For those of you seriously (and I hope we're a bit less impulsive than this) considering open carry of any kind of long gun, check your county/city laws first. Montgomery County has restrictions on the carry of any kind of gun without a permit, outside of the transport to ranges/gunsmith/gunshop/gunshow/etc...
http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/content/ded/agservices/pdffiles/ch57_weapons.pdf
Maryland's preemption statute provides uniformity for most gun laws
throughout the state. But localities may still regulate the discharge of firearms within their limits and the carry of firearms within 100 yards of schools, parks, churches, public buildings, and places of public assembly.
Speaking of the "besides, people can carry long guns" angle.
It seems to me they're forgetting that DC tried the "you can have a long gun" excuse in Heller and were slapped down with the "in common use for self defense" argument.
Although the Supreme Court held that the option to have firearms other than handguns was not sufficient to sustain a ban on handguns in the home, ..., the character of—and danger presented by—handguns is different inside and outside of the home. See discussion above at 14-16. “Unlike possession of a gun for protection within a residence, carrying a concealed firearm presents a recognized threat to public order,” exposing “persons other than the offender” to possible “physical harm.” People v. Yarbrough, 169 Cal. App. 4th 303, 314 (2008) (internal citations omitted).
For those of you seriously (and I hope we're a bit less impulsive than this) considering open carry of any kind of long gun, check your county/city laws first. Montgomery County has restrictions on the carry of any kind of gun without a permit, outside of the transport to ranges/gunsmith/gunshop/gunshow/etc...
http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/content/ded/agservices/pdffiles/ch57_weapons.pdf
Since when does the level of danger have be demonstrated to apply 2A carry right?The plaintiffs have failed to make that showing here. In simple terms, the “good
and substantial reason” requirement does not treat similarly situated people differently
because not all Maryland gun owners are similarly situated. Those who can demonstrate
that they face a greater than average level of danger are by definition situated differently from those who cannot ( page 59)
Maryland just argued that non-permitted Open Carry of firearms does not require a permit in Maryland even under intermediate scrutiny. They didn't meant to do it, but they did. And if you add the parts of Heller than bind handguns, that Open Carry would also have to include handguns.
(1) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, a person may not:
(i) wear, carry, or transport a handgun, whether concealed or open, on or about the person;
(ii) wear, carry, or knowingly transport a handgun, whether concealed or open, in a vehicle traveling on a road or parking lot generally used by the public, highway, waterway, or airway of the State;
(c) Preexisting local laws.- To the extent that a local law does not create an inconsistency with this section or expand existing regulatory control, a county, municipal corporation, or special taxing district may exercise its existing authority to amend any local law that existed on or before December 31, 1984.
True, if the statement applies only to long guns
False, if applies to handguns
§ 4-203. Wearing, carrying, or transporting handgun.
Hey not bad......They are telling us we can carry our rifles open or concealed.
Maybe I will have to start carrying my undefolder ak .
I think Maryland goofed big time
Great pick Patrick and johnyl...the sweet irony is that as the State misquotes Heller, the attorney who argued and won Heller will be responding...something tells me Gura, along with Cary Hansel are just a bit more into the nuances of Heller than Gansler.
Yeah...April 15th can't get here soon enough.
So, couldn't the judge say "you conceded, they win with no stay" and when they appeal there told "no, we will not hear your appeal because you conceded?" it's probably wishful thinking but makes perfect good sense to me.
Maryland MSJ Supporting Memo said:If the Permit Statute Is Not Subject to the “Reasonable Regulation” Standard of Review, It Is Subject to Intermediate Scrutiny.
...
Third, the law does not regulate the wearing and carrying of all firearms in public, but is limited only to handguns. Even individuals who lack a good and substantial reason to obtain a permit to wear and carry a handgun have the option of wearing and carrying other types of firearms in public.
I think Gansler just handed the judge a gift-wrapped option: rule for public open RKBA, assign it intermediate scrutiny -which Gansler acknowledges includes citizen carry of loaded firearms without a permit, and then use Heller's direct guidance on handguns to extend the long-gun concession to handguns. Maryland is suddenly a no-permit required Open Carry state.