I was trying to make a federal case about it!
Montgomery County Bill 21-22
- Thread starter DC-W
- Start date
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:
jmcgonig
Active Member
I would have no issues delaying my rights to get Andy his trial, but there really isn't a relationship. My issue is that the default is f**k the public. It should be inverted... If there is even a chance that a new law is hitting at the rights of people, it should be immediately suspended and let the state have the burden to prove that it should be implemented immediately.
The above describes the "precautionary principle". If there's a modest or high probability that harm will come from an action, the action should be regulated or not permitted to avoid the harm.
The lefties apply this principle subjectively. It's applied when regulating businesses as related to environmental impact; and it's applied in social and economic policy development on topics like education, economic development, etc. It's also applied to civil rights policy related to things like free speech, elections, assembly, etc. But it's not applied by the lefties where second amendment civil rights are concerned. Many on the left spurn the precautionary principle when considering right to self defense. Those rights are perfectly fine to interest balance out of existence.
Because the left is subjective and hypocritical in applying the precautionary principle it makes many of their precautionary principle based arguments weak because they don't consistently apply the principle.
Andy wasn't charged with the law in question. His situation isn't a cut and dry self defense case so it can't be compared. Shooting at a retreating person or car will get you in hot water in most states.
ANYWAYS. For all you worry warts who are concerned about CCW safe covering you.
I called twice on this topic to get 2 different people. If you are not charged or ticketed with said law they will represent you.
If you are charged with it(unlikely) there is a possibility they will represent you after it is reviewed by their claims council because they do represent their clients in criminal court as well(dont forget that). Both of them said if it is a clear act of self defense they will defend you.
Take that for what you will. We have yet to see anyone charged with this including a known white male gun store owning conservative.
So they'll cover the clear acts of self defense (simpler, cheaper cases), whereas in cases that are not so clear cut, and a vigorous defense (more difficult and costly cases) is needed most, they may refulse to assist. Go figure.
pcfixer
Ultimate Member
QuotedThis was posted
71
Maryland Shall Issue, Inc. v. Montgomery County, Maryland, 8:21-cv-01736 - CourtListener.com
Docket for Maryland Shall Issue, Inc. v. Montgomery County, Maryland, 8:21-cv-01736 — Brought to you by Free Law Project, a non-profit dedicated to creating high quality open legal information.www.courtlistener.com
Feb 6, 2023
Motion Hearing held on 2/6/2023 before Judge Theodore D. Chuang re 57 MOTION to Remand to State Court Renewed Motion to Remand Counts I, II, and III and Stay Counts IV Through VIII filed by Montgomery County, Maryland, and 54 Corrected MOTION for Preliminary Injunction Corrected Supporting Memorandum filed by Andrew Raymond, I.C.E. Firearms & Defensive Training, LLC, Joshua Edgar, Carlos Rabanales, Deryck Weaver, Nancy David, Brandon Ferrell, Maryland Shall Issue, Inc., Engage Armament LLC, Eliyahu Shemony, Ronald David.(Court Reporter: Patricia Klepp\2B)
yes, Now 13 Feb 2023. Prayer for relief-soon
CONCLUSION
A TRO and a preliminary injunction should be granted without delay.
Blacksmith101
Grumpy Old Man
- Jun 22, 2012
- 22,314
I don't have Pacer does this mean what I think it means, that the TRO and PI are granted?
And, if so, to what extent? All of the law, or just partial?
Nah i didnt get that impression. It was more so them reassuring me that if it's self defense you will be covered. They have taken conflicting cases, they offer up to 1 mil in bond and 500k standard not to mention criminal case coverage.
1 million is now standard. Upgrade was sent via email several days ago
MSI has said nothing about a decision
Atomevolution
Member
- Mar 29, 2014
- 90
Actually?! This is awesome news!
coinboy
Yeah, Sweet Lemonade.
Police investigate triple shooting in Montgomery Co.
Officials say that three victims suffered gunshot wounds.
www.wusa9.com
This happened literally outside of the MoCo Parks and Permitting departments. Well within 100 yards. Clearly no one told the shooter that it's a gun-free zone.
you should follow the case to see if he'll be charged with it. DoubtfulPolice investigate triple shooting in Montgomery Co.
Officials say that three victims suffered gunshot wounds.
This happened literally outside of the MoCo Parks and Permitting departments. Well within 100 yards. Clearly no one told the shooter that it's a gun-free zone.
View attachment 401485
If things like this do not bring a charge, would that help prove the capricious and arbitrary nature of the law if they actually were to bring charges against an otherwise law-abiding W&C permit holder? I would think that a good lawyer could make some hay out of that.
pcfixer
Ultimate Member
Please allow me to help and guide you my friend.
Response – #70 in Maryland Shall Issue, Inc. v. Montgomery County, Maryland (D. Maryland, 8:21-cv-01736) – CourtListener.com
RESPONSE re 66 Response filed by Nancy David, Ronald David, Joshua Edgar, Engage Armament LLC, Everytown for Gun Safety, Brandon Ferrell, I.C.E. Firearms & Defensive Training, LLC, Maryland Shall Issue, Inc., Carlos Rabanales, Andrew Raymond, Eliyahu Shemony, Deryck Weaver. (Attachments: # 1...
Document 70 Filed 02/02/23 Page 14 of 14
pcfixer
Ultimate Member
All: This doe NAIL the argument. Period.
Quoted in Response #70.
Second, plaintiffs need not show that the Second Amendment applies to “specific, enumerated areas.” The right recognized in Bruen is that “the Second Amendment guarantees a general right to public carry,” 142 S.Ct. at 2135, and that there is a “general right to publicly carry arms for self-defense.” Bruen, 142 S.Ct. at 2134.
A “general right” to carry in public cannot be reasonably limited to particular places, as Everytown would have it. Bruen explains that the “‘textual elements’ of the Second Amendment’s operative clause— ‘the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed’— ‘guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.’” 142 S.Ct. at 2134,
quoting District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 592 (2008). The right to bear arms thus “naturally encompasses public carry” because confrontation “can surely take place outside the home.” Id. The text of the Second Amendment is thus informed by the right of self-defense. Not even Everytown disputes that Bruen recognizes that the right of self-defense extends outside the home
Quoted in Response #70.
Second, plaintiffs need not show that the Second Amendment applies to “specific, enumerated areas.” The right recognized in Bruen is that “the Second Amendment guarantees a general right to public carry,” 142 S.Ct. at 2135, and that there is a “general right to publicly carry arms for self-defense.” Bruen, 142 S.Ct. at 2134.
A “general right” to carry in public cannot be reasonably limited to particular places, as Everytown would have it. Bruen explains that the “‘textual elements’ of the Second Amendment’s operative clause— ‘the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed’— ‘guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.’” 142 S.Ct. at 2134,
quoting District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 592 (2008). The right to bear arms thus “naturally encompasses public carry” because confrontation “can surely take place outside the home.” Id. The text of the Second Amendment is thus informed by the right of self-defense. Not even Everytown disputes that Bruen recognizes that the right of self-defense extends outside the home
Me too.
Users who are viewing this thread
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
-
Ruger America in .308.....Tight Chamber?.....Not a Gen II Rifle.- Started by Coehorn
- Replies: 7
-
-
-
-
-