BenL
John Galt Speaking.
I guess it was silly of me to think this might be settled by next summer.
SAF SUES IN MARYLAND OVER HANDGUN PERMIT DENIAL UPDATED 3-5-12
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:
- Status
krucam
Ultimate Member
Hell, I'm on the verge of owing a dinner because it isn't looking like it will be done this year (carrying in MD)...
Hell, I'm on the verge of owing a dinner because it isn't looking like it will be done this year (carrying in MD)...
I have a feeling, once the SAF/Gura wins this round. The other courts won't touch this one with a ten foot pole.
The reason why, MD had already made OC illegal.
Patrick
MSI Executive Member
I don't think we'll win this round; at least not the way we want. I don't think the SAF expects to win big, either. Hence the exceptional deference given in all their cases thusfar to government games (enhanced discovery and the like). The mere fact that someone entertains discovery for a matter of law question is ridiculous.
Nah. These are going up the circuits and then to the big court. If we get a good decision from the 4th and they refuse to stay it pending appeal, we could very well see shall-issue in MD within a year. But don't expect there to be a quick permitting process, even with the "finding" stage gone.
Our legislature won't be in session when the 4h rules (no way given the schedules). But I wouldn't be surprised to see an "emergency session" called to handle the "crisis" and put into place "sensible regulation" to "limit the damage" caused by the ruling. Of course, this assumes MoM wins re-election.
As always, a strong ruling for strict scrutiny from the 9th could throw all this half-assed analysis out the window. Even though the SAF is not pushing a standards-review test (requiring scrutiny to be decided) for this case, it would help. That could really short-circuit a good amount of legal work for other courts.
Of course, that works both ways.
Nah. These are going up the circuits and then to the big court. If we get a good decision from the 4th and they refuse to stay it pending appeal, we could very well see shall-issue in MD within a year. But don't expect there to be a quick permitting process, even with the "finding" stage gone.
Our legislature won't be in session when the 4h rules (no way given the schedules). But I wouldn't be surprised to see an "emergency session" called to handle the "crisis" and put into place "sensible regulation" to "limit the damage" caused by the ruling. Of course, this assumes MoM wins re-election.
As always, a strong ruling for strict scrutiny from the 9th could throw all this half-assed analysis out the window. Even though the SAF is not pushing a standards-review test (requiring scrutiny to be decided) for this case, it would help. That could really short-circuit a good amount of legal work for other courts.
Of course, that works both ways.
ezliving
Besieger
That slapped the happy off my day.
Trapper
I'm a member too.
Hate to quote myself, but anyone have an answer to this?
They could, but won't.
The submission, will be checked, double checked, and triple checked. No one wants to have an "Oh crap, I forgot" moment.
krucam
Ultimate Member
Since they didn't reply on the last day to reply, and only submitted a Motion to Dismiss it seems obvious that they're not going to play fair until they have to. They are stalling right now for uncertain reasons. Maybe, just maybe to actually answer the questions posed in the complaint.
I did a search in their pdf 8-1 (MTD) for the word "fundamental"...nope, not there.
Go look at the recent events in the Ezell v Chicago thread if you want a real good look into how to muddy a case and bury it in motions...
This is what we're up against in these last, stubborn hold out states. We'll have to deal with it.
Trapper
I'm a member too.
I realize why MD is delaying (same as Chicago), but if they are waiting on the plaintiffs for something (SAF), is there a reason that SAF doesn't turn it in until the last day?
Or am I missing something and they're actually waiting on MD again?
Patrick
MSI Executive Member
They can deliver it in 30 minutes or less if they want. Problem is they got to write it.
To answer your larger question: there is generally no reason for the plaintiff to delay something like this. The only theory is that a plaintiff is going to respond with data that they want to make the defendant answer without much time. I cannot imagine that being an issue here, and history says the SAF has been more than gracious by not objecting to extensions in other cases.
The only impatient party here are us.
Patrick
MSI Executive Member
DC lost Heller in 2008. How many people there can get guns at home? In practical terms?
Just sayin'.
Until these guys start facing serious costs from average citizens for their recalcitrance, we're looking at a long road. And my assumption is nothing will matter until after the Supreme Court rules, anyway. Average time for these cases to proceed that far: 2 years. And that is fast by Supreme Court standards.
What is the record length for a thread here at MDS? This one might beat the "WTF?" thread, in time.
But there will be plenty of good things happening between now and then. And I can be completely off here. There are long-running cases in other circuits that could shorten this whole mess considerably.
Just sayin'.
Until these guys start facing serious costs from average citizens for their recalcitrance, we're looking at a long road. And my assumption is nothing will matter until after the Supreme Court rules, anyway. Average time for these cases to proceed that far: 2 years. And that is fast by Supreme Court standards.
What is the record length for a thread here at MDS? This one might beat the "WTF?" thread, in time.
But there will be plenty of good things happening between now and then. And I can be completely off here. There are long-running cases in other circuits that could shorten this whole mess considerably.
- Mar 23, 2008
- 1,394
One reason SAF / Alan Gura might be acting so graciously regarding plaintiffs' (all plaintiffs, not just this one in this suit) stalling tactics is that it gives Alan Gura & team the time they need to work on the rest of their case load. I mean, the reality is that Alan Gura is splitting his time between all these cases he's involved in. My bet is that if the plaintiffs were organized enough they could really screw Gura to the wall by not stalling and instead expediting all these cases at once as fast as possible.
krucam
Ultimate Member
Possible, but SAF and Gura's friends at Cato Inst are likely working these issues as well. There is a common thread in Defendents actions for stalling. MD with the Younger Abstention is a twist, but I don't think it applies in this case and won't go very far. Their argument that Woollard should go to court to remedy his denial is extreme for the exercise of a Fundamental right, plain and simple.
We WILL win this battle (Woollard), it just may not be at the District Court level. We'll have to see as it unfolds, but it is obvious that the anti's are digging in hard.
Keep has been resolved. Keep and Bear are one and the same grammatically speaking...there is no way to separate them. It will be decided properly, it just may not be as soon as we would like.
I'm still going forward with my planned purchase of a pocket gun...
Any advantage to flooding the MD court system with cases of our own?
Trapper
I'm a member too.
May I recommend the Kahr CW45, very nice, very compact, and reasonably priced.
krucam
Ultimate Member
STILL leaning towards a Kahr...PM9 and have been made an offer from someone on the board for one...perhaps not reasonably priced but for me, it looks like the ticket...I need at least a 9mm, the .380's are tempting, but...just sayin'...
Back on topic, this (CCW) is a'coming. Nordyke, Palmer (some year) and Sykes will define the boundaries for all of us, Ezell might surprise us. Perhaps Woollard might beat them out of the gate albeit with a non-satisfactory result at the District level. It's enough to get your panties in a'bundle, but it is the way things will proceed. I hope it doesn't take till 2012 as Patrick suggested, but that is certainly possible right now.
The various Courts at play are apparently afraid to make the call, whether it is rights at the Fundamental nature, whether it is Scrutiny, whether or not another Court has decided ranges are fundamental to a core right...
This is very new and bold, unexplored territory for the Courts. They will be cautious until the 1st domino tips and then it is 'game on'. There is no other rational terminus, it will happen, the verbiage in the Constitution can't be ignored...whether '10, '11 or '12, it IS coming to fruition. We've waited this long, another few months ain't going to kill us now.
I am expecting that once 2A is returned that the anti's ranks will grow, due to fear. This means not going back to the beer and TV. I'm in this for the long haul. It's a right that I mean to maintain.
...and another thank you for all the helpful opinions and discussion.
...and another thank you for all the helpful opinions and discussion.
I'd expect a short rise in the anti activity, but I don't know how long it would last. Look at all the states that now have Shall-Issue. Death and bloodshed was predicted by the antis in every case and it never happened. I think it has become a non-issue in most of those states.
Here's hoping!!
I can live with that...
But, I'm going to be on guard, picking my candidates, writing my letters and so on...
- Status
