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

[E.Shell]

Yes but the Pittman-Robertson act is a good tax...

Good/Bad/Indifferent/Not The Point - it's a federal tax on a civil right, right?

 

[fa18hooker]

An interesting discussion of the most recent motion to dismiss:

http://onlygunsandmoney.blogspot.com/2010/12/woollard-v-sheridan-mixed-ruling-on.html

 

[Norton]

An interesting discussion of the most recent motion to dismiss:

http://onlygunsandmoney.blogspot.com/2010/12/woollard-v-sheridan-mixed-ruling-on.html

nice that he links back to here as a reference source.

 

[boricuamaximus]

Good/Bad/Indifferent/Not The Point - it's a federal tax on a civil right, right?

It is a Federal Tax but I would not call it on.

Technically, you're right 100% that we're paying a tax for a fundamental right depending on what angle you're looking at it from but I look at it like a road tax.

It's a one time fee, per item and it's being used to benefit us directly. What other taxes that are levied upon us in this matter (we choose to buy a firearm) can we say it goes directly to fund gun nut playgrounds?

Personally, I think the Nat Park service is doing a good job in comparison to other agencies. Lots of room to improve but we can see where our money is going.

We as gun owners do more for the environment that the fringe eco idiots that run around with a "I Love Pandora" or "Leave only footprints" T-Shirts and we're demonized by them for the most part.

When we look at it even our freedom of speech is taxed.
We pay taxes for the service of getting internet.
We pay taxes to send a letter to our reps.
To get to anywhere to do a stump speech we will have to pay a transportation tax of some sort.

I know what you're saying and I agree and it's sad that we have a tax included to practice a right. What I say is that this is a tax that is damn good and we have seen positive effects from it. It's not taken out of our paycheck, only when we purchase toys or food for our toys.

When I think about it, maybe it's not on a civil right. We elect to purchase a weapon. No one forces us to. It's not a re-ocurring tax on the same item like a car (I know car is a bad example). It's just added to an item that we purchase. We can make our own home made bow and even firearm if we wish and not have to pay taxes on them.

 

[Boxcab]

Sorry Boricuamaximus, I do not agree.

I consider it "Fuddish" (New word!) for one to think that every gun purchase is only used in the National Parks and lands supported by this tax or that I am not also being taxed in other ways to fund these very same Parks and lands.

Do not try to justify it because the guns will be used to "hunt" in these supported areas. 90+% of my ammo is shot on private lands or ranges. You will probaly find that is true for the majority of the gun owners.

-Boxcab

 

[boricuamaximus]

True but as the law is written at least it's not going to fund some Section 8 housing somewhere. Not saying that we have to agree with the law but the application of this law benefits us someway or another.

I know is bad form to support any kind of tax in this day and age but this one should be supported. Or just because the National Park service is not in the Constitution we should make a move to defund it?
Works great for Haiti.

 

[Boxcab]

Thank you for not taking my "fuddish" comment personally.

You write as if there is only one funding method for the Parks. Why should gun owners be forced fund the parks more than anyone else? This is a bad law that penalizes a select set of people who wish to exercise their 2nd Amendment right. If the tax was on cars and gasoline it would make more sense. As it stands the Courts should invalidate the tax and gun owners should demand a refund.

Back to the real topic of this thread…

 

[ezliving]

Legislators try to tax everything that moves, everything that is nailed down, and now (with Obamacare) taxing The People if they do nothing at all. They can justify and rationalize taxing anything and everything. They call it by many names: license fees, permit fees, user fees, tolls, lottery, slots and "taxes" of every description.

In the case of the tax on guns and ammo, I think they stepped on the Constitution with a tax on a fundamental civil right. It doesn't matter that some approve of how the taxes are spent; that is always the case. I believe that guns and ammo tax is unconstitutional and would be declared so if the question was asked of the SCOTUS.

(A lawfully passed law / tax is presumed lawful until the courts say it isn't.)

 

[Norton]

guys, we're wandering off of the reservation pretty far here.

Let's confine discussion to the topic of the thread.

 

[ChannelCat]

Good/Bad/Indifferent/Not The Point - it's a federal tax on a civil right, right?

I thought Pittman-Robertson was a tax on both fishing and hunting gear to be put back into the land, but I digress...

guys, we're wandering off of the reservation pretty far here.

Let's confine discussion to the topic of the thread.

...I just sent in my "suggested" 40 buck donation/membership to SAF, and its money well spent... ...and tax deductible to boot! What's not to like!!

 

[krucam]

Additional thoughts on the US v. Chester opinion (4th Ckt) and the potential impact on Woollard.

I was wondering which thread to post into (Chester or Woollard), but figured we'd gotten so far off the beaten path here that resucitation was needed....thanks Norton for the reminder.

Please stay on topic when in any thread, don't "feed" off-topic posts.

The Brady's, LCAV and others have typically picked & chose verbiage in Heller/McDonald to support their arguments as necessary, even though what they've picked is innuendo and not taken in context with the surrounding paragraphs or sentances. We all know that.
Here is LCAV's post-Heller Litigation Summary.

One of their favorites from Heller was the following:

The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

The anti's have gotten a lot of mileage out of that paragraph. Now...take the following from Chief Judge Traxler from the 4th Ckt in US v. Chester:

Under intermediate scrutiny, the government need not establish a close fit between the statute’s means and its end, but it must at least establish a reasonable fit. The government has done almost nothing to discharge this burden. Instead, it has premised its argument almost entirely on Heller’s reference to the presumptive validity of felon-dispossession laws and reasoned by analogy that § 922(g)(9) therefore passes constitutional muster. That’s not enough.

Chief Judge Traxler is reading Heller more strictly than it was delivered from the Supreme Court. There is plenty more goodness in the US v Chester opinion if you haven't read it.

So...I'm assuming Mr's Hansel & Gura are readying their Amended Complaint having read this opinion from our 4th Ckt. We'll know by Jan 21st when it is due.

Surely, AG Gansler and Defendants have been made aware of the opinion from the Circuit. District Judge Motz has likely heard of the Chester opinion AND, he will be receiving "guidance on the framework for deciding Second Amendment challenges.", courtesy of Chief Judge Traxler.

I am now just guessing, but the Defendants will likely be given a chance to respond to the amended complaint, especially since their original response to the original complaint was a MTD which was dispatched last week. Let's SWAG and say the Defendant response to Plaintiff Amended Complaint is due March 21 (being generous and giving them 2 months). Unless they come up with something clever and procedural again, they will have to address the complaint. This is going to be even harder as Patrick mentioned with Chester in the mix...their stalling has hurt them with this one. I would expect a very weak and unconvincing response.

Fast forward a month to April 21, where I think SAF/Hansel/Gura can write up their coup de grace, fully implementing arguments utilizing Chester dicta. They submit a MSJ in April.

Judge Motz again has received "2A guidance" from the Circuit. Even if he want to, deep, deep inside to deny the MSJ...he approves the MSJ in June/July. Defendants State of MD, consider appeal BUT...know what awaits them in the 4th Circuit.

Hansel/Gura mention over coffee to Gansler that the 42USC1988 Legal Fees are at $600K and counting, and will likely double if taken to the Circuit.

With Chester, along with Heller/McDonald in our tool box, MD goes Shall-Issue this Summer.

Tell me where I'm wrong. What "alternate" timeline do you see? Dissuade me...

BTW, I'm on day-30 of a Chantix regimine and 12 days without a smoke, so take that into consideration...

 

[SirMrManGuy]

Additional thoughts on the US v. Chester opinion (4th Ckt) and the potential impact on Woollard.

I was wondering which thread to post into (Chester or Woollard), but figured we'd gotten so far off the beaten path here that resucitation was needed....thanks Norton for the reminder.

Please stay on topic when in any thread, don't "feed" off-topic posts.

The Brady's, LCAV and others have typically picked & chose verbiage in Heller/McDonald to support their arguments as necessary, even though what they've picked is innuendo and not taken in context with the surrounding paragraphs or sentances. We all know that.
Here is LCAV's post-Heller Litigation Summary.

