Gun Transport for MD residents

[oupa]

...I drive from my home to West Virginia... I drive back over the border into MD and a cop stops me for some reason and checks my trunk. He sees my properly stored firearm and asks me why I am transporting it...

Okay, this is the only pertinent part of your post. I'm not going to get into why he'd ask to check your trunk or why you'd let him. Nuther argument completely.

You have the gun/ammo properly stored for transport (in MD.). No problem.

Question; Why did you take it to buy a Pepsi? Did you stop on the WV side and strap it on? Have you ever gone to the range, then decided not to shoot? Just because you didn't (need to) shoot it while in WV doesn't impact you're having transported it for the purpose of shooting (if needed).

If you never took the gun out of the trunk and lockbox while in WV, why did you even take it?

Few cops would ask unless there was some other indication to be suspicious over. Fewer yet, seeing the properly transported conditions, would care where or why you took it.

You're overthinking this way to much.

 

[Pinecone]

You may deny it but in my mind this is still BGOS. While I agree that there is certainly the potential for a DC to not be bona fide I don't think that is the case with most of the guys I know on this forum. Most have large collections and are clearly bona fide in my book. The comment about IANAL is crazy. There is no way someone would prevail in an action brought for following advice gathered from an anonymous internet forum. That's ridiculous.

I too deal with legal language, laws, and contracts all day every day for a living. The omissions are just as important as the language that is present. I agree the DC letter is not in and of itself a free transport pass but it certainly lends additional support to anyone who is an actual collector transporting any part of their collection for private or public display.

Again I know of no one whom I have personally met from this forum who isn't a true collector so the FAQ's matter not to those folks.

If you are really a collector (bona fide), then you DON'T NEED THE DC LETTER ANYWAY.

Would a DC be part of your defense? Absolutely. Would a good prosecutor be able to get around that? Very likely.

 

[redeemed.man]

If you are really a collector (bona fide), then you DON'T NEED THE DC LETTER ANYWAY.

Would a DC be part of your defense? Absolutely. Would a good prosecutor be able to get around that? Very likely.

Need and useful are two different things. A prosecutor would fail miserably at convicting someone for illegal transport if they had a DC letter as part of the defense. Ever heard of reasonable doubt, jury of your peers, and all that? Seriously you are beating this drum into the ground. BGOS completely in my opinion.

Very respectfully,
BD

 

[RoadDawg]

No.

It simply allows you to buy more than one regulated firearm every 30 days.

Too many people reading too much into the DE.

And yes, it has NOT been tested in court. But a number of you seem to be willing to be that test case. And I applaud you for that. And anxiously await being proven wrong.

And not battered. Cautious. Especially when it comes to me freedom and future rights.

Knows and states it has not been tested in court...

Renders opinion as if an expert in the matter...

Sorry, your opinion is not any more legal than anyone else's. And I disagree with you.

Also, your assertion that any one of us can be sued for advice on the Internet... is down right hilarious.

#goodluckwiddatkay?

 

[vgplayer]

It's sad knowing that good citizens have to spend time debating what ultimately shouldn't be a problem in a free society.

 

[redeemed.man]

It's sad knowing that good citizens have to spend time debating what ultimately shouldn't be a problem in a free society.

This sir is an excellent point.

 

[CypherPunk]

Officer: "Are there any firearms in your vehicle"
Citizen: "There is nothing illegal in my car.

FIFY

 

[Minuteman]

No.

It simply allows you to buy more than one regulated firearm every 30 days.

Too many people reading too much into the DE.

And yes, it has NOT been tested in court. But a number of you seem to be willing to be that test case. And I applaud you for that. And anxiously await being proven wrong.

And not battered. Cautious. Especially when it comes to me freedom and future rights.

Nope we don't.

But that first person may end up in prison and without 2A rights.

And even if they do not, they will end up with some seriously large legal bills.

I deal with laws, regulations, and compliance all the time. And WORDS DO MATTER. Even HOW the word is used, which is not always the way it is used in common usage.

Read a legal document, there is a REASON they are worded the way they are.

But please, be that test case.

Or, personally, if I took your guys advice, and got in trouble with the law, I would be suing YOU for your advice. Putting IANAL in your post does not indemnify you.

Oh, BTW, from MSP FAQ page:

Thank you sir for the explaination. I believe this is perhaps the last and only topic we still disagree on.

I look forward to attending future training and social events with you. Thanks again, and that German place has reopened, let's do that again and invite more MDShooters.

Much respect.

 

[Pinecone]

Need and useful are two different things. A prosecutor would fail miserably at convicting someone for illegal transport if they had a DC letter as part of the defense. Ever heard of reasonable doubt, jury of your peers, and all that? Seriously you are beating this drum into the ground. BGOS completely in my opinion.

Very respectfully,
BD

Are you paying the legal bills?

Winning in court is still losing.

 

[Pinecone]

Knows and states it has not been tested in court...

Renders opinion as if an expert in the matter...

Sorry, your opinion is not any more legal than anyone else's. And I disagree with you.

Also, your assertion that any one of us can be sued for advice on the Internet... is down right hilarious.

#goodluckwiddatkay?

1) Yes, it is my opinion and it put out there for others to hear, consider, and decide on their own. And it each person's decision.

2) You can be sued for ANYTHING. It may be thrown out, but you will have had to pay a lawyer to represent you to get it thrown out.

 

[Pinecone]

It's sad knowing that good citizens have to spend time debating what ultimately shouldn't be a problem in a free society.

Yes.

 

[Pinecone]

Yeah, Blob's Park is not Bavarian Restaurant on Route 100. The old location of Gunning's Crab House.

When??????

I am in German food withdrawal. I was in Berlin over New Year's. LOTS of brats.

 

[Pinecone]

Also, everyone thinks I am trying to change their minds.

Nope I am just making sure the other side of the story is out for the many people who read and do not post in these threads.

They need to hear the other side, to make an informed decision.

 

[redeemed.man]

Are you paying the legal bills?

Winning in court is still losing.

Redundant, I have answered it for you in the past, NO. Your voice is not coming across as a voice of reason but rather the voice of BGOS.

 

[redeemed.man]

1) Yes, it is my opinion and it put out there for others to hear, consider, and decide on their own. And it each person's decision.

2) You can be sued for ANYTHING. It may be thrown out, but you will have had to pay a lawyer to represent you to get it thrown out.

So I guess you can be sued for your constant scare tactics which serve to prevent everyone who listens to you from having a gun anywhere near them even when legally allowed to do so.

 

[redeemed.man]

Also, everyone thinks I am trying to change their minds.

Nope I am just making sure the other side of the story is out for the many people who read and do not post in these threads.

They need to hear the other side, to make an informed decision.

If that were true you wouldn't keep asking anyone with a differing opinion whether they are going to pick up a strangers legal tab.

BGOS - it's a real illness.

 

[Mark75H]

I agree with Pinecone's assessment of the legal definition of "bona fide" in this case ... it is not defined in MD law by enactment, codification, or legal precedent; only by logic.

Its well known that law and logic do not intersect in MD.

 

[redeemed.man]

I agree with Pinecone's assessment of the legal definition of "bona fide" in this case ... it is not defined in MD law by enactment, codification, or legal precedent; only by logic.

Its well known that law and logic do not intersect in MD.

No one is arguing that someone with a DC letter may not be a bona fide collector. Someone with a DC letter who truly is a collector (most of us) has an excellent piece of supporting documentation for a traffic stop that would lead even the most aggressive officer to rethink an arrest. That I know of no one is advocating breaking the law. Quite simply the more evidence you can provide that you are law abiding the better. Just like the guys who ride around with AG opinions in their gun cases when transporting long guns. Nothing wrong with it. It may be overkill but it could be helpful in avoiding an arrest and it would surely be helpful in avoiding a conviction.

 

[Mark75H]

I carry copies of those documents for that reason, but I'm not going to argue with a cop on the side of the road.

 

[redeemed.man]

I carry copies of those documents for that reason, but I'm not going to argue with a cop on the side of the road.

Not suggesting an argument. It is simply supporting documentation that could and should keep you from being wrongfully arrested.