SB1 (2023) - Criminal Law - Wearing, Carrying, or Transporting Firearms - Restrictions (Gun Safety Act of 2023)

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!
  • lazarus

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 23, 2015
    13,625
    Guns are icky

    I can't believe you all own guns

    You probably eat meat, and drink bourbon too

    Repent sinners!!!
    I drink meat and eat bourbon. Where is your god now!
     

    lazarus

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 23, 2015
    13,625
    WV will be one of the last holdouts.

    Questions about what passed last night:

    If I am travelling through the state and I have firearms with me (unloaded & cased per FOPA), and then I get tired or I'm forced to stop for the night for some other reason like car trouble or inclement weather, do I need to find a hotel that explicitly permits firearms?

    If I am flying out of BWI and it's not explicitly posted that firearms are permitted, how do I bring one in my checked baggage?
    Leave it in your vehicle. Or yes, you'll need a hotel that explicitly allows firearms.

    BWI is owned and operated by the Maryland Department of Transportation. A public entity. So no permission needed. The SB1 stuff only applies to private property, unless it is something explicitly listed in the bill as a named sensitive place (in which case even private property owners can't give permission).
     

    bcr229

    FFL/SOT
    Jul 15, 2011
    1,290
    Inwood, WV
    Dulles is as least as convenient to WV Eastern Panhandle as BWI .
    It's not a matter of which airport I choose, but for other travelers. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is well known for jamming up people passing through who should be otherwise covered by FOPA.

    Leave it in your vehicle. Or yes, you'll need a hotel that explicitly allows firearms.

    BWI is owned and operated by the Maryland Department of Transportation. A public entity. So no permission needed. The SB1 stuff only applies to private property, unless it is something explicitly listed in the bill as a named sensitive place (in which case even private property owners can't give permission).
    Thank you for the info about BWI.

    Unfortunately leaving a firearm in a vehicle is begging for it to get stolen. If that's truly the legal workaround I foresee a lot more smash & grabs at hotel parking lots.
     

    CrueChief

    Cocker Dad/RIP Bella
    Apr 3, 2009
    2,956
    Napolis-ish
    What really needs to happen with bills/laws like this is the legislators that write and sponsor them should be the ones defending them in court. As well as anyone who votes for them should have the possibility of ending up on the witness stand to defend their vote for it as well as cross examination by plaintiffs lawyers. The sponsors should also be the ones writing the briefs and all court responses. Most of these morons are lawyers after al.

    As it is now they can draft, lie, rewrite, lie, twist arms, lie and then vote for it. Take a victory lap and maybe even a celebratory Wes conference and that’s it , it becomes someone else’s problem to defend, at taxpayer expense of course.
     

    Reezie

    Member
    Aug 18, 2020
    61
    After initially seeing this news i was upset but ive come to the point where i realized i dont even care. Ill continue to do as ive been doing
     

    JPG

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 5, 2012
    6,950
    Calvert County
    This is where we are in the world. Courts will overturn the law(s) and the legislature will pass the same law again with a "little tweak" and the process starts all over again.

    I guess the "good news' is that some of these laws are already being challenged in other courts, so the wait won't as long as it could be in making its way to the SCOTUS.

    It would be nice when the SCOTUS see this stuff happening and says WTF are you legislators doing? We said..........
     

    Allen65

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 29, 2013
    6,936
    Anne Arundel County
    You could. But the language of the bill is the other way around. The renter has NO say. The landlord does.

    It is the owner or owner's agent. You have to give your RENTER permission to have firearms in the structure or they are violating SB1.

    So good luck to all of those renters who don't realize this, or whose landlords are hoplophobes. This includes commercial tenants, so if you want to carry in your business or you are a gun store or gun smith and rent and it isn't in your commercial lease (explicitly. It doesn't matter that the owner/agent knows its a gun store), you'll need to secure permission from them that you have firearms in any rented buildings prior to 10/1 or go to prison for a year for every violation. That could really suck for a gun store.
    Hopefully that renter issue gives MSI something to really sink its teeth into with a lawsuit, because it sure goes against the intent of Heller.
     

    rbird7282

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 6, 2012
    18,325
    Columbia
    When was the last time we had the house, a president willing to sign pro-2A stuff AND a filibuster-proof GOP senate? Specifically, I mean. Because you have to meet all three of those conditions to get what you want. Otherwise, it's Chuck Schumer's game even if we do have a slim majority in the senate and the other two factors. That's the reality of it.

    BUT: we DID do something incredibly important when we had the simple majority in the senate and a constitution-minded president. Trump and McConnell managed to seat hundreds of new constitutionalist federal judges and THREE pro-2A Supreme Court justices (and hence, Bruen). The importance of which cannot be overstated.

