Go Back   Maryland Shooters > Gun Rights and Legislation > National 2A Issues
Don't Have An Account? Register Here

Join MD Shooters

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old February 21st, 2017, 12:41 PM #11
swinokur's Avatar
swinokur swinokur is offline
In a State of Denial
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Gulag Montgomery
Posts: 43,600
swinokur swinokur is offline
In a State of Denial
swinokur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Gulag Montgomery
Posts: 43,600
i am guessing a non resident would have to file suit as a resident would not have standing.

who's got that kind of money? Unless SAF or NRA jumps in.
__________________
swinokur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 21st, 2017, 03:15 PM #12
JC92's Avatar
JC92 JC92 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: MD
Posts: 87
JC92 JC92 is offline
Junior Member
JC92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: MD
Posts: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockstarr View Post
don't the states that pass cc for residents only chance it against the equal protection issue?
I believe our lawyers on this forum have explained before that the Equal Protection Clause requires "similarly situated" claimants and that "residents" and "non-residents" are not similarly situated. Therefore, there is no Equal Protection Clause violation.
JC92 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 21st, 2017, 05:00 PM #13
rockstarr's Avatar
rockstarr rockstarr is offline
Major Deplorable
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: The Bolshevik Lands
Posts: 3,069
rockstarr rockstarr is offline
Major Deplorable
rockstarr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: The Bolshevik Lands
Posts: 3,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by JC92 View Post
I believe our lawyers on this forum have explained before that the Equal Protection Clause requires "similarly situated" claimants and that "residents" and "non-residents" are not similarly situated. Therefore, there is no Equal Protection Clause violation.
why thank you for the kind reminder.


noted
__________________
Be a humble person, for you are no better or anymore special than the person next to you...
rockstarr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 22nd, 2017, 01:28 PM #14
press1280 press1280 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: WV
Posts: 4,082
press1280 press1280 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: WV
Posts: 4,082
Passed the full house 83-9.
press1280 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 22nd, 2017, 05:34 PM #15
rockstarr's Avatar
rockstarr rockstarr is offline
Major Deplorable
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: The Bolshevik Lands
Posts: 3,069
rockstarr rockstarr is offline
Major Deplorable
rockstarr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: The Bolshevik Lands
Posts: 3,069
is it north or south Dakota that if passed, the governor will likely veto?
__________________
Be a humble person, for you are no better or anymore special than the person next to you...
rockstarr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 22nd, 2017, 06:56 PM #16
traveller's Avatar
traveller traveller is offline
The one with two L
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: SoMD
Posts: 10,847
traveller traveller is offline
The one with two L
traveller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: SoMD
Posts: 10,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockstarr View Post
is it north or south Dakota that if passed, the governor will likely veto?
That was the SD governor.

I don't believe Burgum has commented on the bill. 83:9 would be veto proof in the house. With crude prices still in the tank, he has bigger fish to fry than getting into a fight about this. Interestingly this was not a party-line vote. Some dems voted for it, some rural Rs against it.
traveller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 23rd, 2017, 12:19 AM #17
Biggfoot44 Biggfoot44 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 16,846
Biggfoot44 Biggfoot44 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 16,846
I looked at the nuetered Con Carry, and I looked at the rest of ND carry related laws. And saw some things.


Yeah, yeah , in the abstract pure Constitutional Carry is a high Ideal to strive for. But looking a the current state of affairs in ND, nuetered Con Carry wasn't the most important goal for the 2A forces.

As it stands now, inexpensive, very simple Shall Issue for 18 & up . 4 or 5yrs ago, this would have been the good example for everyone else to strive for, in regards to licensing.

But meanwhile:

They suck about any carry or quasi-carry for non licensees. They would get great benefit from having some form of open carry, or at least car carry.

They suck at restrictions of places. The "public gatherings" prohibitions takes in a whole lot of everyday life. Even their exceptions for Church Carry are way restrictive in themselves.


They could do a lot better about non-residents. Too cought up in state vs state recognition pissing contests . They ought to recognize all other State's permits. Also too restrictive over which state's citizens they will allow to apply for ND non-res permits. They should allow all US citizens to apply.



These are the 2A legislative goals that would have more real world benefits than nuetered Con Carry.
Biggfoot44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 23rd, 2017, 12:54 AM #18
traveller's Avatar
traveller traveller is offline
The one with two L
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: SoMD
Posts: 10,847
traveller traveller is offline
The one with two L
traveller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: SoMD
Posts: 10,847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggfoot44 View Post
They suck at restrictions of places. The "public gatherings" prohibitions takes in a whole lot of everyday life. Even their exceptions for Church Carry are way restrictive in themselves.
Not much of an issue. It used to be that you couldn't stop at a highway rest stop as it was a 'state facility', but that was done away with in the last legislative session in 2015. There is no statutory definition of 'public gathering' and as such the prohibition is toothless. Dont wave around a gun at a concert and nobody is going to care. Some of the restrictions are funny, you can go into a restaurant with a liquor license as long as you dont sit in the bar section.
traveller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 26th, 2017, 10:16 AM #19
Stoveman's Avatar
Stoveman Stoveman is offline
TV Personality
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Cuba on the Chesapeake
Posts: 12,549
Stoveman Stoveman is offline
TV Personality
Stoveman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Cuba on the Chesapeake
Posts: 12,549
Quote:
Originally Posted by traveller View Post
Some of the restrictions are funny, you can go into a restaurant with a liquor license as long as you dont sit in the bar section.


Florida has that same requirement. You can have a drink with your meal, just not in the bar section of the restaurant.
__________________
_______________
Proud CCW Cultist
Stoveman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 26th, 2017, 10:21 AM #20
swinokur's Avatar
swinokur swinokur is offline
In a State of Denial
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Gulag Montgomery
Posts: 43,600
swinokur swinokur is offline
In a State of Denial
swinokur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Gulag Montgomery
Posts: 43,600
It's not that uncommon actually. More than a few states allow carry in the restaurant area but not in the bar area if there is one.

Example, VA doesn't actually have bars as we know them. Just restaurants that may or may not have a bar area.
__________________
swinokur is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  Home Page > Forum List > Gun Rights and Legislation > National 2A Issues


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
2018, Congregate Media, LP Privacy Policy Terms of Service