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

[esqappellate]

esqappellate,

Thanks for the quick response and more importantly thank you for the inside look at how the court system works.

Most of us are mystified on the inner working of the legal system.

For example I did not know that the court does not sit every day or even every week. Now it makes a little more sense why things take so long.

One more question on that: When you say that they do not sit every day (or week) does that mean they are not sitting hearing orals? Or does that mean they are not at work at all?

I would be surprised to learn that they have a short 20 hour work week.

I would imagine that when they are not sitting hearing orals or voting on a case they are reading briefs, researching precedent, and writing opinions. Meaning that hopefully they are busy all the time and there are just a lot of case to get through and that is why cases take a long time. So I would hope the reason cases take so long is NOT just because they take their sweet time with them.

By sitting, I mean to hear argument. Appellate judges work extremely hard. As you can tell from the description, they must work hard just to get ready for an argument. Most federal appellate courts hear between 4-7 cases a day in argument and will sit for argument for a week at a time, all the while writing opinions in cases already heard from prior weeks in which they were sitting. Some cases are hard, with large records and difficult legal questions, some are easier. Some involve life and death matters or billions of dollars. Or your freedom.

 

[shawn]

By sitting, I mean to hear argument. Appellate judges work extremely hard. As you can tell from the description, they must work hard just to get ready for an argument. Most federal appellate courts hear between 4-7 cases a day in argument and will sit for argument for a week at a time, all the while writing opinions in cases already heard from prior weeks in which they were sitting. Some cases are hard, with large records and difficult legal questions, some are easier. Some involve life and death matters or billions of dollars. Or your freedom.

Awesome.

Thanks for the explanation.

 

[tsmith1499]

By sitting, I mean to hear argument. Appellate judges work extremely hard. As you can tell from the description, they must work hard just to get ready for an argument. Most federal appellate courts hear between 4-7 cases a day in argument and will sit for argument for a week at a time, all the while writing opinions in cases already heard from prior weeks in which they were sitting. Some cases are hard, with large records and difficult legal questions, some are easier. Some involve life and death matters or billions of dollars. Or your freedom.

esqappellate, all I can say is YOU DA MAN!!!

 

[Inigoes]

Anything out on PACER yet?

 

[esqappellate]

The State has made its filing. Here is the main brief. There are attachments (not posted).

 

[hodgepodge]

The State has made its filing. Here is the main brief. There are attachments (not posted).

I'm not a lawyer, but that looks weak.

Harm is harm and they keep citing small groups that may be harmed, without real proof.

 

[jrosenberger]

Is it me, or does this just re-hash the merits arguments for the most part?

Do they really think that Legg won't see through their obvious use of 'killings' by permit holders to imply that murders are committed by permit holders? More justified 'killings' of criminals are exactly how shall issue permits reduce crime!

 

[Inigoes]

They just brought back the long gun argument

 

[Seagrave1963]

uhh wow - so many "reputable', objective sources too.

 

[AC20814]

Maryland law allows the wearing and carrying of handguns without a permit in the home and many other locations, see ECF No. 26 at 6-7, 33-34, and further generally allows the open wearing and carrying of long guns in public, see ECF No. 26 at 7. Thus, staying the injunction pending appeal would neither interfere with a core constitutional right nor prevent citizens from keeping and bearing firearms for self-defense either inside or outside the home.

How absolutely absurd to suggest that citizens can protect themselves by carrying long guns. Unbelievable.

-Alex

 

[BUFF7MM]

It looks to me that if they looked at the constitution we already have a good and substantial reason...... It's called the SECOND AMENDMENT!!!!!!!

 

[Afield]

Is it me, or does this just re-hash the merits arguments for the most part?

Do they really think that Legg won't see through their obvious use of 'killings' by permit holders to imply that murders are committed by permit holders? More justified 'killings' of criminals are exactly how shall issue permits reduce crime!

Wow their whole brief is weak. "all that other stuff, oh, and guns 'r' bad, mmmkay..."

Someone needs to tell them arguments on the merits is over (for now).

The judge is giving them enough rope to....well you know.

 

[MJD438]

Gotta love it - MD will still ask for G&S even during an unstayed injunction period (yes, they go on to say that it would not affect the decision...):

If there is no stay, MSP would attempt to mitigate these potential consequences by asking, during the Interim Period, that applicants who have good and substantial reason voluntarily provide it and cooperate with MSP’s investigation.

 

[dlmcbm]

We need a lawyers take on this. All I read was BLA BLA BLA whine cry and whine some more. LOL

No I like the.... we would have to revoke them all......well unless people that have G&S would tell us anyway BUT we don't think they will do that. Well if they don't do that then its there fault not MSP's when they have it revoked.

 

[MJD438]

More BS:

Individuals who lack good and substantial reason would not be eligible for a permit if the Fourth Circuit reverses. Although MSP expects that many such individuals would comply with its directions and return their permits, MSP anticipates that some will not comply. Id. ¶ 15. Because it would be impractical for MSP to track down and recover all of the permits that would not be returned, a number of permits would remain in circulation that would appear facially valid, but that had been revoked. Id. Police would therefore be significantly hindered in their ability to enforce the law.

How would the police be hindered? Alleged suspect presents a permit, officer calls it in, dispatch advised revoked, alleged suspect earns a set of steel bracelets...this is a HARM? Seriously?

 

[shawn]

ok let me see if I follow one part of their argument

if no stay is granted then the MSP would not know who has g&s and who does not. So when the 4th reverses they would have to revoke all permits issued during the interim.

(so I guess you cant keep a record of who has g&s and who doesnt?)

then they say that people with g&s should voluntarily put down the g&s reason and the MSP will keep a record of it and when the 4th reverses they will only revoke from the people who didn't put down g&s.

then they say that people with job related permits would not be able to get their permits through because of the glut of the applications that would come.

then they say the job related permits would get revoked as well because they wouldn't know who had g&s.

Are they trying to confuse the judge into just saying "screw it. I cant understand this so I will just grant a permanent stay"

 

[Inigoes]

Heck, they even lied in the brief saying the MSP would continue processing applications...

There is evidence otherwise...

 

[shawn]

and big big surprise.


They mentioned the martin/zimmerman thing.

The vast majority of these killings were committed by individuals who obtained a concealed carry permit in a “shall issue” state, including the recent killing of Trayvon Martin by Florida concealed permit holder George Zimmerman.

 

[MJD438]

Notably, as of 2010, Maryland’s level of violent crime was the lowest ever recorded for both overall violent crime and homicide.

Context is important...MD is stressing crime rates as a whole for all SHALL ISSUE states, but focuses on a state-only report to cover their crime statistics to back up this statement. A simple search yielded the following fuel for the fire:

• Per DailyFinance in April 2010, MD was the 8th WORST state for violent crime in a 2010 ranking of all 50 states: http://www.dailyfinance.com/2010/04/05/most-dangerous-states-crime-rankings-for-2010/.
  
• Per Yahoo, in November 2010, MD improved on DailyFinance's ranking by a SINGLE POSITION - 9th WORST in the USA: http://voices.yahoo.com/most-dangerous-states-america-violent-7260628.html.

 

[krucam]

Jethro Tull and "Living in the Past" come to mind. It didn't work for the case and merits, but lets try it in trying to obtain a Stay against the case they lost.

No new ground. Reminder that MSP won't care if you strap an AR on your shoulder and walk by the Capitol in Annapolis or the Inner Harbor (please don't try this), bringing up the "ugliness" of granting permits and then "what do we do" when/if the 4th reverses...oh my!

Here's the updated entries to the docket today:

04/19/2012 67[RECAP] MOTION to Stay re 63[RECAP] Order, 53[RECAP] Order on Motion for Summary Judgment,,,,, 52[RECAP] Memorandum Opinion Under Rule 62(c) (Renewed) by Marcus L. Brown, Denis Gallagher, Seymour Goldstein, Charles M. Thomas, Jr. Responses due by 5/7/2012 (Fader, Matthew) (Entered: 04/19/2012)

04/19/2012 68[RECAP] RESPONSE in Support re 54[RECAP] MOTION to Alter/Amend Judgment as permitted by 53[RECAP] Order on Motion for Summary Judgment,,,,, pursuant to Rule 59(e) MOTION for Other Relief Motion for Clarification pursuant to Rule 59(e) MOTION to Stay re 53[RECAP] Order on Motion for Summary Judgment,,,,, , 67[RECAP] MOTION to Stay re 63[RECAP] Order, 53[RECAP] Order on Motion for Summary Judgment,,,,, 52[RECAP] Memorandum Opinion Under Rule 62(c) (Renewed) filed by Marcus L. Brown, Denis Gallagher, Seymour Goldstein, Charles M. Thomas, Jr.. Replies due by 5/7/2012. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A. Declaration of Marcus L. Brown, # 2 Exhibit B. NRC Report, # 3 Exhibit C. Webster & Ludwig Article, # 4 Exhibit D. Aneja, Donohue, Zhang, # 5 Exhibit E. Luo Article, # 6 Exhibit F. Sun-Sentinel 1/28/07, # 7 Exhibit G. Sun-Sentinel 1/29/07)(Fader, Matthew) (Entered: 04/19/2012)

The "exhibits" that esqapellate didn't want to download (and neither do I) include what appear to be Sun-Sentinel articles from 2007...well before Heller and in my book, obsolete references.

#67 is a renewed request for a Stay. I'm not sure of the rationale for this. #68 is the MD AG's Response.

Links for the two pdf's follow:
67: http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.mdd.180772/gov.uscourts.mdd.180772.67.0.pdf

68: http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.mdd.180772/gov.uscourts.mdd.180772.68.0.pdf

Updated Docket: http://ia600501.us.archive.org/1/items/gov.uscourts.mdd.180772/gov.uscourts.mdd.180772.docket.html

Should be like shooting fish in a barrel come May 9th when Plaintiffs respond. Time to dust off my long guns....kidding, really....