SAF SUES IN MARYLAND OVER HANDGUN PERMIT DENIAL UPDATED 3-5-12

[Dead Eye]

Ummm, I know the District Court is in Baltimore and all...but this seems a bit harsh even for them.

As far as the court case goes, we're pretty down to funding SAF, watching and waiting.

But we are in an election cycle. It'd be good to soften up the statehouse a bit. I'd like to work on devising some efforts but am busy for the next few weeks. Sucks, but true. I'm limited to armchair warrior at the moment.

How about someone else?

I have minimal time to give, but perhaps with the horsepower that exists, a plan could be formulated, and we can collectively take a bite at it, one at a time?

"You can eat an Elephant, one bite at a time" - Chinese saying

 

[krucam]

I have minimal time to give, but perhaps with the horsepower that exists, a plan could be formulated, and we can collectively take a bite at it, one at a time?

"You can eat an Elephant, one bite at a time" - Chinese saying

Kill the seeds at the MD General Assembly NOW. Pre-midterms and pre-session in Jan/Feb. Let these people know we are watching and are not going to take another batch of anti-gun bills...just the opposite, it is time to reverse a handful of bad bills.

- Spent Shell Casing requirement
- Shall Issue (legislatively) to fend off the Judicial suit by SAF & $$ down the drain
- 7 day wait
- 30 day between regulated purchases
- Useless and ineffective ban of magazines > 20 rounds

Now is the time to kill bad bills and support good bills that infringe upon our Fundamental Civil Rights. The GA needs to understand the new world that exists post-McDonald. These bad laws will not withstand Constitutional muster any longer.

 

[Afield]

Two people knocked at my door tonight. One was my state senator, accompanied by one of my Delegates (there are 3). I knew them both already, from my various stuff I've done around town. I live right in the heart of Rockville, the old part. So I have tons of neighbors that are...shall we say...very smart, very sheltered, and very liberal. I think of myself as a libertarian, the older I get and the more jaded I get.
Anyway, I'm a registered independent, but am putting up their yard sign. So I took a little time to bend their ear about Shall Issue here in Maryland, the facts, other states, a little about the lawsuit. The Delegate remembered a bill that was around "last session." I told him it didn't get even voted on in its committee due to a senator named "Frosh." They certainly did some listening.
I basically took the time to say..."nobody's advocating that felons, wife beaters, alcoholics, or the mentally ill get gun permits... but there is a real problem when someone with a clean background is arbitrarily denied by our state system."
My best advice is to meet with these folks one-on-one as often as possible. I did reiterate to them that the legislature could avoid being dictated-to by a lawsuit if they fixed the problem themselves.

So that's what I did today. To quote someone else's thread, what did YOU do?

 

[Patrick]

Two people knocked at my door tonight. One was my state senator, accompanied by one of my Delegates (there are 3). I knew them both already, from my various stuff I've done around town. I live right in the heart of Rockville, the old part. So I have tons of neighbors that are...shall we say...very smart, very sheltered, and very liberal. I think of myself as a libertarian, the older I get and the more jaded I get.
Anyway, I'm a registered independent, but am putting up their yard sign. So I took a little time to bend their ear about Shall Issue here in Maryland, the facts, other states, a little about the lawsuit. The Delegate remembered a bill that was around "last session." I told him it didn't get even voted on in its committee due to a senator named "Frosh." They certainly did some listening.
I basically took the time to say..."nobody's advocating that felons, wife beaters, alcoholics, or the mentally ill get gun permits... but there is a real problem when someone with a clean background is arbitrarily denied by our state system."
My best advice is to meet with these folks one-on-one as often as possible. I did reiterate to them that the legislature could avoid being dictated-to by a lawsuit if they fixed the problem themselves.

So that's what I did today. To quote someone else's thread, what did YOU do?

Awesome.

I'm looking for chances to meet with some pols and politely walk them through why being against 2A is being against Civil Rights at large. How carving an exception for a right they do not like opens the door to carving exceptions to rights they do like.

Look, we are not going to convert these guys. So we need to logically explain to them the danger in weakening the fundamental protections we all have. You scuttle fundamental rights in the name of hurting 2A and you scuttle abortion, gay marriage, equality laws, woman's rights, religious protections, the exclusionary rule, speech...the list goes on. Most of the ones the Left really loves these days are not even recognized as "fundamental" (abortion, gay marriage, etc.).

Argument: if you can take out something the Supreme Court calls "fundamental"...literally it's all on the table.

 

[SkunkWerX]

Kill the seeds at the MD General Assembly NOW. Pre-midterms and pre-session in Jan/Feb. Let these people know we are watching and are not going to take another batch of anti-gun bills...just the opposite, it is time to reverse a handful of bad bills.

- Spent Shell Casing requirement
- Shall Issue (legislatively) to fend off the Judicial suit by SAF & $$ down the drain
- 7 day wait
- 30 day between regulated purchases
- Useless and ineffective ban of magazines > 20 rounds

Now is the time to kill bad bills and support good bills that infringe upon our Fundamental Civil Rights. The GA needs to understand the new world that exists post-McDonald. These bad laws will not withstand Constitutional muster any longer.

Krucam, all excellent points, and most dovetail nicely into MD State budgetary issues.
Meaning, most of the items you listed cost MD taxpayers money to administer.
If these laws were rectified legislatively they could show an overall savings due to reduction in the bureaucracy caused by:
having to store and database spent shell casings, provide "not disapproved" notifications back to FLLs, etc. etc.

To BenL's point and Patrick's follow-up: BenL, I am with you philosophically about needing a permit to exercise a Right, but that would probably be a fight for another day.
I don't think any of us would balk at a reasonable, affordable, and expedient permitting process, especially if it helped ensure felons and losers were screened out of the carrying pool.
Making Right to Carry (Bear Arms) A fundamental, individual right could very well put it in the hands of the FEDs. A NICS check, a finger print card, Fee paid and a National Carry card issued.

Federalize it all? Perhaps that is the ultimate answer if some states don't want to "play nice"? It's the States game to lose.
They can ease up via their legislatures, thus avoiding being trampled on by the FEDs,
or they can fight it to the end (which CA, NY, MA, MD, and NJ might do?) and end up being told , via the SC,
their ability to regulate possession and carry of firearms is being taken away via SC ruling.

They (The states) have got to be weighing all of this with much scrutiny.

.

 

[Tom43491]

Any news on any event, like an open holster rally, being planned for the Baltimore area? I financially support the SAF, MSI, and the NRA and NRA-ILA, and I take whatever opportunity I can to write letters to my reps and comments to news articles, and the occasional facebook post and the like in an attempt to get people's minds working, but I have been dying to get more involved and finally meet some of you guys.

I got involved in the fight just this year, which also got me interested in local and national politics. As a result, I have become much more informed and involved, and much more vocal, and encourage everyone I know to do the same. I owe a lot of that to quite a few of you guys here.

A lot of you guys are incredible, I'm glad to support the effort alongside people as dedicated as you, even if my contributions (for now) pale in comparison.

 

[Spot77]

Things to do while the case advances:

1.Volunteer for a pro gun candidate's campaign. Thye need help placing signs, going door to door and a whole bunch of other things.

2. Surf the net. Seriously, search out online articles regarding the case, or simply gun rights in general. Most online articles allow viewer comments and discussion. Post smart comments. Post links here to articles where "our" side is losing to the screeching of the ignorant.

3. Email, email, email! Ask pointed questions of every candidate in your area. Let them know that this is what you'll be basing your voting decision on. Send emails to friends that agree with the cause, but might not be active about it.

4. Write LTE's (Letters to the Editor) to get posted on the opinions pages of the print editions of local papers.

5. If you haven't done it yet, join MSI, SAF or even the NRA. This case, and others will take truckloads of money. We did well by sending them $10k through MSI and a whole bunch more through the forums via membership fees, but if we could send them another $10k in a few weeks....well that wil certainly help.

 

[Boxcab]

I am with you philosophically about needing a permit to exercise a Right, but that would probably be a fight for another day.
I don't think any of us would balk at a reasonable, affordable, and expedient permitting process, especially if it helped ensure felons and losers were screened out of the carrying pool.

You make a dangerous assumption that evil doers would bother to go through “a reasonable, affordable, and expedient permitting process” in order to be weeded out. They do not now and they will not later. So the only result of such a requirement would be to force the majority (law abiding citizens) to go through an ineffective process in order to make someone feel like they are “doing something”. The current Maryland laws are based on the very same premise and evil doers just ignore them.

Yes, I would baulk at such a misguided requirement.

 

[Tom43491]

You make a dangerous assumption that evil doers would bother to go through “a reasonable, affordable, and expedient permitting process” in order to be weeded out. They do not now and they will not later. So the only result of such a requirement would be to force the majority (law abiding citizens) to go through an ineffective process in order to make someone feel like they are “doing something”. The current Maryland laws are based on the very same premise and evil doers just ignore them.

Yes, I would baulk at such a misguided requirement.

I agree completely, although I would certainly deal with a permit requirement *for now* if it meant that my right to self defense and the defense of those I love was not being legislated away from me anymore.

 

[gamer_jim]

What if instead of a "permit" we had like the MD firearms safety video you have to watch before purchasing a regulated firearm in MD? The video would include and overview of the laws (including where you could and couldn't carry), how to interact with LEO, and what to do right after a self defense situation. Maybe even include how to reduce threat, deterrence, avoidance, etc.

 

[ezliving]

Note: A.G. Gansler's response to the lawsuit is due next week.

 

[ezliving]

This case, and others will take truckloads of money.

We should be emphasizing that scarce tax dollars from honest law-abiding Maryland citizens are being used to defend a clearly unconstitutional CCW permitting scheme.

DC owes millions of dollars to Alan Gura for their Heller loss (our federal tax dollars) and Chicago taxpayers will owe him millions for McDonald.

It's an election year and candidates need to know that we don't like our taxes used to defend unconstitutional gun laws.

So lawmakers must stop passing unconstitutional laws and, when they do, the Governor must veto them.

 

[Squaredout]

We should be emphasizing that scarce tax dollars from honest law-abiding Maryland citizens are being used to defend a clearly unconstitutional CCW permitting scheme.

DC owes millions of dollars to Alan Gura for their Heller loss (our federal tax dollars) and Chicago taxpayers will owe him millions for McDonald.

It's an election year and candidates need to know that we don't like our taxes used to defend unconstitutional gun laws.

So lawmakers must stop passing unconstitutional laws and, when they do, the Governor must veto them.

+1

 

[krucam]

We should be emphasizing that scarce tax dollars from honest law-abiding Maryland citizens are being used to defend a clearly unconstitutional CCW permitting scheme.

DC owes millions of dollars to Alan Gura for their Heller loss (our federal tax dollars) and Chicago taxpayers will owe him millions for McDonald.

It's an election year and candidates need to know that we don't like our taxes used to defend unconstitutional gun laws.

So lawmakers must stop passing unconstitutional laws and, when they do, the Governor must veto them.

As in all Civil Rights suits, Costs of suit, including attorney fees and costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988, to be paid if the case is lost.

42 U.S.C. § 1988 Link: Proceedings in Vindication of Civil Rights

 

[Dead Eye]

We should be emphasizing that scarce tax dollars from honest law-abiding Maryland citizens are being used to defend a clearly unconstitutional CCW permitting scheme.

DC owes millions of dollars to Alan Gura for their Heller loss (our federal tax dollars) and Chicago taxpayers will owe him millions for McDonald.

It's an election year and candidates need to know that we don't like our taxes used to defend unconstitutional gun laws.

So lawmakers must stop passing unconstitutional laws and, when they do, the Governor must veto them.

AMEN!

 

[Gray Peterson]

Folks,

The confusion over "concealed carry" is making it where folks are thinking that this case can be easily defeated in that it only seeks concealed carry. Maryland's permit system is a "Permit to Wear a handgun", not Permit to Carry a concealed handgun.

Use Permit to Carry instead. It just flows better, and is actually correct legally.

 

[Patrick]

Folks,

The confusion over "concealed carry" is making it where folks are thinking that this case can be easily defeated in that it only seeks concealed carry. Maryland's permit system is a "Permit to Wear a handgun", not Permit to Carry a concealed handgun.

Use Permit to Carry instead. It just flows better, and is actually correct legally.

Good point. I think we're using concealed carry because that is the actual practice they currently quasi-require (according to those who know)...and for the rest of us, it is easy to type "CCW".

I don't think anyone here yet uses "PWH". I'll start. We'll see if it catches on with the drunks, rabble-rousers, rednecks and general class of misfit on this here forum. We can be a bit slow.

 

[Patrick]

You make a dangerous assumption that evil doers would bother to go through “a reasonable, affordable, and expedient permitting process” in order to be weeded out. They do not now and they will not later. So the only result of such a requirement would be to force the majority (law abiding citizens) to go through an ineffective process in order to make someone feel like they are “doing something”. The current Maryland laws are based on the very same premise and evil doers just ignore them.

Yes, I would baulk at such a misguided requirement.

Completely agree with you, though I think two things: Amerika is not quite ready for true Constitutional Carry (but eff em); and requiring a permit to carry is almost surely going to be held as Constitutional as long as it respects the core of 2A (oops, eff us).

 

[Hyper-W]

I don't think anyone here yet uses "PWH". I'll start. We'll see if it catches on with the drunks, rabble-rousers, rednecks and general class of misfit on this here forum. We can be a bit slow.

Hey! I resemble that!

 

[Oreo]

How about (C)arry (P)ermit? As in I'd like to have a Maryland CP.