Go Back   Maryland Shooters > Gun Rights and Legislation > National 2A Issues
Don't Have An Account? Register Here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 29th, 2021, 12:48 PM #61
camo556's Avatar
camo556 camo556 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 943
camo556 camo556 is offline
Member
camo556's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2021
Posts: 943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedora View Post
Cannot active / retired police carry widely without knowing the particular carry restrictions of the states they are transiting? How does the LEOSA address this issue?
I don't think it does. Anyway, police are presumed to know the law.

Police get special carve outs for lots of gun laws, including rifle and magazine bans.

Again, i dont agree with it. There are lots of good counter arguments, but I think that they will fall on deaf ears in the 9th, 2nd, and 3rd circuits.
camo556 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 29th, 2021, 01:26 PM #62
Texasgrillchef's Avatar
Texasgrillchef Texasgrillchef is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2021
Location: Dallas, texas
Posts: 115
Texasgrillchef Texasgrillchef is offline
Member
Texasgrillchef's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2021
Location: Dallas, texas
Posts: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by camo556 View Post
this.

States (and DC) will say that they can require training in the peculiar laws of self defense in that jurisdiction, along with training on where the sensitive places are. What you are allowed to do in FL and TX is not the same as what you can lawfully do in a duty to retreat state like MD. The counter argument of course is that hunting training is almost universally recognized, for example the TX online course counts to a MD hunting license (and apparently HQL), while hunting and game laws are completely different. A lot of reciprocity we see (like Drivers licenses) is not through courts forcing the issue, its through state compacts and uniform agreement on training standards. Congress could impose universal training requirements, but would we really want that? I cant see any state thats now constitutional carry wanting Congress to impose standards.

States may be forced to offer non resident permits, and also be forced to cut training some like 4 hours, but I am skeptical courts will force full reciprocity. If you want to carry in NYC, the 2nd circuit will say "gee we dont want a lot of vigilantes from the south, you need to prove you know the law before you carry" and allow NYC specific training. And btw NY gun laws are byzantine, so 16 hours seems appropriate.

I am not saying i agree with this, but asking CCW permit holders to know the law before they carry seems like an ask a judge will have a hard time turning down.
All very good points. It is exactly the reason why I think the courts will say that a state has the option. They (The state) can opt for one of three choices. They can go With Permitless Constitutional Carry, they can do reciprocity for all States, or they can issue NR permits. I spose they could do a combination of the last two, in that they would recognize some state permits and require residents of those states they don’t recognize to get a NR permit. However I would see that being challenged in the courts for 14A rights and discrimination. So I think a state will go one of those three ways.

It goes along the lines of what the Georgia Supreme Court did many many years ago and told the state that it was unconstitutional to ban both open and conceal carry. That the state could ban one or the other but not both. So GA went for open carry. As of today, GA has Permitless open carry, but a shall issue permit for conceal carry. Louisiana Is the same way.

As an Instructor I will agree with you when it comes to training, and what laws a “problem” state might implement when it comes to training.

They might require more hours of training.

Texas for being a constitutional carry state is only one of a few states that require state specific specialized training.

Most other states only require NRA Basic Pistol or similar. No training on the laws, other then signing a statement that you understand the state laws.

Texas though you can take the course online, then seek out an instructor for shooting qualification.

Legal laws training can easily be done online.

If states would allow NRA/USCCA courses with legal online trading in to suffice. That would NOT be a bad thing.

Of the 11 LTC’s I have. Only 3 required State specific training. Utah, Illinois, and Texas. Everyone else accepted NRA basic Pistol Instructor as being enough. i am an NRA, Illinois & Maryland Instructor, and within the next 90 days I will be a Utah and Texas Instructor as well.

What’s crazy are the states that still want an instructor to take the course that they teach to get a permit., and to retake for renewal!

I know of instructors that are just signing off on each other’s trainings along with doing actual live fire qualification if needed. Crazy and stupid. At least for Illinois, which requires a 3hr renewal class every 5 years, is not required of instructors. The whole purpose of the 3 hr renewal is to update permit holders on new laws and to do a live fire requalification of their shooting.
Texasgrillchef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 29th, 2021, 06:49 PM #63
press1280 press1280 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: WV
Posts: 6,202
press1280 press1280 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: WV
Posts: 6,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by motorcoachdoug View Post
Heck how much for the Oregon case? I have relatives in Oregon and I do travel out that way to visit my aunt and my first cousin as well. I have my Utah and would like to be able to carry concealed but alas no joy..
I would point out most of Oregon is unlicensed open carry. The plaintiff would probably need to be someone who visits the several cities with open carry bans or else they'll tell you you can just OC when you're here.
press1280 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 29th, 2021, 10:29 PM #64
Texasgrillchef's Avatar
Texasgrillchef Texasgrillchef is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2021
Location: Dallas, texas
Posts: 115
Texasgrillchef Texasgrillchef is offline
Member
Texasgrillchef's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2021
Location: Dallas, texas
Posts: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by press1280 View Post
I would point out most of Oregon is unlicensed open carry. The plaintiff would probably need to be someone who visits the several cities with open carry bans or else they'll tell you you can just OC when you're here.
I thought of that as well. But if you take a look at a map of where OC is banned. It makes it hard to get some places. Itís not just some cities that ban OC. But if I am correct at least 1 maybe 2 complete counties have banned OC as well.

But your correct, the plaintiff would have to travel to a city, or need to go to an area that OC is not allowed.

However also keep in mind, that the 9th circuit for California and Hawaii also cover Oregon. So all it takes is one of those three cases to win, to make it effective for all three states.
Texasgrillchef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 30th, 2021, 01:11 PM #65
lazarus lazarus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 7,990
lazarus lazarus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 7,990
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texasgrillchef View Post
That would be challenged under the HIPPA act.

If Doctors started to be required to report my medical health condition to the state. I would stop seeing the doctor, or go to one in a different state.

There would be many doctors, making money under the table for seeing patients “ anonymously“

The way the system is now, many people aren’t getting th mental healthcare treatment they need because they are afraid the state will somehow find out and revoke, suspend or not issue them their LTC. Even though their condition isn’t or won’t be an issue.

We don’t want those to far gone from having firearms, but on the other hand we want people to get the help they need too.

At least in Texas… if you get mental health care voluntarily. No one knows. Records are sealed and destroyed. And you can keep your firearms and your LTC.

If you get mental healthcare involuntary by being legally committed that’s another story.

So it becomes an an incentive to get help and treatment before it is to late and becomes an issue where someone else steps in and forces the issue.
If it is required by a state law, it likely wouldn't violate HIPAA. There are already carve outs in the law relating to protecting health and safety of others as well as disclosures to police for law enforcement related activities (such as reporting to police someone with a gunshot wound, or reporting to affected individuals someone who exposed them to an STI or other communicable disease).

A state could likely argue pretty successfully that a requirement for doctors to report if a patient had a health condition making it unsafe for them to drive would pretty likely be held not to violate HIPAA. That being said, I'd rather that not happen. But it probably would be legal.
lazarus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 30th, 2021, 01:13 PM #66
teratos's Avatar
teratos teratos is offline
My hair is amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Bel Air
Posts: 41,289
teratos teratos is offline
My hair is amazing
teratos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Bel Air
Posts: 41,289
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazarus View Post
If it is required by a state law, it likely wouldn't violate HIPAA. There are already carve outs in the law relating to protecting health and safety of others as well as disclosures to police for law enforcement related activities (such as reporting to police someone with a gunshot wound, or reporting to affected individuals someone who exposed them to an STI or other communicable disease).

A state could likely argue pretty successfully that a requirement for doctors to report if a patient had a health condition making it unsafe for them to drive would pretty likely be held not to violate HIPAA.
There is precedent for reporting certain health conditions and still being HIPPA compliant. Not an issue. BTW, MD does not require docs to report when we instruct a patient not to drive. Just document it.
__________________
Quote:
"The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it.No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it."(16 Am. Jur. 2d, Section 177; later 2d, Section 256)
teratos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2021, 01:29 AM #67
777GSOTB 777GSOTB is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 339
777GSOTB 777GSOTB is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texasgrillchef View Post
It goes along the lines of what the Georgia Supreme Court did many many years ago and told the state that it was unconstitutional to ban both open and conceal carry. That the state could ban one or the other but not both. So GA went for open carry. As of today, GA has Permitless open carry, but a shall issue permit for conceal carry. Louisiana Is the same way.
You should go and read that Nunn case that you refer to here, as they never said that...If so, post that legal determination up, would love to see it. In reality it's just the wishful thinking of the gun clubs that want to see the right to open carry without a license subverted through the requirement of a license.

Looks like I've got one SCOTUS Chief Justice who understands that point of view...Been sayin' it since the 2008 Heller case.

New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn. v. Bruen
From oral arguments:

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Well, I'm not sure that's right. I mean, you would --regardless of what the right is, it would be surprising to have it depend upon a permit system. You can say that the right is limited in a particular way, just as First Amendment rights are limited, but the idea that you need a license to exercise the right, I think, is unusual in the context of the Bill of Rights.
777GSOTB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2021, 08:32 AM #68
rascal rascal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,204
rascal rascal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texasgrillchef View Post
Look at having a Washington DC LTC. If you donít live there where can you carry it? Not in federal or public buildings. D.C. isnít very big. Most private businesses donít let you carry. So in D.C. itís basically your home and your car. You canít carry on public transportation either.
Only a very tiny portion of businesses in DC forbid carrying on their property. And you can't carry in federal buildings anywhere in the US
rascal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2021, 09:25 AM #69
steveh326 steveh326 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Mt. Airy
Posts: 1,335
steveh326 steveh326 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Mt. Airy
Posts: 1,335
OK I freely admit I am ignorant in these matters, but can someone help me understand how the case has been heard, but no decision will be rendered until June 2022? How/why is this possible? Does the SC not work year round? how much do we pay these people anyway and how long to they need to debate something? what if a jury took 8 months to deliberate a case?

I have no clue on this stuff but it just doesn't seem right.
steveh326 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 3rd, 2021, 09:31 AM #70
Bertfish's Avatar
Bertfish Bertfish is offline
Throw bread on me
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: White Marsh, MD
Posts: 11,548
Bertfish Bertfish is offline
Throw bread on me
Bertfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: White Marsh, MD
Posts: 11,548
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveh326 View Post
OK I freely admit I am ignorant in these matters, but can someone help me understand how the case has been heard, but no decision will be rendered until June 2022? How/why is this possible? Does the SC not work year round? how much do we pay these people anyway and how long to they need to debate something? what if a jury took 8 months to deliberate a case?

I have no clue on this stuff but it just doesn't seem right.
They deliberate and write lengthy opinions

Courts in general aren't quick and this is on par with other major SCOTUS cases I can recall on this topic
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by clandestine View Post
Do not wear blindfolds when a man a putting his anus on your wiener.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADR View Post
I prefer a small house on a lot of land. Keep your family close and everyone else far away.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RepublicOfFranklin View Post
Socialism and individual liberty cannot exist in the same space.
Quote:
Originally Posted by StantonCree View Post
Whoever actually needed your post eats soup with their hands
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBert View Post
You are so cocksure that you are always right that you end up sticking your appendage in poop all of the time.
Bertfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  Home Page > Forum List > Gun Rights and Legislation > National 2A Issues


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
© 2021, Congregate Media, LP Privacy Policy Terms of Service