One of their favorites from Heller was the following:

The anti's have gotten a lot of mileage out of that paragraph. Now...take the following from Chief Judge Traxler from the 4th Ckt in US v. Chester:


Chief Judge Traxler is reading Heller more strictly than it was delivered from the Supreme Court. There is plenty more goodness in the US v Chester opinion if you haven't read it.

So...I'm assuming Mr's Hansel & Gura are readying their Amended Complaint having read this opinion from our 4th Ckt. We'll know by Jan 21st when it is due.

Surely, AG Gansler and Defendants have been made aware of the opinion from the Circuit. District Judge Motz has likely heard of the Chester opinion AND, he will be receiving "guidance on the framework for deciding Second Amendment challenges.", courtesy of Chief Judge Traxler.

I am now just guessing, but the Defendants will likely be given a chance to respond to the amended complaint, especially since their original response to the original complaint was a MTD which was dispatched last week. Let's SWAG and say the Defendant response to Plaintiff Amended Complaint is due March 21 (being generous and giving them 2 months). Unless they come up with something clever and procedural again, they will have to address the complaint. This is going to be even harder as Patrick mentioned with Chester in the mix...their stalling has hurt them with this one. I would expect a very weak and unconvincing response.

Fast forward a month to April 21, where I think SAF/Hansel/Gura can write up their coup de grace, fully implementing arguments utilizing Chester dicta. They submit a MSJ in April.

Judge Motz again has received "2A guidance" from the Circuit. Even if he want to, deep, deep inside to deny the MSJ...he approves the MSJ in June/July. Defendants State of MD, consider appeal BUT...know what awaits them in the 4th Circuit.

Hansel/Gura mention over coffee to Gansler that the 42USC1988 Legal Fees are at $600K and counting, and will likely double if taken to the Circuit.

With Chester, along with Heller/McDonald in our tool box, MD goes Shall-Issue this Summer.

Tell me where I'm wrong. What "alternate" timeline do you see? Dissuade me...

BTW, I'm on day-30 of a Chantix regimine and 12 days without a smoke, so take that into consideration...

Courts go our way but MD legislature pulls some Chicago style BS and changes the permit scheme to include all sorts of fees and requirements instead of getting rid of "good and substantial", we spend another two years fighting.

 

[krucam]

Courts go our way but MD legislature pulls some Chicago style BS and changes the permit scheme to include all sorts of fees and requirements instead of getting rid of "good and substantial", we spend another two years fighting.

Negative. We have a fundamental right here. I'm not suggesting they won't try some shenanigans, but "the fight" is getting much closer now with Chester.

Oh, there's always the "sue their asses off" option for Civil Rights deprivation as well. That will likely be the next phase we take in MD ala WI and CA for over zealous reactions to our exhibiting a fundamental right. Think the 1960's civil rights movement.

You didn't "dissuade me"! It's coming....

 

[INMY01TA]

Courts go our way but MD legislature pulls some Chicago style BS and changes the permit scheme to include all sorts of fees and requirements instead of getting rid of "good and substantial", we spend another two years fighting.

BINGO!

 

[SirMrManGuy]

Negative. We have a fundamental right here. I'm not suggesting they won't try some shenanigans, but "the fight" is getting much closer now with Chester.

Oh, there's always the "sue their asses off" option for Civil Rights deprivation as well. That will likely be the next phase we take in MD ala WI and CA for over zealous reactions to our exhibiting a fundamental right. Think the 1960's civil rights movement.

You didn't "dissuade me"! It's coming....

I sure hope you are right.

Just some BGOS going on here.

 

[Hopalong]

MD goes Shall-Issue this Summer.

Tell me where I'm wrong. What "alternate" timeline do you see? Dissuade me...

Even if the timeline plays out like you describe, it would likely time some time for the proper "administrative changes" to be made at the MSP level, which would postpone the actual enforcement of Shall-Issue by a few more months. I doubt that actual issuance of permits would happen as soon as 2011, even if the decision comes down in our favor this summer.

I still think Gansler has something that he thinks will work up his sleeve that may delay things a bit more. In light of this new Circuit judgment though....

BTW, I'm on day-30 of a Chantix regimine and 12 days without a smoke, so take that into consideration...

Right on and good luck!

 

[Wraith]

I hope your conclusion is the outcome we will see krucam. Hopefully enough cards have been pulled out that, the good, and substantial clause will fall.

Though, being as you mentioned this,

BTW, I'm on day-30 of a Chantix regimine and 12 days without a smoke, so take that into consideration...

I will remind you of the following, in a bit of good jest as we wait for Gura's amended complaint,

The most common side effects include nausea (30%), sleep problems, constipation, gas and/or vomiting. If you have side effects that bother you or don't go away, tell your doctor. You may have trouble sleeping, vivid, unusual or strange dreams while taking CHANTIX. Use caution driving or operating machinery until you know how CHANTIX may affect you.

 

[fightinbluhen51]

Damn, I take the holidays off from a mental perspective, and this is what I find?

Awesome stuff guys. Patrick and Kru, thanks for the break downs as always.

While Gansler may be good at pulling the wool over our eyes at times, I honestly don't think he is THAT intelligent, but I could be surprised.

If this honestly goes the right way for us, I can be looking at carrying from home to the beach in VA and back all while not having to worry about crossing jurisdictional lines!

 

[krucam]

I sure hope you are right.

Just some BGOS going on here.

BGOS is a problem sometimes...myself included. We're on much more solid ground right now than we have been in Decades however.

Even if the timeline plays out like you describe, it would likely time some time for the proper "administrative changes" to be made at the MSP level, which would postpone the actual enforcement of Shall-Issue by a few more months. I doubt that actual issuance of permits would happen as soon as 2011, even if the decision comes down in our favor this summer.

"IF" this "might" be over this Summer, they can't delay unless they request a stay of some sort. This WILL be a ruling from a Federal Court. The 'Good & Substantial' requirement will go away. I've already downloaded the app, although I realistically expect a new app to come out shortly after this event. Regardless...get ready and avoid the likely rush!

I still think Gansler has something that he thinks will work up his sleeve that may delay things a bit more. In light of this new Circuit judgment though....

I do not see how MD can win this in MD District "IF" Hansel/Gura read the Chester Ruling and implement in their amended complaint and "IF" Dist Judge Motz gets the Memo from 4th Ckt Chief Judge Traxler. EVEN IF the State wins the District battle, an appeal to 4th Ckt would be a guaranteed loss. Assuming THAT the Plaintiffs when in District, why would the State appeal to a likely guaranteed loss at the 4th?

Right on and good luck!

Thanks...10 days now.

I hope your conclusion is the outcome we will see krucam. Hopefully enough cards have been pulled out that, the good, and substantial clause will fall.

Though, being as you mentioned this,
You may have trouble sleeping, vivid, unusual or strange dreams while taking CHANTIX. Use caution driving or operating machinery until you know how CHANTIX may affect you.

I have to admit to have some really "strange" dreams the last few weeks. Nothing terrible, just very intricately wound...hard to describe. My wife works at a Dr's office and knew of this potential side affect. After the first 3 days I mentioned to her that my dreams included a dog (we don't have one). A few days later I told her the dog was speaking to me...in English. A few days later it was German which I never took, but still understood....you get the picture!

Damn, I take the holidays off from a mental perspective, and this is what I find?

Awesome stuff guys. Patrick and Kru, thanks for the break downs as always.

While Gansler may be good at pulling the wool over our eyes at times, I honestly don't think he is THAT intelligent, but I could be surprised.

If this honestly goes the right way for us, I can be looking at carrying from home to the beach in VA and back all while not having to worry about crossing jurisdictional lines!

I honestly don't expect Gansler to find a way out of this, or so the German speaking Dog said....Chester if utilized effectively will be lights out for MD along with Heller/McDonald. We'll probably get some more good "bits" from other Circuits in the next few months, but this coming from the 4th WITH his announced "guidance to be provided" to the Districts....reason to be VERY optimistic.

 

[Oreo]

Taking a step back for a second, this guidance from the 4th is great for us in MD short term if MD drops the appeal but in the long run I thought we were after a SCOTUS ruling to really drive the nail home. If MD does appeal then we'll likely get our circuit split and a guaranteed ride to SCOTUS. If MD doesn't appeal where does that leave us nationally?