Good and Substantial- Not Just for Carry Anymore

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!
  • lawdogmd

    Member
    Oct 18, 2013
    11
    So, I will throw this out as an interesting aside. I have often argued against G&S by saying there is no way G&S would be sustained if applied to freedom of speech or religion, well it looks like I was wrong. A local Montgomery County female basketball player, happens to be Muslim, was prohibited from playing in the region finals because she didn't have "documented evidence" that her religion required she wear a hijab or headscarf.

    I guess Maryland is OK with applying G&S to other fundamental civil liberties. Who knew?

    Anyone think Frosh will jump in to clear this one up?

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/spor...6e6a6713f4b_story.html?utm_term=.6671b24baabb
     

    iH8DemLibz

    When All Else Fails.
    Apr 1, 2013
    25,396
    Libtardistan
    You didn't argue it much on here... Just kidding.

    I think G&S is more like driving around and seeing MPH signs with no numbers on them.

    Then being pulled over and told you were receiving a ticket for speeding.

    And when you ask how fast you were going, the police aren't required to tell you.
     

    lawdogmd

    Member
    Oct 18, 2013
    11
    Yeah, I know

    You didn't argue it much on here... Just kidding.

    I think G&S is more like driving around and seeing MPH signs with no numbers on them.

    Then being pulled over and told you were receiving a ticket for speeding.

    And when you ask how fast you were going, the police aren't required to tell you.

    I may not post much, very rarely admittedly, but I do write letters to legislators and do what a little here and there.

    I also know G&S was sustained with respect to carry permits BUT does anyone expect a G&S type demand related to the First Amendment to be supported by Frosh? I think the disparity interesting.
     

    CrueChief

    Cocker Dad/RIP Bella
    Apr 3, 2009
    3,030
    Napolis-ish
    Somehow I thought being a Muslim meant you were the member of a protected class and the rest of us had bow down in submission??? But like was said before who knew?
     

    Hakuna Matata

    Active Member
    May 14, 2014
    196
    "National Federation of State High School Associations" rule book....doesn't sound like it's a Maryland specific rule to me, just so happens the issue occurred in MOCO
     

    WeaponsCollector

    EXTREME GUN OWNER
    Mar 30, 2009
    12,120
    Southern MD
    No politician judge or cop can decide whether or not I have a "good and substantial" reason to carry a weapon for my own personal defense.
    Only I can decide that. :draw:
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,911
    WV
    So, I will throw this out as an interesting aside. I have often argued against G&S by saying there is no way G&S would be sustained if applied to freedom of speech or religion, well it looks like I was wrong. A local Montgomery County female basketball player, happens to be Muslim, was prohibited from playing in the region finals because she didn't have "documented evidence" that her religion required she wear a hijab or headscarf.

    I guess Maryland is OK with applying G&S to other fundamental civil liberties. Who knew?

    Anyone think Frosh will jump in to clear this one up?

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/spor...6e6a6713f4b_story.html?utm_term=.6671b24baabb

    Not sure if that technically applies like a law, just sounds like a game regulation.
    On a side note, I'd be really curious if any states or localities try to apply this standard to simple handgun ownership. I'm almost wishing some do, just to help get the question to SCOTUS to smash it down once and for all.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,372
    Messages
    7,279,169
    Members
    33,442
    Latest member
    PotomacRiver

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom