Assuming we win, the next fights will be over sensitive places, fees, permit processing, etc.

    I am seriously interested in where fees are going. I think they will stay, but be highly regulated and limited in scope and price. From a more practical matter I am interested in the time it takes to issue a permit and what data they will try to use. Can they ask for a medical release to ensure you are not on heavy meds or been diagnosed clinically depressed (VA talked about this and I think it got shot down)?

    Lots of details need to be worked out and the arguments will never end.

    How many think MD will continue issuing permits for 3 years instead of the standard 5 or in FL's case, 7 years?
     

    Ethan83

    Ultimate Member
    Jan 8, 2009
    3,111
    Baltimoreish
    Whattaya know. I was wrong.

    Nevada has this requirement that you qualify on the weapon your licensed to carry.

    I was beaten to this.

    How many think MD will continue issuing permits for 3 years instead of the standard 5 or in FL's case, 7 years?

    I can't wait for the day when I'm concerned about how long my MD CCW permit is good for before I have to renew.

    Edit: Weird, dunno why it quoted those other two lines...
     

    krucam

    Ultimate Member
    Latest entries on the Woolard v. Sheridan docket:

    Date Filed # Docket Text
    07/29/2010 1 COMPLAINT against Terrance Sheridan, Denis Gallagher, Seymour Goldstein, Charles M. Thomas, Jr. ( Filing fee $ 350 receipt number 0416-2619321.), filed by Raymond Woollard, Second Amendment Foundation, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Line for Summons)(Hansel, Cary) Modified on 7/30/2010 (ljs, Deputy Clerk). (Entered: 07/29/2010)
    07/30/2010 Deficiency Notice as to Second Amendment Foundation, Inc.,. Your Local Rule 103.3 disclosure statement has not been filed. The Statement must be filed by 8/9/2010 (ljs, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/30/2010)
    07/30/2010 2 NOTICE by Second Amendment Foundation, Inc., Raymond Woollard re Deficiency Notice, 1 Complaint, Summons for All Defendants (Attachments: # 1 Summons, # 2 Summons, # 3 Summons)(Hansel, Cary) (Entered: 07/30/2010)
    07/30/2010 3 Summons Issued 21 days as to Denis Gallagher, Seymour Goldstein, Terrence Sheridan, Charles M. Thomas, Jr.. (ljs, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 07/30/2010)
    08/06/2010 4 MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Alan Gura on behalf of Second Amendment Foundation, Inc., Raymond Woollard by Second Amendment Foundation, Inc., Raymond Woollard (Filing Fee Paid $50.00, Receipt #14637044273)(bmh, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/09/2010)
    08/09/2010 5 PAPERLESS ORDER granting 4 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice for attorney Alan Gura on behalf of Raymond Woollard and Second Amendment Foundation Inc. Directing attorney Alan Gura to register on-line for CM/ECF at http://www.mdd.uscourts.gov/attorney/registration.asp.. Signed by Clerk on 8/9/10. (cmns, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/09/2010)
    08/09/2010 6 Local Rule 103.3 Disclosure Statement by Second Amendment Foundation, Inc.. (Hansel, Cary) (Entered: 08/09/2010)
     

    Kashmir1008

    MSI Executive Member
    Mar 21, 2009
    1,996
    Carroll County
    The NRA still does good work in the sporting and instructor side of things. They did great technical work on range safety and backstop construction that someone here pointed my way. It's good stuff.

    I think the problem is they cry about protecting our rights to get our money and then we are disappointed when they are MIA.

    I would not be surprised to find someone from the NRA here on the forum. More than a few instructors. Seriously would like to hear the things they've done for us in MD. Maybe it's all a big misunderstanding and we simply are ignorant of the facts.

    Or maybe they do need to step up. In which case, join the discussion and tell us how you will help.

    But something in my head tells me the NRA is not watching the flow here because they are so absent from MD they could care less what we think or say about them. I hope they prove us wrong, because we need lots of help here. Let the SAF fight in the courts; we need power on the ground in Annapolis working both fronts at the same time.

    Agreed -

    Obviously they work pretty well at the national/federal level in keeping the politicians aware that we are out here. I guess we can give them some credit for the "assault" weapons ban being allow to expire (even there, I'm not so sure how much they had to do with it)

    But here in MD we have been relegated to 2nd class citizen status and the NRA has not lifted one blessed finger to help us. No ads in the local news papers, no information campaign no nothing. I think they came out against the Saturday night special ban back in 1988 (How'd that one work out for you MD legislators? - jackasses) but other than that? Seriously can someone help out here and say something positive about the NRA in MD?

    I'll be pissed off if the NRA tries to step in on the SAF lawsuit. They need to let the SAF and Gura have the spotlight and the glory for their masterful work and not try to claim any of the credit.
     

    Patrick

    MSI Executive Member
    Apr 26, 2009
    7,725
    Calvert County
    I guess we can give them some credit for the "assault" weapons ban being allow to expire (even there, I'm not so sure how much they had to do with it)

    That can be credited directly to the loss of the House by Democrats in 1996. It is 'conventional wisdom' on both the left and the right that the '94 ban had a big role in the loss. I'm not so sure, but suspect the NRA stepped in to heighten the impression after the fact (which is brilliant in my estimation).

    Even today, even Obama won't touch it with a ten foot pole.

    Just today there was a debate on WTOP between Eleanor Holmes Norton and the guy who looks to unseat her. She said point blank that a great number of Dems would walk from any congressional vote bill if it meant dropping the gun measure attached last year. She credited the NRA for getting on the bill, but said it was "gun Dems" who killed the chance to drop the provision and pass the DC voting bill. So she walked.

    Her competitor, Douglas Sloan, said of the gun provision "leave it in so we get the vote"..."we can always try to remove it later."

    He sounded pretty good to me, guns aside (what other position can he take in DC?). He would have taken the deal last year and DC would be a Shall-Issue district. He would have complained about it the whole time, but he would have taken it. Sounds reasonable to me.

    Granted, that would have ended Palmer's lawsuit against DC...maybe part of the evil NRA scheme??? :innocent0 (kidding)
     

    2SAM22

    Moderator Emeritus
    Apr 4, 2007
    7,178
    As I was tucking my M&P into my waistband preparing to go to dinner, I got to thinking about this lawsuit. I take CCW for granted. Its been so long, 20 years, that I've been able to do it.
    That said, I am ecstatic that this lawsuit is in the works and I will be partying with the rest of you when it succeeds and the free, law abiding citizens of MD can exercise their 2A rights.
     

    Oreo

    Banned
    BANNED!!!
    Mar 23, 2008
    1,394
    I think it speaks loud volumes that MSI, & now SCOPE in NY have donated substantial sums of money to SAF for their accomplishments & ongoing battles for our rights. I don't hear anyone talking about giving any money to the NRA other then renewing their memberships (which seems prudent.) The NRA officials would have to be literally intoxicated with hookers & blow 24/7 to not hear that message loud & clear; to not see the writing on the wall.

    NRA needs to decide if they want to stay relevant or be relegated to the outskirts, only to be involved in range activities. The formulation of so many other 2A support groups hasn't been because of infighting among the national shooting community. It's been because the one group we had to unite us all has been AWOL. Slowly, we're all gravitating back together, many voices across the nation saying the same thing, just without the NRA. I can foresee a day when the NRA has been replaced by another national group doing essentially what the NRA should have been doing. Maybe ten years from now it will be the SAF that congress and gun owners pay the most attention to.
     

    golo

    Member
    Apr 21, 2009
    75
    Buffalo NY
    I am a member of SCOPE NY

    We made the news release today, Donated $5000.00 to SAF.
    In the discussion at our last meeting I learned that MSI is doing in Maryland what SCOPE is doing in NY. Fighting back against 2A assaults by hoplophobic politicians and their contributors.

    After learning of the Law Suit in July, also at a SCOPE Meeting, I joined SAF the next day.

    I always came to this forum for updates on McDonald as in my opinion Maryland Shooters had the most comprehensive discussion of the subject on the net.

    I don't know the political scene in MD but in NY we had 3 Democratic Senators that are Pro Gun. The Dems hold the majority this year. If they continue to hold the majority after November, ( census) the lines will be redrawn, the pro gun republicans will be forever screwed and so will gun owners.

    Never been involved in Politics before (other than voting). This year however, I can finally say I am Involved. Working on several pro gun candidates campaigns and have donated to them.

    Could have left New York but decided to stay and fight. If the worst case happens and the NY dems retain the majority, and Cumo becomes governor, then I will have to pack up and go.

    Anyway, I feel a stronger bond now to MS Members.
    Great bunch of guys and we are all in it together.
     

    krucam

    Ultimate Member
    We made the news release today, Donated $5000.00 to SAF.
    In the discussion at our last meeting I learned that MSI is doing in Maryland what SCOPE is doing in NY. Fighting back against 2A assaults by hoplophobic politicians and their contributors.

    After learning of the Law Suit in July, also at a SCOPE Meeting, I joined SAF the next day.

    I always came to this forum for updates on McDonald as in my opinion Maryland Shooters had the most comprehensive discussion of the subject on the net.

    I don't know the political scene in MD but in NY we had 3 Democratic Senators that are Pro Gun. The Dems hold the majority this year. If they continue to hold the majority after November, ( census) the lines will be redrawn, the pro gun republicans will be forever screwed and so will gun owners.

    Never been involved in Politics before (other than voting). This year however, I can finally say I am Involved. Working on several pro gun candidates campaigns and have donated to them.

    Could have left New York but decided to stay and fight. If the worst case happens and the NY dems retain the majority, and Cumo becomes governor, then I will have to pack up and go.

    Anyway, I feel a stronger bond now to MS Members.
    Great bunch of guys and we are all in it together.

    Golo...

    Welcome to the fight and we're glad to have you here on MDS. Keep up the fight in NY. The Kachalsky v. Cacace case in NY mirrors that of the Woolard case here in MD. Alan Gura is fighting this fight in different Circuits for a reason....a penultimate battle in SCOTUS is looming to keep the clause/phrase "Keep and Bear" together in the Fundamental (Civil Right) sense.

    This battle WILL be won in very short order. Thanks and Kudos to NY for your also generous contributions to SAF....
     

    rambling_one

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Oct 19, 2007
    6,725
    Bowie, MD
    We made the news release today, Donated $5000.00 to SAF.
    In the discussion at our last meeting I learned that MSI is doing in Maryland what SCOPE is doing in NY. Fighting back against 2A assaults by hoplophobic politicians and their contributors.

    After learning of the Law Suit in July, also at a SCOPE Meeting, I joined SAF the next day.

    I always came to this forum for updates on McDonald as in my opinion Maryland Shooters had the most comprehensive discussion of the subject on the net.

    I don't know the political scene in MD but in NY we had 3 Democratic Senators that are Pro Gun. The Dems hold the majority this year. If they continue to hold the majority after November, ( census) the lines will be redrawn, the pro gun republicans will be forever screwed and so will gun owners.

    Never been involved in Politics before (other than voting). This year however, I can finally say I am Involved. Working on several pro gun candidates campaigns and have donated to them.

    Could have left New York but decided to stay and fight. If the worst case happens and the NY dems retain the majority, and Cumo becomes governor, then I will have to pack up and go.

    Anyway, I feel a stronger bond now to MS Members.
    Great bunch of guys and we are all in it together.

    Thanks for the posting golo. More and more silent gun owners have found their voice and this is a battle that we will win.
     

    Dead Eye

    Banned
    BANNED!!!
    Jul 21, 2010
    3,691
    At Wal-Mart, buying more ammo.
    Maybe a few more letters like this wouldn't hurt, either?

    From the Cecil Whig , as printed in this morning's edition. http://www.cecilwhig.com/opinion/letters/

    LETTER: Maryland gun laws are far too restrictive

    From: Jerry R. Roope

    Perryville

    Recently, a court case was filed in Maryland District Court challenging the "good and substantial" clause of the Maryland Concealed Carry Permit application requirement. This requirement directly conflicts with the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, in that it greatly prohibits an individual their God given and inalienable "right to bear arms."

    This clause is predicated on the state of Maryland's interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, particularly the Bill of Rights, and whether or not those rights transfer from the federal to state governments under the 14th amendment. As part of his certiorari opinion, of the landmark case "McDonald vs. Chicago," Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito clearly stated that the Second Amendment does transfer to the states.

    So, what does all of this mean? Basically, that of these 50 United States, the state of Maryland is still only one of 10 remaining "hold-out" states that chooses to infringe upon your constitutional rights to defend yourself, and your family. So stalwart are they in their position, they are willing to waste your tax dollars to continue to litigate this issue, rather than adopt "Shall Issue" permitting laws.

