no worries.
i didn't take them that way anway.
we're all frustrated with our Government, both state and Federal
i didn't take them that way anway.
we're all frustrated with our Government, both state and Federal
CCRKBA says SCOTUS ruling should open National reciprocity
- Thread starter swinokur
- Start date
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!
Member Benefits:
Colt Justice
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
This court has been 2nd Amendment friendly. They ruled that 2A is an individual right, which has been a liberal sticking point for decades. They ruled against DC's gun ban, and Chicago's as well. I see this court backing it up.
As to whether or not any reciprocity laws will apply, I think so. For one, the 2A is specifically mentioned as a Constitutional right, as opposed to gay marriage. For 2, the ruling is that if one state recognizes gay marriage, they all have to recognize it. Of course, it means licensing, just as gay marriage does, but I can't see how they can separate the two and still be on equal footing.
Anyway, this is what I think.
As to whether or not any reciprocity laws will apply, I think so. For one, the 2A is specifically mentioned as a Constitutional right, as opposed to gay marriage. For 2, the ruling is that if one state recognizes gay marriage, they all have to recognize it. Of course, it means licensing, just as gay marriage does, but I can't see how they can separate the two and still be on equal footing.
Anyway, this is what I think.
I think we're getting ahead of ourselves. SAF has not filed a suit and no National reciprocity bill is going to get signed by this POS, er I mean POTUS.
You don't have to go get arrested, just file a lawsuit. I'm sure MSP will let you know your (UT,VA,FL) permit isn't honored and you will be arrested if caught carrying. That should be enough to get standing.
Attachments
Another way of looking at national Reciprocity is even if you have a permit from NV, if you move here you are required to have a MD DL. I don't think that's gonna change.
who knows though.
who knows though.
Colt Justice
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
I'll just ignore the snarky comments.
Is humor not ok? lighten up.
or ignore. your choice.
or ignore. your choice.
Colt Justice
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
danb
dont be a dumbass
To get a circuit split on outside the home, the lawsuit has to be filed in outside of 2nd,3rd,4th circuits. I think that the lawsuit would end up in the circuit of the state of residence of the plaintiff. For example: UT permit not honored in NM, IL, MD would end up in 10th (UT). A lawsuit by a MD resident would end up in the 4th - and I doubt they would contradict themselves. You would have to figure out in which circuit you want the case to end up (for a split) and work backwards with plaintiffs from those states.
psycosteve
Meme magic works!!!
Well could one own a piece of property in a free state and claim residency in that state. Residents who live on the borders of state could as easily do that to gain a permit thus making them legal in this state if this law passes. The funny part of all of this is the tax revenue that is going to be lost by those who do this. This loss in tax revenue could be the thing that could force things over the top. At this point the millions that the state could loose for no real gain. This means that if National Reciprocity passes MD should go shall issue if nothing for the fact that at this point there would nothing else they could gain, but have a lot to loose.
Blacksmith101
Grumpy Old Man
- Jun 22, 2012
- 22,280
I have friends in Delaware and Pennsylvania who have permits who would love Reciprocity. My brother and his wife who are Texas residents with permits had to leave their firearms with a relative in PA when they came east rather than risk the insane laws of Maryland and DC. Brother said he was good to carry in every other state they touched.
I don't think that's right. You would need to challenge the state which fails to recognize the plaintiffs permit, since that is the state which would charge you with a crime. That means if you have a UT permit that is not recognized in IL, you would be at risk of violating IL laws if you carried there, so that is where you would file suit.
If we need to get more circuits to say that 2A applies outside the home, couldn't we file an open carry challenge in a shall issue state (FL, SC, IL) and get the same result?
The state would make the argument that since the plaintiffs right to carry is available through a CCW, they can ban open carry. IOW, the state would be making the exact argument we're advancing in Peruta.
Since courts seem to like upholding state laws, they could easily uphold the open carry ban since CCW is available. We'd get appellate rulings that state that the 2A rights aren't violated since CCW is easy to get.
Driving is a privilege, not a right, so it's not the same. As mentioned above, a quickie Vegas wedding/marriage (now a universal right) is valid and recognized in MD. The carry permit should be more akin to a marriage license than a driver's license because of the right vs privilege status.
As someone else pointed out in another thread, it's amazing how SCOTUS can stretch and bend to make new rights and still not be able to figure out "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
abean4187
Ultimate Member
- Apr 16, 2013
- 1,327
Good luck with that, the liberal judges that think that gay marriage is a universal right in no way will vote for concealed carry being a universal right. Right off the bat we are currently at best 5-4 and I have low hopes that certain “conservative” judges will vote in our favor for this. Best win the election in 2016 and hope that 1-2 liberal judges die before we take this to the SCOTUS.
Part of the problem is some courts (the 4CA) have not yet agreed carry is a right. Even if it were, a national reciprocity law might still allow individual states to determine requirements for permits for residents to keep 10A issues from arising.
MikeTF
Ultimate Member
Pot is next, after the Supreme Court rules that capital punishment by lethal injection is cruel and unusual (despite the fact that veterinarians perform it without incident every day).
Edit: Supreme Court upholds lethal injection for death penalty.
Edit: Supreme Court upholds lethal injection for death penalty.
Last edited:
Odiferous Maximus
Active Member
Perhaps a bit tongue-in-cheek here...but maybe I should type that up and send it to Maryland's Attorney General and tell him that I believe I have the right to carry a concealed handgun the next time I visit Maryland.
Maybe end it with something along the lines of "Unless I receive a written negative response within 7 working days, I will interpret it as an affirmation of the above."
Maybe end it with something along the lines of "Unless I receive a written negative response within 7 working days, I will interpret it as an affirmation of the above."
Kharn
Ultimate Member
What about filling suit against a state that will not issue a non-resident permit unless you have a permit from your home state?
ETA, especially if the issuing authority provided a statement that they would issue to such a person if not for state law, such as a PA sheriff for a MD resident denied a permit by MSP. PA would probably be the most ripe due to local issuing authority (not the state police), mandatory shall issue, and the AG's vigorous invalidation of non-resident reciprocal arrangements.
ETA, especially if the issuing authority provided a statement that they would issue to such a person if not for state law, such as a PA sheriff for a MD resident denied a permit by MSP. PA would probably be the most ripe due to local issuing authority (not the state police), mandatory shall issue, and the AG's vigorous invalidation of non-resident reciprocal arrangements.
A headline this morning is that SCOTUS says the "controversial" lethal injection drug is ok to use. At the time I saw it, it was only a headline (no details). Just FYI.
Users who are viewing this thread
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
Sign up on our online store and earn 1000 points- Started by J_Gunslinger
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
-
-
-
PG County getting some Liberty Doll love over a bill that would ban computers for minors- Started by jc1240
- Replies: 6