SAF involvement in MD

EL1227 · Sep 12, 2015

gprimr1 said:
Woollard v. Sheridan. The 4th Circuit court of appeals held that G&S was constitutional. The Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal.

No they haven't. The District of Columbia is located in a different federal circuit court than MD or NJ. The DC case is being heard in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. MD is in the United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit. NJ is in the United States Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit.

If DC loses and chooses not to appeal, the decision is only binding on the DC Circuit. Only if the Supreme Court rules in favor of defeating Good Reason does it apply to MD and NJ.

What you've described is exactly the path taken by Heller then McDonald, just not for the same issue. DC's permits hinge on Chief Lanier's interpretation of 'special reason', while MD's hinges on the MSP Superintendent's equally arbitrary interpretation of Good & Substantial. If DC loses, so should MD else you have two CA jurisdictions that SCOTUS would need to reconcile, thus backing up your concluding statement.

dblas · Sep 12, 2015

swinokur said:
^^^^^

this exactly.

And for transparency, I am also a Defenders Club member. worth every dime IMO.

SAF went as far as they could in MD, but when SCOTUS denied CERT in Woollard, their legal options were stymied. Now they work in other states and DC (Wrenn) to affect a possible SCOTUS challenge that if won, would allow licensed carry in MD. So it's a worthwhile endeavor IMO.

A win in Wrenn would have to come from SCOTUS for it to have any affect on MD.

BeoBill · Sep 13, 2015

And that, sir, was my point.

swinokur · Sep 14, 2015

But if we don't get to SCOTUS, we certainly know the outcome. Our only real hope is that a circuit split or appeal will get to SCOTUS.

Not supporting SAF guarantees we get nothing.

Doctor_M · Sep 14, 2015

I support them both, but IMHO, SAF has done a lot more for MD than the NRA has. Don't flame me... just my opinion. Like I said, I will continue to support them both.

Biggfoot44 · Sep 14, 2015

No State is an Island , and there is no instant gratification.

The popularily defined Civil Rights movement took multiple decades of litigation. By that standard 2A is on fast track.

dblas · Sep 14, 2015

Doctor_M said:
I support them both, but IMHO, SAF has done a lot more for MD than the NRA has. Don't flame me... just my opinion. Like I said, I will continue to support them both.

NRA is funding the current Kolbe case. Not a flame just an FYI.

swinokur · Sep 14, 2015

And the NRA had a rep in Annapolis the entire time the fight against FSA 2013 was going on. Neither group has abandoned us, regardless of the less than favorable outcome.

Doctor_M · Sep 16, 2015

dblas said:
NRA is funding the current Kolbe case. Not a flame just an FYI.

Good point. I didn't know that. Thanks.

MDFF2008 · Sep 16, 2015

BeoBill said:
And that, sir, was my point.

I think it's unlikely Maryland would outright defy a Supreme court order. It's not worth the risk. I think they would simply pass new laws that make carry very restrictive.

BeoBill · Sep 16, 2015

gprimr1 said:
I think it's unlikely Maryland would outright defy a Supreme court order. It's not worth the risk. I think they would simply pass new laws that make carry very restrictive.

I agree. After stalling and obfuscating for as long as they can. They'll follow the DC model.

SCDoGo · Sep 18, 2015

BeoBill said:
They'll follow the DC model.

It's only fair, since DC was kind enough to try following our CCW model

Abacab · Sep 18, 2015

I wouldn't give SAF a dime. Alan Gottlieb supported Manchin-Toomey despite his last minute claims he felt differently after secret deals were rescinded.

BeoBill · Sep 19, 2015

I still support the SAF, in spite of my criticism of them. On the whole they do fight for 2A. Just not in the venues I would prefer.

EL1227 · Sep 20, 2015

gprimr1 said:
I think it's unlikely Maryland would outright defy a Supreme court order. It's not worth the risk. I think they would simply pass new laws that make carry very restrictive.

BeoBill said:
I agree. After stalling and obfuscating for as long as they can. They'll follow the DC model.

It 'was' a mutual admiration society, at least while O'Malley was in charge. But, with our new Gov. I'm not so sure. I'm no longer pessimistic, but only cautiously optimistic about the final outcome. We just need to 'neutralize' O'Malley's lieutenants.

There's a geographic anti-2A dynamic going on within MD, DC and NVA, so we need to support our brothers in arms regardless of the organizations they are represented by. The meme from the 'local' anti-gun groups has always been that the illegal guns are coming in from 'other' jurisdictions, with DC blaming MD and NVA blaming DC, where the fact of the matter is that the CRIMINALS are crossing state boundaries to commit crimes, including gun-running ... unless I have missed that guns have evolved and now have sprouted legs along with the ability to independently kill without human assistance. :sarcasm:

Supporting SAF in their efforts in DC, as well as VCDL in their efforts against Terry McAwful's recent anti-gun onslaught will also protect MD from the regional anti-gun blame game. There is still a LOT of incestuous political involvement between DemocRATS in these neighboring locales, with VA AG Mark Herring (D) having regular confabs with our own AG Brian Frosh (D) on 'common legal issues' facing their respective states. And I'm sure that they BOTH are closely watching the outcome of DC's Firearms Amendment Act of 2012 and figuring out how to 'tweak' the interpretation of their gun laws and propagandize them to the press.

My rather rambling point is ... support who you wish, SAF, NRA , GOA, NAGR ... whomever. But, we can't afford to limit our support to our own backyard, because our neighborhood is conspiring against us.

press1280 · Sep 20, 2015

EL1227 said:
What you've described is exactly the path taken by Heller then McDonald, just not for the same issue. DC's permits hinge on Chief Lanier's interpretation of 'special reason', while MD's hinges on the MSP Superintendent's equally arbitrary interpretation of Good & Substantial. If DC loses, so should MD else you have two CA jurisdictions that SCOTUS would need to reconcile, thus backing up your concluding statement.

It's not outside the realm of possibility that even if DC loses that SCOTUS still passes on hearing the appeal.

swinokur · Sep 20, 2015

SCOTUS sure hasn't shown much interest in clarifying the situation.

how many circuit splits will they ignore and let the conflicts continue?

Uncle Duke · Sep 20, 2015

swinokur said:
SCOTUS sure hasn't shown much interest in clarifying the situation.

how many circuit splits will they ignore and let the conflicts continue?

My question also.

Frustrating as all hell too. So is the thought of bring careful what you wish for. Today's answer they've dodged and is uncertain. Tomorrow's uncertain answer becomes even more uncertain in that it rests with future appointments. The wrong answer could likely mean a whole other animal.

SAF involvement in MD

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

R.I.P.

Past President, MSI

Crank in the Third Row

In a State of Bliss

Certified Mad Scientist

Ultimate Member

Past President, MSI

In a State of Bliss

Certified Mad Scientist

Ultimate Member

Crank in the Third Row

Member

Member

Crank in the Third Row

R.I.P.

Ultimate Member

In a State of Bliss

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics