SAF sues MD over CCW good and sufficient rule
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: SAF sues MD over CCW good and sufficient rule

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Montgomery County, MD
    Posts
    223

    SAF sues MD over CCW good and sufficient rule

    Following the NY lawsuit the SAF filed suit in MD to overturn the MSP policy of having to give a good and sufficient reason to CCW. Maybe the walls are starting to come down

    NEWS RELEASE
    Second Amendment Foundation
    12500 NE Tenth Place • Bellevue, WA 98005
    (425) 454-7012 • FAX (425) 451-3959 • Second Amendment Foundation Online
    SAF SUES IN MARYLAND OVER HANDGUN PERMIT DENIAL
    For Immediate Release: 7/29/2010

    BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation and a Baltimore County, MD man today sued Maryland authorities in federal court because the man’s handgun permit renewal was turned down on the grounds that he could not demonstrate “a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger.”

    The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland.

    Joining SAF in the lawsuit is Raymond Woollard, who was originally issued a carry permit after a man broke into his home during a family gathering in 2002. Woollard’s permit was renewed in 2005, after the man was released from prison. That man now lives about three miles from Woollard. Defendants in the case are Terrence B. Sheridan is the Secretary and Superintendent of the Maryland State Police, and three members of the Maryland Handgun Permit Review Board, Denis Gallagher, Seymour Goldstein and Charles M. Thomas, Jr.

    SAF and Woollard are represented by attorneys Alan Gura of Virginia and Cary J. Hansel of Joseph, Greenwald & Laake of Greenbelt, MD.

    The lawsuit alleges that “Individuals cannot be required to demonstrate that carrying a handgun is ‘necessary as a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger’ as a prerequisite for exercising their Second Amendment rights.” Plaintiffs are seeking a permanent injunction against enforcement of the Maryland provision that requires permit applicants to “demonstrate cause” for the issuance of a carry permit.

    “Laws that empower bureaucrats to deny the exercise of a fundamental civil right because they cannot show good cause to exercise that right can’t possibly stand up under constitutional scrutiny,” said SAF Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “We are supporting Mr. Woollard in this action because constitutional rights trump bureaucratic whims.”

    The Second Amendment Foundation (Second Amendment Foundation Online) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control. SAF has previously funded successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles; New Haven, CT; and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners, a lawsuit against the cities suing gun makers and an amicus brief and fund for the Emerson case holding the Second Amendment as an individual right.

    -END-

  2.   
  3. #2
    It's time we enlist an army of PRO 2A Attorneys and take the country by storm!

  4. #3
    The Washington Post ran a brief article last week on this issue; left out most of the circumstances of the suit, didn't mention the bureaucratic control exercised by Maryland and suggested that the plaintiff merely objected to background check, fingerprinting and training as required by current law. I think Maryland elects its Judiciary and I suspect if one makes a political contribution a permit is easy to come by. Kinda stinks for those of us who just want to travel through that state.

  5. #4
    It was good to see this. After I saw the NY filing I became a SAF life member. Of course the NRA and NYSRPA (as far as NY) are nowhere to be found. Alan Gottlieb and the group are doing great things.

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by CPO15 View Post
    The Washington Post ran a brief article last week on this issue; left out most of the circumstances of the suit, didn't mention the bureaucratic control exercised by Maryland and suggested that the plaintiff merely objected to background check, fingerprinting and training as required by current law. I think Maryland elects its Judiciary and I suspect if one makes a political contribution a permit is easy to come by. Kinda stinks for those of us who just want to travel through that state.
    That's funny right there...MD doesn't require ANY training...

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    993
    Neither does Indiana, but we're not a shall-issue state.
    When they "Nudge. Shove. Shoot.",
    Don't retreat. Just reload.

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Tommyquest View Post
    It was good to see this. After I saw the NY filing I became a SAF life member. Of course the NRA and NYSRPA (as far as NY) are nowhere to be found. Alan Gottlieb and the group are doing great things.
    Except for in my opinion, their continued retaining of Attorney Alan Gura Esq., whom repeatably concedes acceptable infringements to the Second Amendment in front of the Court while supposedly defending the Second Amendment...

    http://www.usacarry.com/forums/firea...d-dummies.html

    http://www.usacarry.com/forums/firea...-gun-bans.html

    http://www.usacarry.com/forums/polit...e-2a-laws.html

    Nationwide call to action: Amend/Repeal/Challenge Constitutionality of 1986 FOPA

    Amend/Repeal Class III Ban - A Stepping Stone To Total Gun Confiscation

    Gun bans - Don't think it can happen, watch

    Mythology of the "In Common" Use Firearm or Weapon Criteria...

    The NRA Continues To Compromise On The Second Amendment

    D.C. Appeals Court Upholds Mandatory Gun Licensing

    "The people never give up their liberties, but under some delusion." - Edmund Burke

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    42
    Quote Originally Posted by CathyInBlue View Post
    Neither does Indiana, but we're not a shall-issue state.
    Uhh, yeah, IN is a shall-issue state. We're not a may-issue state. If we pass the BG check, they have to give it to us.

    IC 35-47-2-3 Section 3

    (e) "If it appears to the superintendent that the applicant:
    (1) has a proper reason for carrying a handgun;
    (2) is of good character and reputation;
    (3) is a proper person to be licensed; and
    (4) is:
    (A) a citizen of the United States; or
    (B) not a citizen of the United States but is allowed to carry a firearm in the United States under federal law;the superintendent shall issue to the applicant a qualified or an unlimited license to carry any handgun lawfully possessed by the applicant.

  10. #9

    Arizona's "Constitutional Carry" Initiative

    "The Second Amendment IS my Concealed Carry Permit" - Ted Nugent

    The sooner more take after Arizona's "Constitutional Carry" Initiative ... the better off we all will be in my view...

    "The people never give up their liberties, but under some delusion." - Edmund Burke

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