    Statistics have proven that of those states that adopt "Shall Issue" carry permit laws they immediately see an average 7 percent reduction in all major crimes. Therefore, please contact your elected officials and urge that they support "Shall Issue" laws in the state of Maryland, and help to make it a safer place.
     

    TheZman

    Active Member
    May 10, 2010
    112
    As for the use of Strict Scrutiny versus "something else", I'll agree nothing is guaranteed. Much of what we discuss here is predicated on a strict review of restrictions on the 2A.

    The Supreme Court has spoken on this in the past. Essentially, a right deemed "Fundamental" is afforded strict protections. But this is not absolute - different aspects of the right can be subject to varying reviews.

    I agree. As I wrote in another post, the court has essentially carved out an area off-limits to government intrusion. It is a narrow area now, but in so doing they have opened up a wide new area open for further consideration. That means additional challenges giving the court a chance to draw more lines.

    Anti-2A forces are already drawing their line: 2A is afforded protection in the home. In other words, "keep arms" is protected. They won't actually come out and say "strictly", but I think they would split the baby there if they could. They argue that "bearing" also applies only in the home.

    The challenge for those who are against this civil right are hard. Something about 2A is "Fundamental" and the Heller and McDonald opinions both said it was "personal protection" at the core of the right. The amendment is rather short, and the "collective versus individual right" was settled handily in Heller. But the Court did not break down exactly what scrutiny to afford any part of 2A.

    This is what gives me hope. It will take some creative thinking to self-defense is a fundamental right in the home, but nowhere else. Imagine that standard applied to any other part of the constitution. For instance, the state cannot search your home without a warrant, but they are free to pat you down whenever they like on the street.

    Further, the history of the court suggests continued expansion of fundamental rights. Oddly, the abortion issue is a good example. The court has all but excluded the state from this area. That took 20+ years, but it was a new and unimagined right in 1973.

    2A has the advantage, in my view, of being an explicit part of the Bill of Rights and a short clear part at that.

    I'm not trying to paint a rosy picture for our side. I'm spending most of the time looking at this from the other side - I ask "how do I restrict 2A" under the current rationales. Just how do I thread that needle?

    When it comes to the stated purposes of the right - "individual protection" - it is going to be a tough thing to restrict to just the home.

    I agree. I'd also suggest the anti-2A crowd is suffering from incredibly bad timing. Given the state of the nation and public attitudes toward 2A, they will have a much tougher time convincing politicians to take on their cause.

    Courts pay attention to these things, too. Even here in Maryland, the political class will be tempted to avoid this fight. Heller and McDonald gives them some cover. Another set back in the courts may be enough to cause Annapolis to abandon the fad in order to avoid picking a fight with a class that crosses political lines.
     

    Patrick

    MSI Executive Member
    Apr 26, 2009
    7,725
    Calvert County
    ...

    NRA needs to decide if they want to stay relevant or be relegated to the outskirts, only to be involved in range activities. The formulation of so many other 2A support groups hasn't been because of infighting among the national shooting community. It's been because the one group we had to unite us all has been AWOL. Slowly, we're all gravitating back together, many voices across the nation saying the same thing, just without the NRA. I can foresee a day when the NRA has been replaced by another national group doing essentially what the NRA should have been doing. Maybe ten years from now it will be the SAF that congress and gun owners pay the most attention to.

    Frequently a complaint about the NRA will elicit the response "we should not splinter the gun community...Brady loves us when we grumble about the NRA."

    You said it best, "Slowly, we're all gravitating back together, many voices across the nation saying the same thing, just without the NRA.".

    Bingo. Our voices have been here all along, we just did not have a mouthpiece who listened and represented us. All of these "non-NRA" groups are here because of one thing: they listened and acted on and with our voice (and money).

    There is no "splintering" going on in our community. We are in the midst of a vibrant re-awakening and collective resurgence. We are coming together now under several flags.

    It's up to the NRA to join in. If they choose to sit out...well, we'll miss them but move on.
     

    SkunkWerX

    Ultimate Member
    Jul 17, 2010
    1,577
    MoCo/HoCo border
    The biggest question in all of these cases (DC, CA, NY, MD, NC) is the one not even written: just how do we interpret "keep and bear" now that you call it fundamental?


    Exactly. These cases are all building blocks. Think of Gura as a stone mason.
    He is constructing this, not to get some quick easy wins, but so that it can stand the test of time.

    McDonald and Heller settled, in large portion, the "KEEP" part of it.
    Now Gura is going after the "BEAR" part of the equation.

    The SC typically doesn't go far astray of the case-at-hand.
    Heller and McDonald did not require they weigh in on carrying in public, so they did not. Those cases were about "KEEP" (possess).

    For Marylanders, how does this case affect us?
    If they are successful and have the current scrutiny and burden of proof removed from our current permit law,
    then it will be a SMALL victory nationally, but will give us the ability to more easily obtain carry permits,
    while still having to meet timelines, fees, and other requirements of the State.

    However, if we lose, and Maryland holds it's ground on the current law, then it goes higher up, takes longer, but could end up being a bigger WIN nationally.

    Either way, one (or several) of these cases is going to the SC.


    Where does it all lead? Let's assume that in a few years we have maybe 45 or 48 states with Shall Issue? How would the last 2 or 3 or 5 hold-outs be handled?
    I would surmise WE (the people) would seek a National Reciprocity case, in order to get a decision on your National Right to Bear, as you cross state lines.
    The idea being States cannot infringe on a Constitutional Right, just because you crossed an imaginary line.

    The Woollard case is important, being in our backyard, however, it is merely another building block in the overall scheme of things.

    I don't think I'm giving away any secrets.
    The striking thing, to me, is the lack of backlash from the anti-groups? Perhaps they know things aren't looking good for them?
     

    Patrick

    MSI Executive Member
    Apr 26, 2009
    7,725
    Calvert County
    ...

    I always came to this forum for updates on McDonald as in my opinion Maryland Shooters had the most comprehensive discussion of the subject on the net.

    ...

    Anyway, I feel a stronger bond now to MSI Members.
    Great bunch of guys and we are all in it together.

    Thanks. The only reason we have comprehensive discussion is because of the great people who chime in. Thanks for being one of them. Calguns has some good info, too. But they are dealing with a whole other level of hate out there toward gun owners so their issues are not always applicable to us. That and they are communists. :) (I co-lived in LA and MD for years, so just teasing...)

    Stick around and bring friends. The NY, DC and MD cases are all alike in some critical aspects and I see us as linked in a common fight. Borders don't apply here. Maybe we should reach out to some of our commie friends in Kalifornia...?

    Common action brings common result. Working together is a good thing.
     

    teratos

    My hair is amazing
    MDS Supporter
    Patriot Picket
    Jan 22, 2009
    59,775
    Bel Air
    It's a shame that we have to wonder how a "fundamental right" will be interpreted. It means what it says. Keep and bear. My 8 year old figured this one out just fine when I asked him what he thought that meant.

    Since this is a fundamental right, my suspicion is that ultimately, all 50 States will have shall-issue with full reciprocity.
     

    Norton

    NRA Endowment Member, Rifleman
    Staff member
    Admin
    Moderator
    May 22, 2005
    122,856
    The striking thing, to me, is the lack of backlash from the anti-groups? Perhaps they know things aren't looking good for them?

    Because they have no money. The Bradys are operating on a deficit right now.

    They spent $3,141,984 in 2008 and only brought in $2,921,536 .

    They have a paid staff of 15 with Paul Helmke taking a salary of nearly $250,000 a year. So, even if the remaining 14 are only taking an average $50k a year, that's just under a third of their finances going to salaries. That doesn't include basic expenses for the lights, copiers, etc nor travel expenses.
     

    Boondock Saint

    Ultimate Member
    Dec 11, 2008
    24,367
    White Marsh
    Because they have no money. The Bradys are operating on a deficit right now.

    They spent $3,141,984 in 2008 and only brought in $2,921,536 .

    They have a paid staff of 15 with Paul Helmke taking a salary of nearly $250,000 a year. So, even if the remaining 14 are only taking an average $50k a year, that's just under a third of their finances going to salaries. That doesn't include basic expenses for the lights, copiers, etc nor travel expenses.

    Helmke makes $250K? You're getting hosed, man. :D
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,924
    Messages
    7,259,203
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom