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!
  • Status
    Not open for further replies.

    Mr H

    Banana'd
    Counter sue them for malicious lawsuit, which it is. They will lose.

    Are you buying???

    Seriously... I doubt that's a bill any of us are willing to pay, when the solution is simple enough.

    I agree that proper attribution should be sufficient protection, but the tactics of the "shyster attorneys" seems to be to beat folks down and drag every last cent out of them.

    IMO, it's a fool's game to whiz into this particular wind.
     

    smokey

    2A TEACHER
    Jan 31, 2008
    31,412
    so whats the deal? this thing got delayed again to 3/22? will be nice when it finally gets underway.
     

    kohburn

    Resident MacGyver
    MDS Supporter
    Aug 15, 2008
    6,796
    PAX NAS / CP MCAS
    Are you buying???

    Seriously... I doubt that's a bill any of us are willing to pay, when the solution is simple enough.

    I agree that proper attribution should be sufficient protection, but the tactics of the "shyster attorneys" seems to be to beat folks down and drag every last cent out of them.

    IMO, it's a fool's game to whiz into this particular wind.

    easy for them to do when they are using other peoples money
     

    Patrick

    MSI Executive Member
    Apr 26, 2009
    7,725
    Calvert County
    so whats the deal? this thing got delayed again to 3/22? will be nice when it finally gets underway.

    But this time Maryland agreed to two important things: an end date that includes a cross-filed Motion for Summary Judgment. That means the state has agreed to stop playing games, and agrees that this matter is one of interpretation of law. There will be no discovery, no witnesses and no "trial". Orals arguments are going to happen, the final words will be written and the whole thing should end up in the judge's hands by the first week of May.

    It could still slip a few weeks. Another decision from another court could result in a new angle that either side thinks is worth a bit more analysis. Either side could ask for two more weeks (or so) in such a case and easily get it.

    Either way, we have a rough idea of when this thing ends now: first week of May plus (maybe) 90 days. So we would be looking at a response from the judge in August.

    Nothing says he needs to do it in 90 days, but that is the unofficial time some courts try to maintain. A big constitutional question like this could go shorter or longer. This one is a Senior Judge; I doubt he will split hairs on the decision. The read will be illuminating.

    Gura and Hansel asked the right question the right way. There will be no "close", this will fall one way or the other. No compromise. We win or we lose.

    Handicapping these things is silly - which is why the Internet exists. In honor of our lack of prestige, I will say that if Maryland sticks with their current affirmative defense, I handicap it 80% in our favor. But I highly doubt this will be the case. They gotta have better than their current approach. Hell, I could do better over a weekend cribbing arguments from other defendants in other states. It'd hardly be a match for Gura, but it'd be better than what MD has offered thusfar.

    So the final handicap is going to wait for Maryland's true response. I predict a modified Two-Step with a strong emphasis on public safety/compelling interest arguments to overcome Chester and a general trend towards viewing RKBA as fundamentally bound.

    The fight nationwide is moving to the edges: what constitutes a "reasonable regulation"?
     

    Patrick

    MSI Executive Member
    Apr 26, 2009
    7,725
    Calvert County
    Usually open. Richards v Prieto in California (another carry/'good cause' case from Alan Gura and company) has orals tomorrow in San Fransisco and they are open to the public. But these are usually smallish courtrooms and no recording devices are allowed. So standing room only.

    I, myself, would like to go.
     

    fightinbluhen51

    "Quack Pot Call Honker"
    Oct 31, 2008
    8,974
    Are the Oral arguments open to the public or closed door. I can this being an entertaining session.
    You beat me to the question...

    It'd be nice to get to see this in person. Nicer still if court proceedings were recorded and then YouTubed (but obviously some cases would need to be redacted for witness protection).
     

    krucam

    Ultimate Member
    Are the Oral arguments open to the public or closed door. I can this being an entertaining session.

    Usually open. Richards v Prieto in California (another carry/'good cause' case from Alan Gura and company) has orals tomorrow in San Fransisco and they are open to the public. But these are usually smallish courtrooms and no recording devices are allowed. So standing room only.

    I, myself, would like to go.

    You beat me to the question...

    It'd be nice to get to see this in person. Nicer still if court proceedings were recorded and then YouTubed (but obviously some cases would need to be redacted for witness protection).

    There aren't any Oral Arguments scheduled in Woollard. :innocent0

    At least according to the Scheduling Order: http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.mdd.180772/gov.uscourts.mdd.180772.23.0.pdf
     

    Patrick

    MSI Executive Member
    Apr 26, 2009
    7,725
    Calvert County
    Not yet. But I am looking forward to the fact there will be oral arguments. They wouldn't be listed until they have an agreeable date.

    If there were no orals, I would be really surprised.
     

    krucam

    Ultimate Member
    Not yet. But I am looking forward to the fact there will be oral arguments. They wouldn't be listed until they have an agreeable date.

    If there were no orals, I would be really surprised.

    With dueling MSJ's, the Judge could grant one, deny the other and it's over. We'll really know more I guess once we see what Gansler does he answers the complaint for real...

    I'm sure they're busy copy/pasting from a handful of other Defendant briefs from across the country as I type....as you said, we could almost write one of these now.
     

    Patrick

    MSI Executive Member
    Apr 26, 2009
    7,725
    Calvert County
    Dueling MSJs would be fine with me. It'd speed things up.

    I imagine the staff in Gansler's office are getting carpel tunnel mouse finger by now, copying all that text. As an added service, they can contract me out and I will draft the argument for them. I will honestly do my absolute best (as I do with all my clients), because I think the best argument I could come up with would still be an ultimate loser.
     

    krucam

    Ultimate Member
    Had to double-check myself...we are indeed looking at "Dueling MSJ's". From #23:
    a. The plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment- filed February 18, 2011;
    b. The defendants’ opposition to the plaintiffs’ motion for summary
    judgment and cross-motion for summary judgment- to be filed on or
    before March 22, 2011;
    c. The plaintiffs’ reply in support of their motion for summary judgment
    and response in opposition to the defendants’ cross-motion for summary
    judgment- to be filed on or before April 15, 2011; and
    d. The defendants’ reply in support of their cross-motion for summary
    judgment- to be filed on or before May 2, 2011.
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,927
    Messages
    7,259,345
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom