SAF SUES IN MARYLAND OVER HANDGUN PERMIT DENIAL UPDATED 3-5-12
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:
- Status
aberforth
Lurker
Ripping people's arms out of their sockets when they lose?
- May 5, 2010
- 6,588
aberforth
Lurker
Threeband
The M1 Does My Talking
.
http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/103454/the-chewbacca-defense
If Gansler is watching this thread, and gets the idea to use this defense, then we are without hope.
.
http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/103454/the-chewbacca-defense
If Gansler is watching this thread, and gets the idea to use this defense, then we are without hope.
.
Jim Sr
R.I.P.
5/10/2012 @ 1:22am
Online Users: 388
76 members and 312 guests
Online Users: 388
76 members and 312 guests
LongTom
Active Member
What Gansler did in his brief was outright lie. The things he mentioned were so preposterous, I had a hard time to continue reading, like when you're watching one of your friends embarrass themselves and you have an innate reaction to look away. Gura did a good job of capitalizing on those lies, showing how ridiculous they are.
That being said, I know we're all excited, but what does this mean for us? My point is that the state will obviously still appeal the decision, and we'll still have to face revocation of our licenses later. So let's keep that in mind. I think I am correct in saying that since the Supreme Court will probably never hear the case, we can probably safely assume that we're home free after the final appeal is over.
That being said, I know we're all excited, but what does this mean for us? My point is that the state will obviously still appeal the decision, and we'll still have to face revocation of our licenses later. So let's keep that in mind. I think I am correct in saying that since the Supreme Court will probably never hear the case, we can probably safely assume that we're home free after the final appeal is over.
drblast33
[This Space for Sale ...]
I was expecting a little more in the response. But I guess if you are supposed to respond to an already weak argument, there isn't much more you can write.
Patrick
MSI Executive Member
Page limit.
The brief covered the law and the points used in deciding it. The fact they could fit it in 10 pages is pretty amazing. State response due at end of month. It ought to be interesting.
Note that Gansler & Co. cannot decide to throw their real argument into the reply brief in hopes it prevent a rebuttal from Team Woollard. They basically got to argue the same junk, again, and somehow prove their point using them. Good luck with that.
An eloquently worded brief, compared to the pile of crap with veiled threats - team Gansler provided a few weeks ago
drblast33
[This Space for Sale ...]
Does anyone know if there is/was a benefit of having this type of back and forth instead of a regular hearing? I think if this was in a regular hearing setting, it would have been done faster. Will the paper trail of these arguments help the other appeals case?
(From brief)
Defendant Brown’s arguments with respect to the cost and bureaucratic burdens associated
with the issuance of handgun carry permits are not only unpersuasive, they are not relevant to the
issues before the Court. The Court did not ask whether the injunction would inconvenience the state.
Defendant Brown’s arguments with respect to the cost and bureaucratic burdens associated
with the issuance of handgun carry permits are not only unpersuasive, they are not relevant to the
issues before the Court. The Court did not ask whether the injunction would inconvenience the state.
Ah schit,.... page 8 contains actual DATA and FACTS! 
(And, a good ending too):
[T]he Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms ‘is not strictly limited to the home
environment but extends in some form to wherever those activities or needs occur’. . . .
Although considerable uncertainty exists regarding the scope of the Second Amendment
right to keep and bear arms, it undoubtedly is not limited to the confines of the home.
Bateman v. Perdue, No. 5:10-CV-265-H, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47336, at *10-*11 (E.D.N.C.
Mar. 29, 2012) (citation omitted).
(And, a good ending too):
[T]he Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms ‘is not strictly limited to the home
environment but extends in some form to wherever those activities or needs occur’. . . .
Although considerable uncertainty exists regarding the scope of the Second Amendment
right to keep and bear arms, it undoubtedly is not limited to the confines of the home.
Bateman v. Perdue, No. 5:10-CV-265-H, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47336, at *10-*11 (E.D.N.C.
Mar. 29, 2012) (citation omitted).
krucam
Ultimate Member
This is consistent in most of SAF's briefs. Statistics, polls & current events are easy traps to fall prey to, but at the end of the day they're completely irrelevent to our argument. White noise...
Don't follow them down that path, we don't need it to win.
The only thing better than that read will be Gansler's next response.. Way to go Gura!
Yeah I'm sure it will be so brillant you will have to close your eyes as the perfection of it will blind the mere mortal - NOT
dlmcbm
Ultimate Member
Ganslers responce.... UHHH!!!....... UMMMM!!!!!!! Wait I got it...... NO that won't work. UHHHH!!!! UMMMMM!!!!
After how week his opening was and the way Gura just floored everything he said his response should be a good read.
After how week his opening was and the way Gura just floored everything he said his response should be a good read.
So the timeline is May 23rd for the reply on the stay.
Sometime there after Judge Legg will rule on the stay.
MD appeal opening brief: 6/15/2012
Pltf appeal response: 7/16/2012
MD appeal Reply: 7/30/2012
Sometime there after Judge Legg will rule on the stay.
MD appeal opening brief: 6/15/2012
Pltf appeal response: 7/16/2012
MD appeal Reply: 7/30/2012
- Status
