Decision in Kolbe!

Haides · Feb 21, 2017

frogman68 said:
Seems more lining is being asked for. Seems VA and WV gun right groups get results all MD gets is their groups asking for more money .

And VA & WV are in completely different situations than we are. Cut the shit dude.

fidelity · Feb 22, 2017

jcutonilli said:
It comes from the first sentence in the following paragraph of Heller (554 US at 627). It is a conditional sentence, where the 4CA cite the condition as evidence. From the rest of the paragraph it appears that SCOTUS was trying to say more sophisticated weapons like tanks and bomber are not covered, but small arms that you keep in your house like rifles do have protection otherwise you detach the right from the prefatory clause.

...

Thanks. Seems like 4CA distorted it, purposefully. These folks lack intellectual honesty. Makes one relate to Trump's contempt of them. At least politicians don't pretend to be high minded seekers of the truth, immune from criticism, wearing costumes meant to accord them respect or deference. Makes some of these judges worse as they are no better than pols, yet the media and public treat them as if they were. It's a job ripe for replacement with AI. Better impartiality (programming biases noted) with more predictable outcomes in dead simple cases such as Kolbe.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Hawkeye · Feb 22, 2017

Livingthedream said:
Is there anything a single individual like me can do to help the fight?

Get informed.

Join groups like MSI (Maryland Shall Issue). Pay your dues, which go toward things like supporting these lawsuits, and donate money when you can.

Contact your elected officials. Do you know who your state legislators are? If you don't, find out. If you do, call them, email them, write them letters, and let them know that you think laws like this are foolish, and why.

Evangelize. Educate your friends. Explain to them the idiocy of this kind of law. Explain to them the overreaches committed by guys like Frosh and organizations like the Maryland State Police.

jcutonilli said:
It comes from the first sentence in the following paragraph of Heller (554 US at 627). It is a conditional sentence, where the 4CA cite the condition as evidence. From the rest of the paragraph it appears that SCOTUS was trying to say more sophisticated weapons like tanks and bomber are not covered, but small arms that you keep in your house like rifles do have protection otherwise you detach the right from the prefatory clause.

It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful
in military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be
banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely
detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said,
the conception of the militia at the time of the Second
Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens
capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of
lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia
duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as
effective as militias in the 18th century, would require
sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at
large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small
arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and
tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited
the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the
protected right cannot change our interpretation of the
right.

I agree with your interpretation 4CA cherry-picked that sentence and took it out of context. They're reading the meaning of that portion of the SC decision wrong.

GUNSnROTORS · Feb 22, 2017

protegeV said:

DaemonAssassin said:
I second the

gunman superstar, resurrected? :tinfoil:

Weapons of war ... :sad20:

... they can pry my flintlock from my cold ...

MEGARMS · Feb 22, 2017

Muleskinner said:
They refused to look at NY They refused to look at CT

Don't hold yer breath...

Next stop after they refuse to give an opinion...California style laws..turn in your mags that hold more then 10, pin in your 10 round mags and register ever rifle you own...OH and no more then 500 rounds of ammo...watch it happen...

This really scares the piss out of me. We are headed down a dark path and it does not appear as if there is all that much we can do about it. If the SCOTUS refused to look at NY and CT, they probably won't be inclined to look at us either. :mad54:

ironpony · Feb 22, 2017

With the usual time line with these things our Fat Lady could weigh about 95 lbs. right now and currently be a vegetarian.

Please remind me what the last piece of good news MD has had ....

Livingthedream · Feb 22, 2017

Hawkeye said:
Get informed.

Join groups like MSI (Maryland Shall Issue). Pay your dues, which go toward things like supporting these lawsuits, and donate money when you can.

Contact your elected officials. Do you know who your state legislators are? If you don't, find out. If you do, call them, email them, write them letters, and let them know that you think laws like this are foolish, and why.

Evangelize. Educate your friends. Explain to them the idiocy of this kind of law. Explain to them the overreaches committed by guys like Frosh and organizations like the Maryland State Police.

Thank you, I appreciate the serious answer.

W2D · Feb 22, 2017

That opinion could have been written by the Huffington Post.

Hawkeye · Feb 22, 2017

Livingthedream said:
Thank you, I appreciate the serious answer.

No problem. Some people here are just suspicious of new accounts, especially when questions are asked in very very politically sensitive threads like this one. It's little tinfoil hat-ish, but we have had "mole" type accounts here in the past.

We're glad to have you, especially if you're interested in finding out what you can do to help.

abean4187 · Feb 22, 2017

Hawkeye said:
Contact your elected officials. Do you know who your state legislators are? If you don't, find out. If you do, call them, email them, write them letters, and let them know that you think laws like this are foolish, and why.

You’re too funny. I had to read that 3 times before I stopped laughing. Last time I contacted my elected aka gerrymandered officials about gun rights I was told in the most political way to **** off.

Gun laws in Maryland are never going to get better. Our best hope is to contact federal (Republican) officials and beg them to pass a federal preemption law which will restrict gun bans in the states.

annihilation-time · Feb 22, 2017

Abacab said:
I doubt cert will be granted. Tons of other good gun cases were denied while Scalia was alive. No cert will be granted until Kennedy is gone. Heller was probably neutered just to placate the California Conservative.

My thoughts exactly.

Biggfoot44 · Feb 22, 2017

Re #1730 - Contact your Senator and your Delegate(s). AND contact ALL the members of House Judicary Committee, and Senate Judicial Proceedings.

Ranchero50 · Feb 22, 2017

Livingthedream said:
Is there anything a single individual like me can do to help the fight?

Similar to the election fiasco, be the voice of reason and truth. Learn the laws, try to state them correctly when you hear them being related incorrectly.

I'm expecting the standard round of MD sucks comments about this decision from my coworkers in WV tonight so understanding the snippets where the court got it wrong will help guide and develop the conversation and hopefully me points will get spread throughout their circle of friends and a better understanding will come about.

Defense Rifle · Feb 22, 2017

Guys,

Please stfu about contacting your "local officials", obviously that has not worked in the past and it won't work today. It's a heavily Democratic state and a very anti-2A for that matter. This state has been passing anti-gun laws since the 1960's.

Only the Federal government can help Maryland and other 2A restrictive states at this point.

Most of the Appeals Circuit Courts are majority Democratic appointees so this isn't surprising. Out of 11 circuit courts only 2 are majority Republican appointees.

Also how exactly is the 4th Circuit defining "assault weapons"? Seems to me this ruling now defines semi-automatic rifles as "assault weapons", which has big legal implications.

Hawkeye · Feb 22, 2017

Defense Rifle said:
Guys,

Please stfu about contacting your "local officials",

Guy,

Please don't be rude to others on this forum who are suggesting that people try constructively to help our communities.

obviously that has not worked in the past and it won't work today. It's a heavily Democratic state and a very anti-2A for that matter. This state has been passing anti-gun laws since the 1960's.

Yup. And one of the things that they ALWAYS say when they pass the next restrictive whatever is that "this is what people want" and "I hear from so many constituents that we need this" and other crap like that. I agree that we need to do other things as well, but if we go quiet and stop flying our flag within our own state and to our own local elected officials, we are hastening the demise of our rights even more.

I'm not saying it's the only thing we should be doing, but that it is a very important thing to do, especially in the face of the environment we have here.

If it wasn't for us turning out in Annapolis and beating down doors in the statehouse (literally and figuratively) it would be all that much easier for them to say "well, nobody opposes this - the people want it."

And again, there's no need to be rude.

Drmsparks · Feb 22, 2017

Haides said:
And VA & WV are in completely different situations than we are. Cut the shit dude.

in ten years there will be enough idiots in Northern virginia to outnumber the rest of the state and they will start on their way to being maryland light with ever increasing gun control.

fabsroman · Feb 22, 2017

Defense Rifle said:
Guys,

Please stfu about contacting your "local officials", obviously that has not worked in the past and it won't work today. It's a heavily Democratic state and a very anti-2A for that matter. This state has been passing anti-gun laws since the 1960's.

Only the Federal government can help Maryland and other 2A restrictive states at this point.

Most of the Appeals Circuit Courts are majority Democratic appointees so this isn't surprising. Out of 11 circuit courts only 2 are majority Republican appointees.

Also how exactly is the 4th Circuit defining "assault weapons"? Seems to me this ruling now defines semi-automatic rifles as "assault weapons", which has big legal implications.

I don't think this state is extremely anti-2nd Amendment. Heck, back in the 80's the Handgun Roster legislation barely made it through referendum. Granted, it made it through, but barely. Now, I do believe this state is extremely left leaning. However, those leaning to the left are NOT one issue voters. They vote for Democrats because Democrats align more closely with their core beliefs. I have hippie liberal friends that own firearms and enjoy shooting. They were against FSA2013, but I am willing to bet that they still voted a straight Democrat ticket.

So, contacting legislators can work. Trying to get legislators replaced with Democrats that are more 2A friendly is also an option. It is called the DINO option.

What you are advocating is that nobody do anything other than wait for SCOTUS.

mdlowrider · Feb 22, 2017

Well, I'm a little discouraged about all this. Trump may help over time, but at the rate he's starting new battles with the media and all the lefties, I'm not sure he'll have much time left for 2A issues. It also seems to me that the Maryland Gun Control train is chugging right along, even picking up speed. Must say one of my great regrets is retiring in a leftist safe space and maybe I can change that someday. I'm already a member of MSI and have written many, many emails about this to every Maryland legislator who I thought would listen. I conclude that on 2A and many other issues, those %$#& maybe represent somebody, but not me.

teratos · Feb 22, 2017

For Maryland, there are only 2 ways to get a handle on this issue. Either through the courts or at the ballot box. The Governor can't do squat. I wish people would stop complaining about Hogan. Why even bother fighting a fight he cannot win?

ddestruel · Feb 22, 2017

Heller rejected the notion that state legislatures have latitude in deciding the scope of Second Amendment rights, noting that “constitutional rights are enshrined with the scope they were understood to have when the people adopted them, whether or not future legislatures or even future judges think that scope too broad.”

In a sense the court for Kolbe just engaged in thinking the scope too broad and then explained their from the bench legislative reasoning for allowing it?

Decision in Kolbe!

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Ultimate Member

piled higher and deeper

The Leatherstocking

nude member

KnowNothing

Member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

The Leatherstocking

Ultimate Member

MOLON LABE

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Active Member

The Leatherstocking

Old School Rifleman

Ultimate Member

Member

My hair is amazing

Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics