SAF SUES IN MARYLAND OVER HANDGUN PERMIT DENIAL UPDATED 3-5-12

Merlin · Jun 2, 2012

dblas said:
10,001st post of the thread, and the kicker going forward is, that whatever hoops the state come up, no matter how high or how far, EVERYONE has to abide by them, not just us peons, but the politically connected, the well to dos and the friends of Frosh, Gansler and O'Malley. They all have to follow the same rule we do going forward.

(Unless CA4 overturns the whole ball of wax).

Not true. They should follow the same rules as us, but the connected never do. They can side step 80% of the rules. Legally they should not, but they will. That's OK because it always happens and it will always continue to happen. The only thing I care about is having it where we to can get there even if us peons have to do it the right way be following the rules. Give us some rules to follow that in the end give us a CCW and I will be happy to follow them.

Does it bother me the a friend of someone like MOM could get a ccw and meybe they would not even be required to fill out an app? Well sure it does. But that will happen no matter what this outcome will be that effect us. If we loose this in the end at the 4th, or even if we win this G&S issue and then the state places so many other new laws that it is still impossible to get a CCW in MD, the connected will still get theirs regardless.

Merlin · Jun 2, 2012

gprimr1 said:
That's where MSI members and other groups have to come in. We can win in court; but we can't possibly afford to litigate every single issue. We have to educate people, we have to get them to own the right and make anti-2a a toxic position. Now honestly, you'll never get 100%, people like Frosh will never go down; but if others begin to demand 2A, Frosh's position will become fringe.

There's an MSI event tomorrow in Bowie. There are about 6,800 members on our mailing list who received an invite and a suggestion to volunteer. While it was not a strong volunteer request; we recieved guess how many offers...

0

ZERO people offered to volunteer, ZERO people said "hey, if you happen to need some help, let me know.

Guess what; the legislature will destroy us if we don't educate people and get them to support us.

It's absolutely appalling how gay marriage can make people take off work to oppose it; but when it comes to your 2A rights, all we get are a litany of excuses.

I understand your frustration and concern. I also feel we would be in much worse shape if it was not for the wonderful work MSI does. It would be much worse if it were not for groups like MSI and SAF. However I have mixed feeling on just how much benefit we really get from gun events/rallies.

When people take off of work to oppose gay marriage the news media makes them look like concerned citizens that are worried about an important issue.

When we get together for a gun event to educate people the news meadia has a way of making us look like out on the fringe, gun wheedling mountain men that should be feared. If we had 50 guys in three peice suits at the event the news meadia would show the world the hand full that will show up in cameo's looking like they just came out of the hills for this gun event. So I often thing these events back fire on us.

The news media has a way of either making us look like a kooks, or making our issue seem like many people do not care about it. That's why you see so many people at these gay rights rally's. The news media over the years has show the MD public that it is a very important issue we should be very concerned about. Not so much for us gun guys.

Mr H · Jun 2, 2012

Not sure if you were generalizing, or under a false impression.

Events like Bowie, Towson, county fairs, etc., are not "gun events." They are for community outreach and public education.

In fact, MSI prefers not to do many "gun events", as it's pretty much preaching to the choir.

Now, as we've discussed here often, I firmly believe there are many thousands of gun people in MD who haven't a clue about what we fight for, or simply don't care as they are fixed in an "I've got mine" mentality. In that case, some exposure to those people would be helpful (assuming, of course, they are interested).

So, by and large, MSI's focus is broader... trying to inform people who might not know/understand about the state of self-protection in Maryland.

dblas · Jun 2, 2012

Merlin said:
Not true. They should follow the same rules as us, but the connected never do. They can side step 80% of the rules. Legally they should not, but they will. That's OK because it always happens and it will always continue to happen. The only thing I care about is having it where we to can get there even if us peons have to do it the right way be following the rules. Give us some rules to follow that in the end give us a CCW and I will be happy to follow them.

Does it bother me the a friend of someone like MOM could get a ccw and meybe they would not even be required to fill out an app? Well sure it does. But that will happen no matter what this outcome will be that effect us. If we loose this in the end at the 4th, or even if we win this G&S issue and then the state places so many other new laws that it is still impossible to get a CCW in MD, the connected will still get theirs regardless.

Friends of the connected will always be able to get what they want, where the playing field leveled is requirements to get one (i.e. training, certification, etc) as well as Time and place constraints. The connected won't be able to go anywhere we can't anytime we can't with a CCW, so field leveled. Since G&S are out the door, all of the requirements will now apply across the board to everyone, not just the connected few that bypassed G&S to get their CCW.

Merlin · Jun 2, 2012

dblas said:
Friends of the connected will always be able to get what they want, where the playing field leveled is requirements to get one (i.e. training, certification, etc) as well as Time and place constraints. The connected won't be able to go anywhere we can't anytime we can't with a CCW, so field leveled. Since G&S are out the door, all of the requirements will now apply across the board to everyone, not just the connected few that bypassed G&S to get their CCW.

Don't you bet on it. For the fact that if they will never get into any trouble if they get caught going where you and I can't. The law is different for the connected. You have yourself under the false impression they have to follow the same laws to the same level that we do.

If you or I get caught doing or going somewhere were should not with our CCW, our ccw's will be pulled and maybe fines or jail time as they through the book at us. When a friend of MOM or the AG does the same, they will look the other way and ask very nicely to please do not do whatever anymore. Even if the get caught doing it 10 times.

You/me, behind bars. Them, a very polite request to stop. People are not equal in any world.

Merlin · Jun 2, 2012

mr h said:
Not sure if you were generalizing, or under a false impression.

Events like Bowie, Towson, county fairs, etc., are not "gun events." They are for community outreach and public education.

In fact, MSI prefers not to do many "gun events", as it's pretty much preaching to the choir.

Now, as we've discussed here often, I firmly believe there are many thousands of gun people in MD who haven't a clue about what we fight for, or simply don't care as they are fixed in an "I've got mine" mentality. In that case, some exposure to those people would be helpful (assuming, of course, they are interested).

So, by and large, MSI's focus is broader... trying to inform people who might not know/understand about the state of self-protection in Maryland.

Well your right. For whatever reason there are many gun owners that really could not care less about ccw's. Or if they do on some level they do not care to the point where they are the least bit interested in fighting for a ccw.

I know many gun owners that would not spend 1/1000th of the time talking about guns as we do here. They just have other things that interest them more.

I maybe was generalizing to much about the event. I guess I was thinking more on the lines of the empty holster rallies. I know that many feel these holster rallies are making a good point to the rest of the Maryland. But I think it is just an oppertunity for the press to make us look like a bunch of kooks the MSP are protecting them from.

swinokur · Jun 2, 2012

Bob A said:
Going on to require training might not fly; after all, they did not require training previously.

Any onerous burden that they attempt to apply after 5ii is laid to rest with a stake though its heart would look suspiciously like an attempt to circumvent the court.

One would hope that the court would find such a move distasteful.

Requiring training IMO would probably fly. We who have followed this know it might be an attempt to further restrict carry but most folks (GA?) will view it as reasonable requirement and we'd have a hard time objecting, or we'd be seen as the camo clad gun rights nuts the antis want the public to see.

Other states require some form of training, and as long as it's not a Frosh style elimination on easily obtainable and available training (ie NRA or Hunter courses, etc), we'd probably have to acquiesce to be seen as reasonable and willing to compromise constitutionally.

I'm not for it but would not stand in the way of a reasonable requirement. We have to be realists here on what future things the state will try and what we can tolerate.

Jim Sr · Jun 2, 2012

State gun law due for review

There’s been grumbling among gun owners ever since the Legislature passed a law in 1998 giving police chiefs sole authority to decide who gets a gun permit.

Posted Jun 01, 2012

Mark75H · Jun 2, 2012

Merlin said:
Not true. They should follow the same rules as us, but the connected never do. They can side step 80% of the rules. Legally they should not, but they will. That's OK because it always happens and it will always continue to happen. The only thing I care about is having it where we to can get there even if us peons have to do it the right way be following the rules. Give us some rules to follow that in the end give us a CCW and I will be happy to follow them.

Does it bother me the a friend of someone like MOM could get a ccw and meybe they would not even be required to fill out an app? Well sure it does. But that will happen no matter what this outcome will be that effect us. If we loose this in the end at the 4th, or even if we win this G&S issue and then the state places so many other new laws that it is still impossible to get a CCW in MD, the connected will still get theirs regardless.

Partly true ... the "connected" will always get their way, but any new law has to at least have the appearance of fairness even if it in fact restricts the hoi polloi from CCW. Any arbitrary restriction that allows the connected and restricts the rest of us will just open a new case in court, the sooner the better.

The challenge to the MD legislature is to find that "fair" wording that still gives MSP the ability to restrict, but keeps the law out of court.

If they can find that balance, it will be a feather in MOM's cap as he campaigns for president, esp on the coasts. If it goes into court as a big dispute, it could become the biggest liability for him in "fly-over America"

Biggfoot44 · Jun 2, 2012

The "G&S" will be eleminated on it's face as unconstitutionl.

The concepts of making sure that carriers are not criminals or violent , and reasonably safe and competent has been endorsed as *not unconstitutional * . We can speculate the extremes that Md would go, but we would have to litagate to prove that they are so extreme as to de facto arbitrary denieal, not that they are far out of line with the majority of States.

Our good friend Merlin did happen to stumble upon an important point, our apearence to the general public , and the media in perticular. At one MSI event we had almost 100 people in normal respectable attire , ONE in camo. Guess which apeared on the TV news.

I lIke Camo , and humorous firearm Tee shirts as much as anyone. And when relaxing or working around the house/ yard I'll have old work clothes.. But we need to prioritize our advocacy of 2A rights , and 1A free expression rights.

When we are representing our 2A rights (affilated w/ a group, or on our own) , we need to consider blending with our target audience at be rock bottom minimum , and being at least a step dressier is to be prefered.

esqappellate · Jun 2, 2012

Biggfoot44 said:
The "G&S" will be eleminated on it's face as unconstitutionl.

The concepts of making sure that carriers are not criminals or violent , and reasonably safe and competent has been endorsed as *not unconstitutional * . We can speculate the extremes that Md would go, but we would have to litagate to prove that they are so extreme as to de facto arbitrary denieal, not that they are far out of line with the majority of States.

Our good friend Merlin did happen to stumble upon an important point, our apearence to the general public , and the media in perticular. At one MSI event we had almost 100 people in normal respectable attire , ONE in camo. Guess which apeared on the TV news.

I lIke Camo , and humorous firearm Tee shirts as much as anyone. And when relaxing or working around the house/ yard I'll have old work clothes.. But we need to prioritize our advocacy of 2A rights , and 1A free expression rights.

When we are representing our 2A rights (affilated w/ a group, or on our own) , we need to consider blending with our target audience at be rock bottom minimum , and being at least a step dressier is to be prefered.

I very much agree. Whether we like it or not, this is a PR battle, not just a legal battle. IMHO, that means conducting ourselves in private and public conversation in a way that disarms our opponents or, at least, does not give them ammo to use against us. Once you get labeled as a camo clad, unshaven "gun nut," it is hard to shake it.

pcfixer · Jun 2, 2012

If you want to read about a PR battle, log into talk.baltimoresun.com

Mark75H · Jun 2, 2012

esqappellate said:
I very much agree. Whether we like it or not, this is a PR battle, not just a legal battle. IMHO, that means conducting ourselves in private and public conversation in a way that disarms our opponents or, at least, does not give them ammo to use against us. Once you get labeled as a camo clad, unshaven "gun nut," it is hard do shake it.

+1. Its the reporter, cameraman, editor and producer's job to be as sensational as possible. Our job to be as 'normal' as possible. Fans, certainly; fanatical, hopefully not in any way.

Merlin · Jun 2, 2012

Mark75H said:
Partly true ... the "connected" will always get their way, but any new law has to at least have the appearance of fairness even if it in fact restricts the hoi polloi from CCW. Any arbitrary restriction that allows the connected and restricts the rest of us will just open a new case in court, the sooner the better.

The challenge to the MD legislature is to find that "fair" wording that still gives MSP the ability to restrict, but keeps the law out of court.

If they can find that balance, it will be a feather in MOM's cap as he campaigns for president, esp on the coasts. If it goes into court as a big dispute, it could become the biggest liability for him in "fly-over America"

The thing is you never know when other are getting their ccw to include the connected, so who will raise a fuss where it would go to court. The way they always do what they do will always has the appearance of fairness. So when MOM's friends/connected apps go through the investigating troopers hands it just not looked at that hard. Assuming it even goes through the hands on the same low ranking troopers that our apps do.

As far as the other about him not wanting to get bad press in the public eye on any issues to include this one, that's just politics.

eyesinpines · Jun 2, 2012

I suspect my question has been asked/answered before, so I apologize in advance for having missed it.

I just cannot understand what in the world is taking so long for Judge Legg to rule one way or the other regarding the permanance/lifting of the stay. I totally understand that there is no particular deadline and that he can take as long as he wants. I also understand that he must have some other cases to attend to.

However, given the above, one must presume that as he has already ruled G&S to be unconstitutional, he must be well aware that there are a significant number of citizens presently suffering [as validated by HIS ruling] under the weight of an unconstitutional law. Surely, this of itself should provide adequate motivation - one way or the other, to reach an early decision?

Secondly, all he has to deal with is 10 pages from each side, a total of 20 pages, and restricted to only dealing with 4 specific questions that HE has posed.

Now this seems [admittedly to my layman's mind] hardly a monumental task. Is it really more than just a very few hours of deliberation? Maybe at worst 1 whole day?

So what's the hold up? I for one simply don't get it!

swinokur · Jun 2, 2012

I'm sure Esq can enlighten you. He'll be around at some point.

rambling_one · Jun 2, 2012

eyesinpines said:
I suspect my question has been asked/answered before, so I apologize in advance for having missed it.

I just cannot understand what in the world is taking so long for Judge Legg to rule one way or the other regarding the permanance/lifting of the stay. I totally understand that there is no particular deadline and that he can take as long as he wants. I also understand that he must have some other cases to attend to.

However, given the above, one must presume that as he has already ruled G&S to be unconstitutional, he must be well aware that there are a significant number of citizens presently suffering [as validated by HIS ruling] under the weight of an unconstitutional law. Surely, this of itself should provide adequate motivation - one way or the other, to reach an early decision?

Secondly, all he has to deal with is 10 pages from each side, a total of 20 pages, and restricted to only dealing with 4 specific questions that HE has posed.

Now this seems [admittedly to my layman's mind] hardly a monumental task. Is it really more than just a very few hours of deliberation? Maybe at worst 1 whole day?

So what's the hold up? I for one simply don't get it!

CA4 will consider Legg's decision to lift his stay (assuming that's what happens) in deciding the merits of Gansler's request for one from the higher court (which is sure to happen).

Judge Legg is crossing his "t's" and dotting his "i's".

eyesinpines · Jun 2, 2012

Thanks, but it doesn't answer my basic question. Why does it take more than a very few hours or so of Judge Leggs time to dot the "i''s and cross the "t"'s? Good heavens, there seems to be so little to "dot and cross"? .....
20 pages and 4 questions that the Judge chose?...Still don't get it. I'm not suggesting that I know what his finding should be...only NOT understanding why something of such limited scope and little volume should take such a long time.

Inigoes · Jun 2, 2012

eyesinpines said:
Thanks, but it doesn't answer my basic question. Why does it take more than a very few hours or so of Judge Leggs time to dot the "i''s and cross the "t"'s? Good heavens, there seems to be so little to "dot and cross"? .....
20 pages and 4 questions that the Judge chose?...Still don't get it. I'm not suggesting that I know what his finding should be...only NOT understanding why something of such limited scope and little volume should take such a long time.

Judge Legg does some research to support his decision, just like lawyers making sure noone isn't being bamboozled.

Mr H · Jun 2, 2012

eyesinpines said:
Thanks, but it doesn't answer my basic question. Why does it take more than a very few hours or so of Judge Leggs time to dot the "i''s and cross the "t"'s? Good heavens, there seems to be so little to "dot and cross"? .....
20 pages and 4 questions that the Judge chose?...Still don't get it. I'm not suggesting that I know what his finding should be...only NOT understanding why something of such limited scope and little volume should take such a long time.

With the obligatory IANAL...

The more thorough and reasoned Judge Legg's final decision (and all the previous work), the less chance CA4 will remand the decision for reconsideration. There will likely be an appeal to SCOTUS regardless of CA4's decision. Personally, I would rather it be MD having to beg to have it overturned, than SAF having to fight uphill again. The running theory is that, the longer Legg takes, the more likely we'll like the outcome.

Also, while Legg may well be aware of the rest of us out here, there are 2 important factors, IMO, that are being overlooked by many.

1 - This is primarily about Ray Woollard... we are hangers-on, and technically outside Legg's consideration. We can wish in one hand... but it won't fill up very fast.

2 - This decision is a piece in the bigger puzzle, which will likely be ultimately decided by SCOTUS. In order for them to hear the case, it has to be the best foundation possible. A hasty decision (even in appearance) could open up a window where the case is never heard.

SAF SUES IN MARYLAND OVER HANDGUN PERMIT DENIAL UPDATED 3-5-12

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Banana'd

Past President, MSI

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

In a State of Bliss

R.I.P.

MD Wear&Carry Instructor

Ultimate Member

President, MSI

Ultimate Member

MD Wear&Carry Instructor

Ultimate Member

Active Member

In a State of Bliss

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Head'n for the hills

Banana'd

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics