Loaded Magazine Law

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!
  • Maryland Hunter

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 1, 2008
    3,194
    Probably not a good idea? Since when is OBEYING the law NOT a good idea? If you think that obeying the law will result in Nanny State California Legislative like action, what's the point... you've already lost if you are afraid that obeying the law will result in adverse consequences.

    :facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

    Yeah, definitely not a good idea. Look, I'm all for not inventing laws that don't exist, but you and I know damn well that this would not turn out very good. I have no doubt that you would be detained, face down on the asphalt, and treated as a criminal. You would probably even be hauled in, and the details and statutes cleared up later. At your expense. What needs to happen first, is that these transport laws need to be cleaned up and made clearer, then taught better and more completely to our officers, so as to not have any misunderstandings in the field. I don't want to get shot in the back like the guy on the bike. He wasn't even armed.

    MH
     

    Patrick218

    Active Member
    May 17, 2010
    109
    Police have powers to arrest,detain and act as wards (not sure about the wording ,but this makes it leagal for them to have say a bag of cocaine from a suspect) of the court.They have no power to interpret laws,that what a judge is for.It does not matter how well they undertand a law because that is not their job.They can only act as a witness in a trial,police powers are only stripped after it is proven they have no ability to act in the goverments' best interest.The best law is no law at all period,the more complex the law the harder it is to understand.
     
    Last edited:

    Markp

    Ultimate Member
    Dec 22, 2008
    9,392
    ...Because we all know that eventually, anybody engaging in that behavior is going to have spend a lot of money and sweat on proving that in a court of law, after inevitably getting arrested. Just because you're right doesn't mean an LEO can't or won't ruin your day, even if only because they don't understand the laws properly.

    If I was wealthy I might line up a great lawyer and make myself a test case. Unfortunately, I'm not.

    LEO's can ruin your day without resorting to that... seriously folks... BGOS (Battered Gun Owners Syndrome). You're assuming that if you are acting within the law that some LEO is going to make an example out of you. While technically it could happen, it's less likely to happen if you are polite and have a copy of the law with you for this particular occasion.

    I don't always have a copy with me, but I can usually point to the correct statutes pretty quickly. If a cop is going to arrest you, he's going to do it for more than just this charge. Most of the LEO I have met are pretty reasonable as long as you're not giving them attitude. Even then, the D.A. still has to press charges as well. Somewhere along the line, you're gonna run into someone who does know the law.

    I'm not saying that you should provoke law enforcement to arrest you, but I am also saying that if you continue to act as if obeying the law is wrong you're doing yourself and our community a disservice. As you've proven, you don't even have to be armed to get shot! You haven't stopped driving because you might get pulled over and shot for doing nothing wrong beyond speeding?

    Could you end up face down on the ground? Sure you could, detained, possibly... I have been staring down the barrel of a LEO 9mm for nothing more than wearing CAMO! (AND I WAS IN FULL UNIFORM OUTSIDE MY BUSINESS.) I was then cuffed and stuffed into the back of a patrol car. So I know all about being wrongfully detained and looking down the barrel of a gun.

    So it doesn't really matter whether you have a gun or not... you can end up in the same damn situation. However relinquishing your right to act within the law is NOT the solution. I agree that better education and legislation need to be improved, but we're not gonna get there by being afraid to act properly within the law.

    If you had a carry permit, would you not carry for fear of being treated like a criminal? We had a recent thread where exactly that happened in Fredrick... So would you carry if you had a permit? I know I would!

    Mark
     

    Markp

    Ultimate Member
    Dec 22, 2008
    9,392
    Yeah, definitely not a good idea.

    I don't want to get shot in the back like the guy on the bike. He wasn't even armed.

    MH

    So, if I am going to get shot EITHER way... :facepalm::facepalm::facepalm: Does it matter whether I was carrying legally or not carrying at all?!?
     

    bean93x

    JamBandGalore
    Mar 27, 2008
    4,569
    WV
    so its legal to carry a holstered handgun under your seat, unloaded with a loaded mag in say, the center console or glove box WHILE going to say, informal target practice?
     

    Markp

    Ultimate Member
    Dec 22, 2008
    9,392
    so its legal to carry a holstered handgun under your seat, unloaded with a loaded mag in say, the center console or glove box WHILE going to say, informal target practice?

    Technically, from my reading of the law, it's legal to carry a holstered handgun ON the seat, with a magazine lying right next to it to go target shooting. I do agree that you're likely to get hassled if you get pulled over, but it is still legal from my reading of the law. -=I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.=-

    Mark
     

    Ethan83

    Ultimate Member
    Jan 8, 2009
    3,111
    Baltimoreish
    LEO's can ruin your day without resorting to that... seriously folks... BGOS (Battered Gun Owners Syndrome). You're assuming that if you are acting within the law that some LEO is going to make an example out of you. While technically it could happen, it's less likely to happen if you are polite and have a copy of the law with you for this particular occasion.

    I don't always have a copy with me, but I can usually point to the correct statutes pretty quickly. If a cop is going to arrest you, he's going to do it for more than just this charge. Most of the LEO I have met are pretty reasonable as long as you're not giving them attitude. Even then, the D.A. still has to press charges as well. Somewhere along the line, you're gonna run into someone who does know the law.

    I'm not saying that you should provoke law enforcement to arrest you, but I am also saying that if you continue to act as if obeying the law is wrong you're doing yourself and our community a disservice. As you've proven, you don't even have to be armed to get shot! You haven't stopped driving because you might get pulled over and shot for doing nothing wrong?

    Could you end up face down on the ground? Sure you could, detained, possibly... I have been staring down the barrel of a LEO 9mm for nothing more than wearing CAMO! (AND I WAS IN FULL UNIFORM OUTSIDE MY BUSINESS.) I was then cuffed and stuffed into the back of a patrol car. So I know all about being wrongfully detained and looking down the barrel of a gun.

    So it doesn't really matter whether you have a gun or not... you can end up in the same damn situation. However relinquishing your right to act within the law is NOT the solution. I agree that better education and legislation need to be improved, but we're not gonna get there by being afraid to act properly within the law.

    If you had a carry permit, would you not carry for fear of being treated like a criminal? We had a recent thread where exactly that happened in Fredrick... So would you carry if you had a permit? I know I would!

    Mark

    I understand your point, and I agree, but unfortunately there's the pragmatic and practical side of things. Right or wrong, you still have to choose your battles.

    I too have had my day ruined by an LEO, perhaps more than your experience. I was shooting with a friend on his (large) property. Somebody in the area heard the shots and called 911. We were met by the responding officers at gunpoint, cuffed on the ground, whole nine yards, and then sat on the ground while about 5 or 6 more patrol cars showed up with other officers, who then spent - I'm not kidding - 45 minutes trying to figure out whether or not we had actually broken any law. They reiterated several times that we were not under arrest, only being detained. Eventually they determined that we were in violation of shooting too close to a public road (the relevant statute requires 200 or 300 feet or something like that). Off we went to the county jail, where we spent several hours in leg shackles and our guns were taken into custody (including long guns in the trunk of a car that weren't ever even taken out of their case). They were eventually all returned by the police, but it took over a year.

    Myself, the property owner, and our other friend have to hire a lawyer, and eventually in court it was confirmed that we were over twice the distance required by the statute to be in violation of the law, and were not found guilty of those charges.

    While we were in the right in that regard, I haven't shot there since. Would you like to spend an afternoon target shooting there?

    I agree with you, I really do - but there's still a fine line. I'd rather spend my time outside of jail where I can more effectively affect the political system.
     

    Markp

    Ultimate Member
    Dec 22, 2008
    9,392
    Ethan,

    I don't think we're all that far apart on this... I agree, you have to pick your battles... as it sucks to sit in the county jail because the cops couldn't be bothered to measure the distance. I have never had the pleasure of spending time in a cell. Luck, as much as anything else.

    It just continues to eat at me how much we give to these people who enact these feel good laws that do little to address crime and create untenable situations for law abiding citizens.

    You ask would I like to shoot there... I suppose I would... but I would clearly mark the range ahead of time and have the laws printed out and a video camera ready to cover the story for the local news channel. If I am gonna get arrested without cause, I want to be able to sue for wrongful imprisonment. With your history, they should already know better making a case against them a slam dunk. Sounds like it was a nightmare for you guys and I am sorry to hear that you were forced to deal with that situation.

    Mark
     

    Abacab

    Member
    Sep 10, 2009
    2,644
    MD
    Unless you want to tempt the pokey I suggest steering clear of testing the legal limits.
     

    Markp

    Ultimate Member
    Dec 22, 2008
    9,392
    Unless you want to tempt the pokey I suggest steering clear of testing the legal limits.

    Are you one of those people driving 5 mph under the speed limit in the left lane?

    Do you stop at every yellow light?

    Perhaps you're afraid to drink in public because you might be arrested for public intoxication?

    Sure, you can transport your hand gun and ammo in separate locked containers outside your reach in the trunk of your car... but that doesn't mean that carrying an unloaded weapon in an enclosed holster on your hip with a magazine in your pocket is "testing the law", it's not, IT IS THE LAW IN MARYLAND.

    I'm sorry, the idea that following the law is somehow "testing it" when it is NOT ambiguous is really offensive and is also what those who pass these inane laws hope for.

    The law is clear... The weapon is either loaded or unloaded, the weapon is either in an enclosed case or holster or it's not, and you're either on your way to a legal destination or your not.

    Should the police stop carrying as well... because they are "testing" the same law (operating under one of the exemptions to 4-203.) Asinine, I know, but that's the logic being used...

    Look, there is nothing in the law that differentiates a case from an enclosed holster, they are listed side by side in the same sentence of the MD code.

    "by the person if each handgun is unloaded and carried in an enclosed case or an enclosed holster;"

    You are testing the same law, the same way, whether you have it in an enclosed case or holster. period.

    Mark
     

    Abacab

    Member
    Sep 10, 2009
    2,644
    MD
    Are you one of those people driving 5 mph under the speed limit in the left lane?

    No. Generally I drive in the left lane running a V1 radar detector.

    Do you stop at every yellow light?

    I try to stop at most. You are a horse's ass if you run red lights intentionally. It's an effective way to seriously harm or kill someone.

    Perhaps you're afraid to drink in public because you might be arrested for public intoxication?

    No. However, I am afraid of getting drunk in public. I have no interest in reporting an arrest on various applications for the rest of my life. Also, it's not so much drinking as it is being a belligerent ass in front of LEOs.

    Sure, you can transport your hand gun and ammo in separate locked containers outside your reach in the trunk of your car... but that doesn't mean that carrying an unloaded weapon in an enclosed holster on your hip with a magazine in your pocket is "testing the law", it's not, IT IS THE LAW IN MARYLAND.

    Are you sure about that? You do know that laws are open to interpretation, right? Amendments to the Constitution are open to interpretation. You are not traveling in rural Montana. You are living in a very progressive, very liberal, very urban and very anti-gun state. Would some judge agree with your interpretation? Probably. Would the state eventually drop their charges of carrying a concealed weapon? Probably if you have no priors. Is it worth testing? No, it's not. Despite what you say, it IS testing the law.

    What happens if you run into a LEO who does not agree with your version? You think he's just going to say, "Oh, ok. I never thought about it that way. I will not arrest you now. Have a nice day."?

    I'm sorry, the idea that following the law is somehow "testing it" when it is NOT ambiguous is really offensive and is also what those who pass these inane laws hope for.

    It is ambiguous. You are irrationally offended. Nothing I can do to help you there.

    The law is clear... The weapon is either loaded or unloaded, the weapon is either in an enclosed case or holster or it's not, and you're either on your way to a legal destination or your not.

    It's not clear. Why, if it was so clear, have we needed various appeals to the Attorney General's office clarifying what constitutes 'loaded'?

    Should the police stop carrying as well... because they are "testing" the same law (operating under one of the exemptions to 4-203.) Asinine, I know, but that's the logic being used...

    It is not the logic that is being used. They have a clear exemption. Furthermore, even if we were to entertain your 'logic', do you really think a police department or the State Troopers are going to go after one of their own? On a matter of carrying a loaded weapon despite being a LEO? I doubt it.

    Look, there is nothing in the law that differentiates a case from an enclosed holster, they are listed side by side in the same sentence of the MD code.

    "by the person if each handgun is unloaded and carried in an enclosed case or an enclosed holster;"

    You are testing the same law, the same way, whether you have it in an enclosed case or holster. period.

    Mark

    At least you concede that it is testing the law.
     

    Maryland Hunter

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 1, 2008
    3,194
    Mark,
    I hear what you're saying, and I see your point. However, it is too much of a risk for me, personally, to try it. If you want too, by all means do so. You are within the law, or our interpretation of it. What scares me is the detainment, possible arrest, legal fees, and maybe even a bogus "disturbing the peace" charge, because some citizen was disturbed and scared by me carrying. The laws are open to too much interpretation here, and the police, with all due respect, aren't familiar with all of them. That is evident by the original topic of this thread pertaining to loaded mags. I've even had a state trooper tell me that the gun had to be locked in a case on the way to the range, and in a separate container from the ammo. Even the gun shops and ranges are confused. On Target teaches in one of their classes that the gun must be out of the "lunge area" in the back seat or trunk, and Continental thinks that loadeed mags are illegal to transport. Too much confusion now to test the limits. Lets get the laws cleared up, simplified a little, and make the LEOs more familiar with them and a little more on our side. If you wish to try it, I wish you all of the luck, and I'm on your side, it's just not for me right now. I'd rather play it a little safe. It's kind of like tax loopholes and vague deductions that may be legal, but one has to decide if it's worth the hassle of getting red-flagged and maybe even audited.

    MH
     

    Markp

    Ultimate Member
    Dec 22, 2008
    9,392
    Mark,
    I hear what you're saying, and I see your point. However, it is too much of a risk for me, personally, to try it.

    I'd rather play it a little safe. It's kind of like tax loopholes and vague deductions that may be legal, but one has to decide if it's worth the hassle of getting red-flagged and maybe even audited.

    MH

    I absolutely respect your decision to play it safe. I don't blame you there, you have a lot to lose (as do many of us.) However we all have to decide personally (and I do mean personally) how much we are willing to risk to live as freely as the law allows. Certainly, I respect the law, I want to remain within the law, and despite my rancor about this subject I will not intentionally put myself into a situation where my following the law is in question. At the same time, believing that I live in the home of the brave and the land of the free, I believe that I need to act in a manner that reflects what those who sacrificed for our freedoms would appreciate.

    Thousands of men and women have given their lives, their spouses, their children to insure that we would all have the freedom that they so cherished. The beauty of freedom is that, provided you are acting within the law, you can decide to be as conservative as you need in your own actions to be comfortable with your actions. It is unfortunate that the law is not more clear on the subject and that many feel that they cannot act within the limits of the law for fear of persecution. That said, please don't take my view on the law as criticism of your actions. I respect your decision but I am disappointed by the fact that you feel that you must act so conservatively because of the perceived threat from law enforcement.

    Mark
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,922
    Messages
    7,259,100
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom