Today is the Day

[GTOGUNNER]

So is the case number with MJG. going to be the Judge? Garbis, do we know much of his case history?

 

[montoya32]

Several differences from other states.

The HQL is redundant. It almost completely duplicates the pre existing background check that has been in place since 1996 and regulation of handguns since 1968. It serves no new purpose beyond a new burden.

Although it is called a handgun license, it doesnt actually license anyone to do anything related to a handgun. Its not for possession, carry, or even purchase, because to purchase, one must go through the same process again, almost entirely. But at almost 1/5th the cost and 1/4 the wait. How do they justify that?

The only thing new about it are the fees and the fingerprints. Fingerprints are tied to the same background check systems and NICS, they add no new measure of public protection.

Even the training component was preexisting. They could have just altered that.

In cases like this, the decision should be at the very least based on accomoishing a goal by the least restrictive means necessary. MD's stated goal was already accomplished by the existing regulated firearms process. The actual goal of preventing or reducing legal ownership isnt allowed.

 

[montoya32]

I'll never forget the night the price was debated on the house floor. It started at 100, then 75, 50, 25 -- and that's where the speaker got flustered and said "well it has to cost something" and it took it back to $50.

Completely arbitrary and purposefully burdensome.

And retired LD Commander Jack McCauley testified that the cost analysis determined the actual cost to produce the license was $17.

 

[Blacksmith101]

And retired LD Commander Jack McCauley testified that the cost analysis determined the actual cost to produce the license was $17.

And that was before they did away with the Photo on the ID requirement.

 

[montoya32]

And that was before they did away with the Photo on the ID requirement.

When did they do away with the photo on it? This past session they did away with requiring FFLs from including a copy of the license with purchase apps.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Blacksmith101]

When did they do away with the photo on it? This past session they did away with requiring FFLs from including a copy of the license with purchase apps.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Here is the thread about it:
https://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?t=195441&highlight=HQL+Photo

 

[esqappellate]

We are getting some heat from those who want us to focus solely on carry and not be spending resources on bringing suits like the HQL and Kolbe suits. Here is the response I posted on our Facebook page:

A few points. MSI has definitely not lost focus. Carry is still very much our mission. But that mission includes the right of self-defense at its core. As others have pointed out, the Woollard litigation settled the constitutionality of Good and Substantial in the Fourth Circuit. That suit was brought and lost. As a lawyer, I can tell you that pretty much precludes further litigation on that specific issue, at least until Congress mandates nation-wide reciprocity or the Supreme Court acts on the issue. In the meantime, I spend a lot of time supporting litigation in other circuits that present this issue, such as the Baker case in the 9th Circuit and the Grace/Wrenn case in the D.C. Circuit. We are not sitting on our hands in Maryland. We are also pushing on every front in Maryland for whatever incremental changes we can obtain on the carry issue. I don't have to tell you how difficult that is in Maryland, but we have not given up. Not by a long shot.

Second, the HQL suit and carry are related. Both involve Second Amendment rights. That is why we are a named plaintiff in the Kolbe case (the magazine and rifle ban). All these matters involve your right to keep and bear arms. A person cannot keep and bear arms if he cannot buy them either because they are banned (Kolbe) or because it is difficult or too expensive to navigate all the obstacles the State places in your path (HQL). That is what the HQL suit is about -- the right to keep and bear arms. The suit highlights the discriminatory aspects of the HQL requirements and makes clear that the real issue is the right to self defense. That is what carry is about too. A successful result in the suit will affect carry rights, as the Second Amendment law developed in an HQL suit will carry over to other Second Amendment issues. A frontal attack failed in Woollard. It is now all about attacking on the flanks where the State's defenses are weaker. A win in the HQL suit, even a partial win, will affect everything. That's just how the law works.

 

[esqappellate]

So is the case number with MJG. going to be the Judge? Garbis, do we know much of his case history?

Remains to be seen. He was appointed to the bench by President Bush. By all accounts, he is a scholar and a very smart man. See https://www.mdd.uscourts.gov/publications/JudgesBio/garbis.htm We could have done much worse on the draw than Judge Garbis.

 

[danb]

We are getting some heat from those who want us to focus solely on carry and not be spending resources on bringing suits like the HQL and Kolbe suits. Here is the response I posted on our Facebook page:

A few points. MSI has definitely not lost focus. Carry is still very much our mission. But that mission includes the right of self-defense at its core. As others have pointed out, the Woollard litigation settled the constitutionality of Good and Substantial in the Fourth Circuit. That suit was brought and lost. As a lawyer, I can tell you that pretty much precludes further litigation on that specific issue, at least until Congress mandates nation-wide reciprocity or the Supreme Court acts on the issue. In the meantime, I spend a lot of time supporting litigation in other circuits that present this issue, such as the Baker case in the 9th Circuit and the Grace/Wrenn case in the D.C. Circuit. We are not sitting on our hands in Maryland. We are also pushing on every front in Maryland for whatever incremental changes we can obtain on the carry issue. I don't have to tell you how difficult that is in Maryland, but we have not given up. Not by a long shot.

Second, the HQL suit and carry are related. Both involve Second Amendment rights. That is why we are a named plaintiff in the Kolbe case (the magazine and rifle ban). All these matters involve your right to keep and bear arms. A person cannot keep and bear arms if he cannot buy them either because they are banned (Kolbe) or because it is difficult or too expensive to navigate all the obstacles the State places in your path (HQL). That is what the HQL suit is about -- the right to keep and bear arms. The suit highlights the discriminatory aspects of the HQL requirements and makes clear that the real issue is the right to self defense. That is what carry is about too. A successful result in the suit will affect carry rights, as the Second Amendment law developed in an HQL suit will carry over to other Second Amendment issues. A frontal attack failed in Woollard. It is now all about attacking on the flanks where the State's defenses are weaker. A win in the HQL suit, even a partial win, will affect everything. That's just how the law works.

Some of us allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good. Some of also forget that in the minds of people like Frosh, HQL is only the beginning.

 

[danb]

Time to kick in another contribution to the HQL law suit fund!
https://www.marylandshallissue.org/jmain/16-fundraising/9-fightmdhql

That link does not seem to work. If you try to donate, the website returns an error.

This one seems to work however:

https://www.marylandshallissue.org/jmain/join

 

[Schipperke]

There are over ten states with licensing schemes to purchase or even own a firearm (any firearm). Many include a training requirement. Always hear people on the training requirement, claim the "one shot" rule in MD is unique, well that can be fixed with a sharpie pen, and you still have the scheme like over 20% of the states have. I'm just not sure why this kind of argument against the HQL is so special, when it appears no other states fight it, or may have and lost. The problem with "burden", it is very subjective, unless you are a leftist talking voter registration.. then anything is a burden.

 

[Uncle Duke]

I absolutely applaud MSI's leadership in bringing the HQL lawsuit. While the ultimate success of this lawsuit remains to be seen, there likewise exists the absolute certainty of zero chance of any degree of success given a sorely needed legal argument never presented. Win lose or draw, this clearly tyrannical law relegating a Constitutionally protected right to a state mandated and fees attached privilege needs to be challenged at its very core.

 

[Jaybeez]

There are over ten states with licensing schemes to purchase or even own a firearm (any firearm). Many include a training requirement. Always hear people on the training requirement, claim the "one shot" rule in MD is unique, well that can be fixed with a sharpie pen, and you still have the scheme like over 20% of the states have. I'm just not sure why this kind of argument against the HQL is so special, when it appears no other states fight it, or may have and lost. The problem with "burden", it is very subjective, unless you are a leftist talking voter registration.. then anything is a burden.

Those other states have possession licenses. Md's license isnt even a purchase license, because md still requires another duplicate process for purchases. Md's license is a license to fill out the purchase application.

Its not a license to get an abortion. Its a license to set an appointment to apply to get permission to get an abortion.

 

[aray]

We didn't lose our rights overnigt and we won't win them all back overnight either. This is an important step. Way to go MSI.

Also there are three branches of government. We address the Legislative Branch every year starting in January with the General Assembly lobbying efforts, RR's Patriot Pickets, etc. There are also lots of MDS threads about the Executive Branch and Hogan if you want to view those. This is our play now within the Judicial Branch. The alternative is to sit on our hands. I'm proud that we have an active organization like MSI that is actually doing something rather than sitting at home and sniping about the situation over the internet. Hats off to the MSI BOD for leading us to this point.

 

[MDFF2008]

I'm excited. Even if we lose on the HQL, destroying the 1 shot requirement would be a win for me.

I think the people who are upset, some of them don't know about Woollard, others may not understand that you can't really sue for the same reason over and over. I know a lot of people over the years have asked about why we don't sue over Shall Issue again with a new plaintiff.

 

[CrazySanMan]

Can we get an ally in the General Assembly to submit a bill with the same exact requirements as the HQL, but make it for voter registration instead of a handgun purchase?

 

[BeoBill]

There are over ten states with licensing schemes to purchase or even own a firearm (any firearm). Many include a training requirement. Always hear people on the training requirement, claim the "one shot" rule in MD is unique, well that can be fixed with a sharpie pen, and you still have the scheme like over 20% of the states have. I'm just not sure why this kind of argument against the HQL is so special, when it appears no other states fight it, or may have and lost. The problem with "burden", it is very subjective, unless you are a leftist talking voter registration.. then anything is a burden.

I know of no other state that requires training twice in the process of obtaining a concealed/carry permit. The cupidity of the MGA is unique in that respect.

 

[Okletsfish]

When dealing with the government is all about the money.Once they get their fingers in our pockets it is very hard to remove them.

 

[Bob A]

There seems to be a subtext regarding "discrimination" which might force a wedge into a crack in order to make this a civil rights/discrimination issue. Hard for the liberals to disparage fighting against discrimination, after all.

 

[ComeGet]

Can we get an ally in the General Assembly to submit a bill with the same exact requirements as the HQL, but make it for voter registration instead of a handgun purchase?

LOL. I like that.

The HQL suit has been in the works for a long, long time. Anyone thinking a different strategy would be better would have done well to bring that up before now.

I'm fully behind it, FWIW.