    While this is 100% true, I don’t see either side ever having a filibuster proof majority in the Senate so sooner or later we need to try either by going with small stuff first or bury in a larger bill and make them defend their filibuster of that bill.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     

    ICW2019

    Active Member
    Mar 8, 2012
    355
    Eastern Shore
    I didn't think it warranted a post of its own but going forward October 1st we're still good with the previous knife laws with a wear and carry correct? The verbiage only mentions firearms from what I can tell.
     

    Amontgo9419

    Member
    Feb 20, 2021
    11
    One of the few "I guess we aren't TOO screwed" parts of the bill process was they removed most of the place restrictions that aren't in buildings. Keep in mind, the chair interpreted the language of the bill as banning firearms in parking garages. So any covered structure in his mind is a building. Parking garages, pavilions, etc. It doesn't need 4 walls, just a roof.

    But previously the bill would require your firearms to be in a vehicle unloaded, locked, and stored separately from ammunition if on the property of any sensitive place (which would have included any property you didn't have explicit permission to have firearms). They amended the law to revert to the previous transport requirements for such sensitive places and also the vast majority of sensitive places are now only in the buildings of said places. Not the grounds adjacent to the sensitive places.

    So other than MoCo or near a posted demonstration, and I think possibly a couple of other places that were added like a fair/carnival or live theater performance requiring tickets that might all be outdoors, you can still carry outdoors (well, except in some of the existing 4-203 sensitive places like parks, state forests, etc.). This includes in your vehicle.
    Thank you for your clarification. As sad as it is, it seems like if you’re going to a “sensitive” place and/or a location that is in the gray area you’ll have to disarm to walk in and re-arm when back in your vehicle.
     

    Bertfish

    Throw bread on me
    Mar 13, 2013
    17,467
    White Marsh, MD
    I didn't think it warranted a post of its own but going forward October 1st we're still good with the previous knife laws with a wear and carry correct? The verbiage only mentions firearms from what I can tell.
    Hmm this is a good question. I again defer to I'm not changing my behavior though
     

    Occam

    Not Even ONE Indictment
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 24, 2018
    20,042
    Montgomery County
    While this is 100% true, I don’t see either side ever having a filibuster proof majority in the Senate so sooner or later we need to try either by going with small stuff first or bury in a larger bill and make them defend their filibuster of that bill.
    Yup. That is certainly how they've played the game for a long time, and we have too sometimes - just not as effectively. Mostly because it goes against the grain of the normal constitutionalist/conservative mindset to use tricks (like bundling altogether unrelated matters into a single bill) to get stuff done. But since the Dems have completely abandoned any thought of acting in good faith, here we are.
     

    Pax

    Member
    Feb 11, 2023
    39
    Sparks Maryland
    I realize that what just happened was inevitable. Maryland, mostly due to Counties like MOCO and it's representative's and constituents to follow a very non informed and liberal position. So when Bruen was ruled on, the Dems saw an opening to develop a set of laws that would undermine the ruling. They then, as we see can again, falsely claim to have created a set of Laws that help with gun violence. They absolutely know that it will have little to no effect on reducing gun violence. They know that most if not all will be reversed by the Courts but they will use this only as a political tool to try and leverage time to misrepresent how wonderful they are.

    Would they tell their constituents:

    That this will most likely be struck down, NO.

    That they will be wasting Taxpayer money to fight a losing battle, NO.

    That the Law targets Qualified Licensed CCW individuals, NO.

    That there is little to no crime associated to Licensed CCW citizens, NO.

    That the law as written cause an enormous amount of conflict that they expect Law enforcement to have to act a judge on the spot in grey areas, NO.

    That their already over burdened Law Enforcement officers will have to now be on the lookout for CCW carriers who park in a questionable area, NO

    That their over burdened Legal system will now have to occupy their dockets with minor possible missteps and pushing out cases of real crime cases, NO

    Feel free to continue the list of NO's.

    As we all can agree, again, the motivation of our Political representatives is nothing more then keeping them in office. And we wonder why the general public is so fed up the our political system. It kills me to know that my tax dollars are going to be wasted because of absolute ignorance.

    Thx for listening.
     

    Trbo6gn

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 30, 2011
    2,798
    Harford Co.
    I think it's rich that these legislators sat up there and complain about "legal guns are stolen by criminals and used, that's why we need to put these restrictions is place". While at the same time making almost every location a "sensitive place" which will require people to leave their firearms in their cars. Once guns start getting stolen from vehicles they will again blame the law abiding citizens instead of the policies that required people to leave their guns in the car to comply with the law.
     

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,070
    Messages
    7,221,418
    Members
    33,138
    Latest member
    RamDoug

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom