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

[lazarus]

I didn’t realize the W&C exempted one from the 1000’ school rule, good to know.

As for this thing getting overturned in the medium term if it gets passed, that’s not a consideration as I’ll be long gone from the “Free State” by then.

Only the federal. Baltimore has some local ordinances that are grandfathered. I suspect those will eventually get struck down based on Bruen and precedent from lawsuits that will be coming soon. I forget what those are, 100yds? I don't know that a carry permit exempts you from those.

 

[Rickman]

I was waiting on the initial flood of W&C applicants to subside, and was just about ready to apply. However with this thing looking more and more likely to get jammed through in some form, I’m not even gonna bother.

In addition to all of these new sensitive places, I also need to worry about the existing ones. Here in Baltimore we have a school every few blocks, so that’s problematic.

I would be so worried about where I can/cannot carry that I would probably just default to not carrying.

This is what they want of course.

All the more reason to apply now. Never surrender without firing a shot.

 

[smokey]

Why would you want to? SB1 doesn't propose to change the renewal period

The class requirements and such are looking to be changed. Old permits are grandfathered. I figure it'd be less of a PIA to just to the training under current law than after october.

 

[blipper]

For me, the craziest and most infuriating part is that the main rationale being put forward for restricting carry rights is that it will lead to more guns being in circulation and thereby leading to more prohibited people getting guns BUT the law creates a myriad of prohibited places where people are forced to leave their guns in their cars where the guns are inherently more vulnerable to theft.

 

[teratos]

For me, the craziest and most infuriating part is that the main rationale being put forward for restricting carry rights is that it will lead to more guns being in circulation and thereby leading to more prohibited people getting guns BUT the law creates a myriad of prohibited places where people are forced to leave their guns in their cars where the guns are inherently more vulnerable to theft.

That cat is out of the bag, except for the poor. Fvck the peasants.

 

[Abuck]

For me, the craziest and most infuriating part is that the main rationale being put forward for restricting carry rights is that it will lead to more guns being in circulation and thereby leading to more prohibited people getting guns BUT the law creates a myriad of prohibited places where people are forced to leave their guns in their cars where the guns are inherently more vulnerable to theft.

That cat is out of the bag, except for the poor. Fvck the peasants.

No, they are helping the poor and the peasants with this. Leaving a gun in your vehicle makes it more accessible for those underprivileged souls.

Also, look at all the victim zones being created by banning carry in places that serve alcohol. Theoretically at least, anyone inside won’t be armed, and much safer for someone that needs your money, watch, or other belongings more than you do.

It’s win/win for the takers.

 

[Bertfish]

The class requirements and such are looking to be changed. Old permits are grandfathered. I figure it'd be less of a PIA to just to the training under current law than after october.

Yeah they are changing the required content. Not a big deal. Thing is many of the things they're requiring to be taught there is very little to show from a legal standpoint. Nothing in law regard deescalation techniques so it's going to vary greatly from class to class

 

[teratos]

No, they are helping the poor and the peasants with this. Leaving a gun in your vehicle makes it more accessible for those underprivileged souls.

Also, look at all the victim zones being created by banning carry in places that serve alcohol. Theoretically at least, anyone inside won’t be armed, and much safer for someone that needs your money, watch, or other belongings more than you do.

It’s win/win for the takers.

Good point. Thanks for making sense of this for me.

 

[Pax]

I feel like I am going to create a sheet of where and when I can carry. I also bet I will be wearing and suddenly find myself 1 foot over the line. What a headache!

I just read the latest iteration of the bill. Am I reading correctly that even with a CCW you must transport your weapon, locked and separated from the ammunition while in my vehicle?

 

[NatBoh]

All the more reason to apply now. Never surrender without firing a shot.

Or GTFO and go to a state that doesn’t hate my and my Rights.

 

[Pax]

I feel like I am going to create a sheet of where and when I can carry. I also bet I will be wearing and suddenly find myself 1 foot over the line. What a headache!

I just read the latest iteration of the bill. Am I reading correctly that even with a CCW you must transport your weapon, locked and separated from the ammunition while in my vehicle?

These are the 2 sections that have me wondering:


A FIREARM THAT IS CARRIED OR TRANSPORTED IN A MOTOR 27 VEHICLE IF THE FIREARM IS: 28 (I) UNLOADED; AND 29 (II) LOCKED IN A CONTAINER THAT IS SEPARATE FROM ANY 30 AMMUNITION THAT IS SUITABLE FOR USE IN THE FIREARM.

Then further down it states:

A PERMIT ISSUED UNDER THIS SUBTITLE SHALL RESTRICT THE 18 WEARING, CARRYING, AND TRANSPORTING OF A HANDGUN BY THE PERSON TO 19 WHOM THE PERMIT IS ISSUED TO WEARING, CARRYING, OR TRANSPORTING A 20 HANDGUN CONCEALED FROM VIEW:

 

[Biggfoot44]

Exhibit A;

Post Bruen W&C holders are so dangerous, there is so much blood flowing in our streets, that if passed, it will not go into effect until 10/01/23.

It goes into effect Oct 1 , because that's the default date for new laws to take effect , and it's a stiff legislative hurdle to pass Emergency Legislation ( i.e. take effect upon signing ) .

 

[Doco Overboard]

My take is I'm better off without a permit than with one.
Sometimes I figure, its better to ask for forgiveness rather than permission.
Especially for God given rights. At least I can bank on redemption through what Christ paid instead of some pack of rabid assholes and who they lust to judge before him.

 

[Biggfoot44]

So, I am getting little ahead of myself but was pondering about enforcement "If" this bill goes thru in whatever form, will on October 1 will they be sending/notifying all permit holders regarding the "new" requirements?

In some ways I look at this as a potential trap and or setup to mess CCW holders. If they would only put the same energy into criminal behavior.

That's a feature . not a fault .

 

[Pyramid]

Article from Baltimore Sun that just showed up on my computer........

Maryland Senate labors over constitutionality of firearm wear and carry legislation

 

[Biggfoot44]

MDAG letter to the legislature as written testimony are not opinions and not used or held as such. As for getting a copy of it, show up at the Senate JPR office and ask for a copy of it. As a part of the official record of the bill, you, as a citizen of Maryland, are entitled to a copy, no FOIA request needed.

Bill Files are your friend . For a real hoot , read the one from 1972 .

 

[Occam]

It goes into effect Oct 1 , because that's the default date for new laws to take effect , and it's a stiff legislative hurdle to pass Emergency Legislation ( i.e. take effect upon signing ) .

But it's a great example of the bill's truly unimportant reality (from a public safety perspective). Sure, there's a hurdle to getting emergency legislation passed and into effect. But if it had any demonstrable or even vaguely logical prospect of taking a bite out of (say) Baltimore's murder rate, it would be a shoe-in for immediate enactment. Their obvious lack of urgency on that front highlights the bill's nature as strictly aimed at us, as a punitive measure, out of spite riled up by Bruen.

 

[teratos]

It goes into effect Oct 1 , because that's the default date for new laws to take effect , and it's a stiff legislative hurdle to pass Emergency Legislation ( i.e. take effect upon signing ) .

They are gonna need a lot of time to prepare a defense…

 

[Biggfoot44]

Printing is not a problem. Heck if you have a fully enclosed holster where the firearm is not visible thats ok too.

A statute says whatever it says .

But the usual language , and usual case law adressing such matters is to the effect of " readily identifiable to the common person , with casual observation as being a ( fill in blank ) . Statutes can fine tune details , in either direction .

Random examples :

A totally enclosed holster , that looks like a holster wouldn't be conealed .

The NAA Mini Revolver mounted on a belt buckle , while literally fully exposed , would be concealed , because to casual observation of common person , it's something to hold your pants up , not apparent as a firearm .

 

[swinokur]

SB 1 is MD’s temper tantrum because SCOTUS shot down G&S.

No different thanks child lying on the floor kicking and screaming