"Sensitive" places restrictions on wear and carry currently that should not be.

[DC-W]

MSI's list of prohibited places has been updated. https://www.marylandshallissue.org/jmain/information/md-carry-permits#f

Places and Times In Which Firearms Can Not Be Legally Carried by a Permit Holder

• On public school property - Md. Criminal Law § 4-102, Md. Criminal Law § 4-203(a)(1)(iii)https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=gcr&section=4-102&enactments=false
• With the deliberate purpose of injuring or killing another person - Md. Criminal Law § 4-203(a)(1)(iv)
• While in the commission of a crime of violence - Md. Criminal Law § 4-204
• While under the influence of alcohol or drugs - Md. Public Safety § 5-314
• When not in physical possession of the issued permit - Md. Public Safety § 5-308
• Outside of any restrictions placed upon the issued permit - Md. Public Safety § 5-307
• Aboard any vehicle or inside any building under the control of the Maryland Transit Administration (MTA) - Md. Transportation § 7-705(b)(6)
• Within 1,000 feet of a demonstration in a public place after being notified by law enforcement that guns cannot be carried - Md. Criminal Law § 4-208
• In or around State-owned public buildings and grounds - COMAR 04.05.01.03
• Inside State legislative buildings - Md. State Government § 2-1702(e)(2)
• Aboard aircraft engaged in certified air commerce - Md. Transportation § 5-1008
• An innkeeper may refuse to provide lodging or services to or may remove from a lodging establishment an individual where the innkeeper reasonably believes the individual possesses property that may be dangerous to other individuals, such as firearms or explosives - Md. Business Regulation § 15-203(a)(6)
• Captain, master or any person on board or having control of any dredge boat may not have or permit to be kept on the dredge boat more than two shotguns not larger than a number ten gauge and using shot not larger than number one - Md. Natural Resources § 4-1013
• Chesapeake Forest lands, except at designated shooting ranges and when legally hunting - COMAR 08.01.07.14
• State Forests, except at designated shooting ranges and when legally hunting - COMAR 08.01.07.04
• State Parks, except at designated shooting ranges and when legally hunting - COMAR 08.07.06.04
• State Highway rest areas, when displayed - COMAR 11.04.07.12
• At a facility under the control of the Maryland Stadium Authority - COMAR 14.25.02.06
  Such facilities are defined in COMAR 14.25.01.01
• At a State museum unless authorized for an exhibition that in the museum director's judgment promotes the purposes of the museum - COMAR 34.04.08.04
• At a Video Lottery Facility as defined by Md. State Government, § 9-1A-01(aa) - COMAR 36.03.10.48
• In community adult rehabilitation centers - COMAR 12.02.03.10(h)(9)
• In child care centers, except for small centers located in residences - COMAR 13A.16.10.04
• If under a proclaimed State of Emergency by the Governor when the Governor has issued orders, rules, or regulations controlling the possession, carry, use, and/or sale of firearms - Md. Public Safety § 14-303(b)(8)

 

[willtill]

Oyster wars. I never knew. Fascinating. Thanks for the info everyone.

 

[rhippert]

Washington Post, 7/12/22, "Chief: Gun violence on the rise in Md. County" includes the following two paragraphs:

Under legislative action to be introduced Tuesday, Albornoz said the county would make a "zone text amendment" to forbid a person -- even if they have a "wear-and-carry permit" from the state -- from taking a gun into a "place of public assembly.
The council president said such locations "are purposely wide-ranging," and could include places of worship, shopping centers and businesses.

Shopping centers and businesses pretty much covers everywhere. Are they going to forbid MS-13 and other gangs and criminals from those places, too? That same story starts with a description of a shooting in a shopping center parking lot in the Briggs Chaney area where "Literally 60 rounds were fired...".

 

[Gravedigger]

THE List is GROWING

 

[Park ranger]

Didn't see this posted.

Legislation - HB0590

mgaleg.maryland.gov

F) (1) THE DEPARTMENT MAY NOT PROHIBIT AN INDIVIDUAL TO WHOM
6 A PERMIT TO WEAR, CARRY, OR TRANSPORT A HANDGUN HAS BEEN ISSUED UNDER
7 TITLE 5, SUBTITLE 3 OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY ARTICLE FROM WEARING, CARRYING,
8 OR TRANSPORTING A HANDGUN IN A STATE PARK OR FOREST, SUBJECT TO ANY
9 LIMITATIONS IMPOSED UNDER § 5–307 OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY ARTICLE.

 

[DC-W]

Didn't see this posted.

Legislation - HB0590

mgaleg.maryland.gov

F) (1) THE DEPARTMENT MAY NOT PROHIBIT AN INDIVIDUAL TO WHOM
6 A PERMIT TO WEAR, CARRY, OR TRANSPORT A HANDGUN HAS BEEN ISSUED UNDER
7 TITLE 5, SUBTITLE 3 OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY ARTICLE FROM WEARING, CARRYING,
8 OR TRANSPORTING A HANDGUN IN A STATE PARK OR FOREST, SUBJECT TO ANY
9 LIMITATIONS IMPOSED UNDER § 5–307 OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY ARTICLE.

Didn’t pass.

 

[Applehd]

Died in committee...?

 

[Park ranger]

Wonder if it will get reintroduced?

 

[foxtrapper]

Not allowed to carry in parks is anti woman. I like to be alone and would love to explore the nearby state park, but the fear of bad men is there. I have had to evade creeps in public places with people around. I once open carried in PA on the rail trail with my aunt. Boy, did I feel safe as hell. There was no one else on the trail at the time.

These dems are ridiculous with their own version of anti woman, but rage when it comes to abortion access. Having a creepy man bothering you several times over your life is NOT comfortable at all. They even creep on me with me being fat. I don't understand the anti gun woman. I guess they have low IQ's or are very easily brainwashed.

 

[DC-W]

Wonder if it will get reintroduced?

Probably. And will probably go right back into desk drawer to never be seen again.

 

[ICW2019]

Since when did the restricted list become expanded?

 

[sclag22]

Not allowed to carry in parks is anti woman. I like to be alone and would love to explore the nearby state park, but the fear of bad men is there. I have had to evade creeps in public places with people around. I once open carried in PA on the rail trail with my aunt. Boy, did I feel safe as hell. There was no one else on the trail at the time.

These dems are ridiculous with their own version of anti woman, but rage when it comes to abortion access. Having a creepy man bothering you several times over your life is NOT comfortable at all. They even creep on me with me being fat. I don't understand the anti gun woman. I guess they have low IQ's or are very easily brainwashed.

But what is a woman?

 

[teratos]

But what is a woman?

Whatever she wants to be. Bigot.

 

[Applehd]

Good luck on your quest to find THAT answer...
Even harder to figure out these days...
No disrespect intended toward you, Foxtrapper. Good to see you posting.

 

[DC-W]

Since when did the restricted list become expanded?

A lot of stuff is buried deep in COMAR. It’s been there. MSP’s list is not at all comprehensive.

 

[ICW2019]

A lot of stuff is buried deep in COMAR. It’s been there. MSP’s list is not at all comprehensive.

I have a feeling I'll be able to enjoy winter through next march carrying out and about then the fun come to a halt next session?

 

[Applehd]

I'm optimistic... really.

 

[DC-W]

I have a feeling I'll be able to enjoy winter through next march carrying out and about then the fun come to a halt next session?

 

[ICW2019]

Look I need feel good news not reality lmao.

 

[nedsurf]

During the hearing on Del. Cox's bill that aimed to allow carry in parks, one of the opponents raised warnings from the National Park Service not to use firearms on wildlife in self-defense. That's the sneaky stuff opponents pull.

There is some case law history with that already. A young man defended himself from an aggressive elk in Rocky Mountain National Park back in 2015. They charged him with knowingly taking wildlife or something like that. He claimed self-defense and it went to trial. It came out in discovery that that elk had recently given birth and had meningitis. I can't remember the details perfectly but I believe that it also came out in discovery that the same elk had an ear tag and there was a documented history of aggressiveness to park visitors prior to the immediate few days of the shooting. Lastly, there was also video of the elk acting aggressive just before he defended himself. The judge threw out the criminal charges.
https://www.dailycamera.com/2017/09...d-in-2015-shooting-of-aggressive-elk-at-rmnp/

NPS personnel were not satisfied with that so they went after him financially under System Unit Resource Protection Act. I don't know yet how that played out.

Back in 2016 TTAG published an article about bad information that the NPS puts out about self defense and firearms.
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/national-parks-service-discharging-firearms-self-defense-illegal/

Many of the park compendiums (park unit specific rules) used to peddle in vague, cryptic, and/or suggestive language to discourage park visitors from carrying a firearm.

The NPS has since changed most of their official public statements to begrudgingly allow that it is legal but still discourage it. The bear spray and firearms webpage is a classic example. There are still some misinformed (probably willfully at this point) employees in the agency.

I've yet to hear of a firearm self defense case going to trial involving an apex predator like a grizzly but I know that there have been apex predator self defense shootings such as here and here. The first case from 2014 the man was charged but the AUSA motioned to drop the charge. The second case from 2015 no charges were filed. This might show at least some NPS officials are learning to accept that wildlife self defense is legal and to not charge when it is a clear case of that.

If anyone also wants to investigate this sort of stuff a FOIA can be submitted for different types of incidents, on all Dept. of Interior managed lands listed in the Incident Management Analysis and Reporting System (IMARS). This system would also have other interesting information like all violent crime incidents on DOI public lands that have been documented since the system's inception. It is an official database with a SORN published in the federal register so no one can deny this info. exists.