Will the New York ruling ever take place in MD?

[Threeband]

They are trying to ban carry on private property by default: churches, amusement parks, banks, and any private business of any type would have to post a sign allowing carry, otherwise it's illegal: the opposite of .

How can the state ban carry in my private business by default? Or in my church?

This is beyond outrageous. I hope these people get seriously smacked down, and very soon.

It reminds me of the old racist rules requiring blacks to read a passage of Chinese or Arabic in order to vote.

 

[Allen65]

They are trying to ban carry on private property by default: churches, amusement parks, banks, and any private business of any type would have to post a sign allowing carry, otherwise it's illegal: the opposite of .

How can the state ban carry in my private business by default? Or in my church?

This is beyond outrageous. I hope these people get seriously smacked down, and very soon.

It reminds me of the old racist rules requiring blacks to read a passage of Chinese or Arabic in order to vote.

The judicial smackdown of this idiocy is going to be a beautiful sight to behold. I don't think this country has seen such outright contemptuous defiance of a SCOTUS ruling by the chief law enforcement officers of multiple states since Brown v Board of Ed. And that didn't end well for the holdouts.

 

[Threeband]

I thought of a cartoon/meme of Frosh standing in the courthouse door, mumbling defiantly, "Good and Substantial today, Good and Substantial tomorrow, Good and Substantial forever!"

Of course he's wearing his "We Will Not Comply " tee shirt.

 

[Bob A]

Don't forget the axe handles attack dogs and fire hoses.

And the sheets and hoods. For evening wear.

 

[fabsroman]

With Woolard still controlling in CA4, believe a new case citing NYSRPA will be needed

How is Woolard controlling after the SCOTUS decision in Buern? Buern is controlling at this point since it is SCOTUS that issued the opinion. Woolard is just plain wrong at this point. A US District Court of Maryland would have to apply Buern, not Woolard. Just the Buern change in the evaluation process of 2A laws puts a lot of these prior anti-2A case opinions in jeopardy. Kolbe v. Hogan is one of those cases that relied on strict scrutiny in the evaluation process.

This one, where the 4th Circuit applied strict scrutiny, might be coming up before SCOTUS next. Strict scrutiny is no longer part of the evaluation process.

Md. weapons ban fails strict scrutiny, gun groups tell justices

Maryland’s ban on assault-style weapons is unconstitutional because it is not narrowly tailored to the compelling interest of safety, gun rights advocates say.

thedailyrecord.com

It would be a dream come true if SCOTUS strikes down the assault weapon ban, the 10 round mag limitation, and the HQL. If Lou45 was still with us, I would give him a high five, maybe even a hug, if that happened.

 

[Doctor_M]

California could have just saved a lot of ink and said, carrying is prohibited in all places where oxygen is freely available to the public. What a bunch of a$$hats.

 

[AKbythebay]

Here is California’s answer:




I’m sure MGA is watching and taking note.

That is insane. What is left after all those exclusions. So I can walk down the street carrying but essentially can't enter any buildings of any kind. And half the streets are off limits as well. Yeah MD is going to copy this for sure.

Sent from my Galaxy S20 using Tapatalk

 

[6-Pack]

That is insane. What is left after all those exclusions. So I can walk down the street carrying but essentially can't enter any buildings of any kind. And half the streets are off limits as well. Yeah MD is going to copy this for sure.

Sent from my Galaxy S20 using Tapatalk

First armed security guard I see at any of these places I'm calling the police and reporting a person with a firearm. Remember that private, armed security guards need to follow CCW rules as well. Same with judges and politicians - so carrying at court could be problematic. Now this is important because when you challenge the laws, put a few judges on the stand and ask them if they carry in court and if they are treated differently than other members of the public. Let California put all the places it wants - they don't realize the can of worms they are opening.

Banks are on California's list. So now every bank cannot have an armed security guard. Similarly, armored car drivers carrying money can't carry their weapons into a bank. Make it enough of a pain in the @$$ and they will change the law.

 

[Doctor_M]

First armed security guard I see at any of these places I'm calling the police and reporting a person with a firearm. Remember that private, armed security guards need to follow CCW rules as well. Same with judges and politicians - so carrying at court could be problematic. Now this is important because when you challenge the laws, put a few judges on the stand and ask them if they carry in court and if they are treated differently than other members of the public. Let California put all the places it wants - they don't realize the can of worms they are opening.

Banks are on California's list. So now every bank cannot have an armed security guard. Similarly, armored car drivers carrying money can't carry their weapons into a bank. Make it enough of a pain in the @$$ and they will change the law.

I agree, but they are spiteful and petty and will continue to play footsie with this longer than I care to wait. They can always exempt judges and security guards, etc. in the next round of legislation. The AGs of CA and MD have no intention of following the intent and spirit of the SCOTUS decision nor do they care about the ramifications of ignoring the Constitution. I'm not being a defeatist, just being realistic, there are many more rounds of shenanigans to be expected by these two states. Let's strap in, the ride has just started.

 

[Ecestu]

Judge Jeanine: Why aren't liberals outraged by criminals carrying illegal guns?
It looks like Fox is trying to be on the right (conservative) side again. Finally.

 

[Allen65]

Judge Jeanine: Why aren't liberals outraged by criminals carrying illegal guns?
It looks like Fox is trying to be on the right (conservative) side again. Finally.

It's not "illegal guns" that are the problem, it's criminals carrying guns illegally and for illegal purposes. Words need to be chosen carefully these days because nothing goes away.

 

[E.Shell]

It's not "illegal guns" that are the problem, it's criminals carrying guns illegally and for illegal purposes. Words need to be chosen carefully these days because nothing goes away.

The words ARE chosen carefully. It is necessary to villify guns while ignoring criminal behavior in order to pursue the citizen disarmament agenda.

 

[Allen65]

The words ARE chosen carefully. It is necessary to villify guns while ignoring criminal behavior in order to pursue the citizen disarmament agenda.

But isn't she norminally on our side? She should have known better.

 

[Ecestu]

But isn't she norminally on our side? She should have known better.

Isn't a stolen gun or a straw purchase gun used in a crime an illegal gun?

 

[Allen65]

Isn't a stolen gun or a straw purchase gun used in a crime an illegal gun?

No, it's illegally possessed. The gun itself not existentially illegal.

 

[Butcher]

That seems like a very contradictory statement, if you don't feel it's necessary, why would you "certainly be carrying"? Do you suddenly no longer feel a 1000 lumen flashlight and Pepper Gel are enough?

1000Lm flashlight on the end of my Glock

 

[LRoberts]

I don't post often. I live in Montgomery county, right in the middle of the blue. When I walk my dog here, I often run into gangs. Some good, some not so friendly toward my dog that barks a lot. That's why I take him out at night. There have been things that bother me to the point where having some backup would make me feel better.

We should all have Constitutional Carry, but Marylandistan Nazis are against that.

 

[LRoberts]

It should be taken seriously and quickly in MD to comply with the SCOTUS decision. But I believe MD will fight it all the way either by ignoring it or putting so many roadblocks (regulatory and financial) in front of anyone trying to carry legally that it will take lawsuits to force the state into complying.

Just my opinion.

Good opinion, don't apologize.

 

[GTOGUNNER]

I’ll help Flush change his mind. If he doesn’t concede by July 4th. All of my carry will be open carry. Once he concedes I’ll return to carry as needed.
Anyone else?


Sent from an undisclosed location.

 

[DC-W]