Maryland Concealed Carry Permit - Page 10
Page 10 of 26 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 252

Thread: Maryland Concealed Carry Permit

  1. #91

    Things Are Changing

    Victory For The Constitution in Maryland

    We just received word that the United States District Court for the District of Maryland has granted a motion for summary judgement for plaintiff Ray Woollard in the Woollard v. Sheridan case that challenged the good and substantial requirement for issuance of a permit to carry a handgun.

    You'll recall that this is the federal court case that Maryland Shall Issue helped to fund through a $10,000.00 donation to the Second Amendement Foundation who spearheaded this effort.

    Ladies and gentlemen, we won!

    This is all breaking news and there is far too much analysis to be done to comment any further today, but we wanted to make sure that MSI's members were aware of this exciting news.

    A copy of the opinion can be found here.

    Here are some important excerpts from the opinion:

    "Because the ―good and substantial reason requirement is not reasonably adapted to a substantial government interest, the Court finds this portion of the Maryland law to be unconstitutional. Woollard is entitled to summary judgment. "

    "A law that burdens the exercise of an enumerated constitutional right by simply making that right more difficult to exercise cannot be considered ―reasonably adapted‖ to a government interest, no matter how substantial that interest may be. Maryland‘s goal of ―minimizing the proliferation of handguns among those who do not have a demonstrated need for them,‖ id. at 40, is not a permissible method of preventing crime or ensuring public safety; it burdens the right too broadly. "

    "At bottom, this case rests on a simple proposition: If the Government wishes to burden a right guaranteed by the Constitution, it may do so provided that it can show a satisfactory justification and a sufficiently adapted method. The showing, however, is always the Government‘s to make. A citizen may not be required to offer a good and substantial reason why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs."

    Just got the e-mail today...man this is good news

  2.   
  3. #92
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Panhandle, Idaho
    Posts
    279
    “A citizen may not be required to offer a `good and substantial reason’ why he should be permitted to exercise his rights,” he wrote. “The right’s existence is all the reason he needs.” U.S. District Judge Benson Everett Legg wrote.


    Amen.

  4. #93
    Thats awesome news Farmhood! Thanks for posting that.
    I bet the MDSP are going nuts.

    I dont mean to be a party pooper, but Im sure the left wing MD politicians and the MD State Police are looking for other ways to restrictive CHL's in the state.

    Im willing to bet that the MD leadership would even go as far as not allowing anyone to get a CHL for any reason.
    Sorta like Washington DC and Illinois.

  5. #94
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Montgomery County, MD
    Posts
    223
    The state has appealed to the 4th circuit and asked for a stay. I doubt they will get it because they must prove the decision harms them. Not hardly.

  6. #95
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Tyrone, Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by Swinokur View Post
    The state has appealed to the 4th circuit and asked for a stay. I doubt they will get it because they must prove the decision harms them. Not hardly.
    So MDSP will issue just Woollard a permit and return to business as usual. They may change the application but their "goals" will remain the same. Wish I were wrong.

  7. #96
    I agree. I lived in MD for 20+ years and they will do anything they can to prevent issuing CHL's.

  8. The judge's ruling certainly is NOT news to us here. We not only knew it all along, but it is clearly the intention of the 2nd Amendment. My question to us is this... WHY do we need permission to exercise what is an undisputable RIGHT??? If the state has the authority to tell us whether and when we can keep and bare our arms, then it's a privilege, not a right. We need to stop being wimps, dammit!
    Heck, I'd like to see lawful gun owners orchestrate a gun owners "occupy" the state capitol... with our guns in tow. (maybe not loaded, for this purpose)
    Who's game?

  9. #98
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Tyrone, Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    25

  10. Quote Originally Posted by Darkmagus View Post
    The judge's ruling certainly is NOT news to us here. We not only knew it all along, but it is clearly the intention of the 2nd Amendment. My question to us is this... WHY do we need permission to exercise what is an undisputable RIGHT??? If the state has the authority to tell us whether and when we can keep and bare our arms, then it's a privilege, not a right. We need to stop being wimps, dammit!
    Heck, I'd like to see lawful gun owners orchestrate a gun owners "occupy" the state capitol... with our guns in tow. (maybe not loaded, for this purpose)
    Who's game?
    Please do not do this. While I agree with you, the way the police have treated UNARMED peaceful protesters has been violent, deadly, and appalling. If you bring guns into the mix, they will not be using pepper spray and rubber bullets to stop the protest, besides this those who are arrested will be stripped of their privilege to bear arms due to our justice system being horribly corrupt and broken at the moment. The news will spin you all as some fanatical gun nuts and use it as ammunition to show how "crazy gun people are". They will make some **** up about how someone was waving their gun around or whatever and the truth will not matter.

    Instead I would recommend doing what many other states have done and has worked well, start a militia of law abiding owners. Like VA's Citizens Defense League, an organization that supports the 2nd and brings the community together, they affect large areas and VA and have done a lot of good. People like these help keep Virginia law as free and fair as it is with respect to firearms. If we can start many organizations like this, and dispel the untruths about gun owners in doing so the laws will come naturally. We will have to fight for it, but now when we finally have this small victory after 36 years of oppression is not the time to protest, it is a time to celebrate. We are not doing enough to befriend the community and teach them with a calm tone and kind hand even while they sceam and kick. Now is the time to show the state we are good people with good intentions. That we are responsible with our lives and our guns. Regardless of our beliefs marching around washington demanding our rights will get us nowhere, as evidenced with the occupy movement. The gov has become too corrupt for peaceful protests to be effective, we must target our own communities, friends, and families so that every single citizen will speak on our behalf whenever they try to infringe on our rights.

  11. #100
    I moved to Florida from MD. in 1987. I own a gun school In Florida and have a 2ndAmendment Radio show on Sunday Nights at 7:00 EST called the BULLSEYE and we will be discussing this week what this Judges ruling means to law abiding citizens. If this sticks it will be a far reaching changing of state gun laws. I left MD because of their liberal anti gun laws. Here in Fla. we have a more logical set of laws when it comes to our second amendment rights. Hopefully Congress will pass HR 922 for National Reciprocity so that I can go back and visit MD again.
    BTTBBOB
    President & Chief Instructor
    www.sflagunschool.com

Page 10 of 26 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast