2112rws
Active Member
- Jan 18, 2013
- 163
Do we know when the Senate votes?
The Senate bill provides protection for residents of CC states, like HR 38 did. Residents of those states need only provide a photo ID in another state. No NR permit required
IANAL.
It is less than clear (to me at least) that you have to have a CC permit from your home state. The operative language applies to a permit issued pursuant to the law of *a* state. Then limits its reach to cases where the handgun has been shipped in interstate commerce other than in the state of the residence. If the Colt is made in Conn. and is shipped to MD where is is purchased by a MD resident, that the interstate shipment requirement is satisfied. A NR permit is issued by “a” state.
Do we know when the Senate votes?
What political downside is it for the MGA to not pursue in-state carry permits while those outside the state can carry? I would submit most Marylanders wouldn't even care. Liberal elites putting pressure on the MGA to go shall issue? I'm not seeing it. If anything, those that want to take advantage will simply declare residency outside of Maryland, get a shall issue permit, then carry in Maryland. The leftist elites don't care because they got the resources to get carry permits regardless - the rest of us be damned.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
If this passes I would become one of the PA residents that travels to MD everyday and would now be carrying everyday in MD. I think this would force MD lawmakers' hand into moving toward shall issue.
We'll just have to be of differing opinions. A look around the USA should have provided fence sitters that the streets won't run red.I didn't say the hard core leftists will put pressure on the GA to go shall issue. We both know that will never happen. The hard core leftists won't change their position on gun control, I agree with this. They will just be angry about it. But the middle of the road fence sitters, both voters and representatives, they may care. At the very least I think you will see some loosening of the current "good an substantial" standard, either in statute or in practice. And regardless, it is a start. Once it passes and the public sees the streets don't run red with blood it makes it easier to pursue a loosening of the current law in Maryland and may make it possible to get the state of residence requirement taken out of the federal law. I doubt Maryland will ever go shall-issue without a federal law or court decision, but this could help chip away at the current basically insurmountable standards for many.
What loss of tax revenue? How so?This sort of solution, if utilised by a reasonable number of soon to be ex-Marylanders, will attract attention of lawmakers sensitive to the loss of tax revenue, hopefully. Of course, it didn't seem to bother them when Beretta pulled up stakes and moved to Tennessee.
Perhaps if it passes Hogan may finally have an inclination to loosen G&S...
What loss of tax revenue? How so?
Sell your house to someone else with similar income and real estate tax?
Decreasing property values and resulting loss of real estate tax would get their attention, but who is willing to take a loss on their house?
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Perhaps if it passes Hogan may finally have an inclination to loosen G&S...
This sort of solution, if utilised by a reasonable number of soon to be ex-Marylanders, will attract attention of lawmakers sensitive to the loss of tax revenue, hopefully. Of course, it didn't seem to bother them when Beretta pulled up stakes and moved to Tennessee.
Since most MD permits have restrictions ie. "When working as ...." and most out of states permits would not have restrictions how might MD permits change if Senate bill version becomes law?