Long Island Shooters Forum banner
1 - 20 of 176 Posts

·
Bangkok rules. Now who has a can?
Joined
·
11,589 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
just saw this...

http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2012/03/05/md-gun-law-found-unconstitutional/

Md. Gun Law Found Unconstitutional

March 5, 2012 12:29 PM

BALTIMORE (AP) - A federal judge has ruled that Maryland's handgun permit law is unconstitutional.

In an opinion filed Monday, U.S. District Judge Benson Everett Legg says a requirement that residents show a "good and substantial reason" to carry a handgun infringes their Second Amendment right to bear arms. He says it isn't sufficiently tailored to the state's public safety interests.

Plaintiff Raymond Woollard was denied a renewal of his permit in 2009 because he could not show he had been subject to "threats occurring beyond his residence." Woollard obtained the permit after fighting with an intruder in his Hampstead home in 2002.

The lawsuit, which names the state police superintendent and members of the Handgun Permit Review Board, was also filed on behalf of the Bellevue, Wash.-based Second Amendment Foundation.
 

·
Bangkok rules. Now who has a can?
Joined
·
11,589 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
just saw this...

http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2012/03/05/md-gun-law-found-unconstitutional/

Md. Gun Law Found Unconstitutional

March 5, 2012 12:29 PM

BALTIMORE (AP) - A federal judge has ruled that Maryland's handgun permit law is unconstitutional.

In an opinion filed Monday, U.S. District Judge Benson Everett Legg says a requirement that residents show a "good and substantial reason" to carry a handgun infringes their Second Amendment right to bear arms. He says it isn't sufficiently tailored to the state's public safety interests.

Plaintiff Raymond Woollard was denied a renewal of his permit in 2009 because he could not show he had been subject to "threats occurring beyond his residence." Woollard obtained the permit after fighting with an intruder in his Hampstead home in 2002.

The lawsuit, which names the state police superintendent and members of the Handgun Permit Review Board, was also filed on behalf of the Bellevue, Wash.-based Second Amendment Foundation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,389 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,389 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
319 Posts
From Dave Hardy's site:

http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2012/03/2a_victory_in_m.php

The Maryland handgun carry permit statute requires the applicant to show that he "has good and substantial reason to wear, carry, or transport a handgun, such as a finding that the permit is necessary as a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger." Plaintiff had had a home invasion, was issued a permit for a time, then was denied it since he could not show a current threat.

The court applied intermediate scrutiny, and notes that the requirement has no significant link to reducing crime. Rather it operates a rationing system. Maryland argued that guns in general pose risks -- law-abiding owners might not always be law-abiding, criminals might steal them -- to which the court responds that you could make the same argument to support a system which arbitrarily issued a permit to every tenth applicant. Maryland also argued that use in self-defense might escalate a situation or lead to accidental injuries -- to which the court replies that that is a peculiar argument, since the permit system supposedly ensures that carry permits go to those most likely to become a victim of crime, and thus most likely to use a gun in self-defense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
319 Posts
From Dave Hardy's site:

http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2012/03/2a_victory_in_m.php

The Maryland handgun carry permit statute requires the applicant to show that he "has good and substantial reason to wear, carry, or transport a handgun, such as a finding that the permit is necessary as a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger." Plaintiff had had a home invasion, was issued a permit for a time, then was denied it since he could not show a current threat.

The court applied intermediate scrutiny, and notes that the requirement has no significant link to reducing crime. Rather it operates a rationing system. Maryland argued that guns in general pose risks -- law-abiding owners might not always be law-abiding, criminals might steal them -- to which the court responds that you could make the same argument to support a system which arbitrarily issued a permit to every tenth applicant. Maryland also argued that use in self-defense might escalate a situation or lead to accidental injuries -- to which the court replies that that is a peculiar argument, since the permit system supposedly ensures that carry permits go to those most likely to become a victim of crime, and thus most likely to use a gun in self-defense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,389 Posts
A couple of major points that address our situation here in NY are:

"For all of these reasons, the Court finds that the right to bear arms is not limited to the home. The signposts left by recent Supreme Court and Fourth Circuit case law all point to the conclusion that Woollard's "claim to self-defense-asserted by him as a law-abiding citizen . . .-does implicate the Second Amendment, albeit subject to lawful limitations."

"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. Those who drafted and ratified the Second Amendment surely knew that the right they were enshrining carried a risk of misuse, and states have considerable latitude to channel the exercise of the right in ways that will minimize that risk. States may not, however, seek to reduce the danger by means of widespread curtailment of the right itself."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,389 Posts
A couple of major points that address our situation here in NY are:

"For all of these reasons, the Court finds that the right to bear arms is not limited to the home. The signposts left by recent Supreme Court and Fourth Circuit case law all point to the conclusion that Woollard's "claim to self-defense-asserted by him as a law-abiding citizen . . .-does implicate the Second Amendment, albeit subject to lawful limitations."

"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. Those who drafted and ratified the Second Amendment surely knew that the right they were enshrining carried a risk of misuse, and states have considerable latitude to channel the exercise of the right in ways that will minimize that risk. States may not, however, seek to reduce the danger by means of widespread curtailment of the right itself."
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,290 Posts
Calling SteveG, come in SteveG.....
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,290 Posts
Calling SteveG, come in SteveG.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
365 Posts
LOL...beat me by 2 minutes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
365 Posts
LOL...beat me by 2 minutes.
 

·
Anti-Statist
Joined
·
5,359 Posts
Paging Steve. Come in Steve. Steve to the OR.

Ladies and Gentlemen. Today is a good day.

It should only be a matter of time before NY sees a similar victory.

If you aren't a member yet, Join the SAF. Seriously, its like $150 for lifetime, and $15 for a year.
 

·
Anti-Statist
Joined
·
5,359 Posts
Paging Steve. Come in Steve. Steve to the OR.

Ladies and Gentlemen. Today is a good day.

It should only be a matter of time before NY sees a similar victory.

If you aren't a member yet, Join the SAF. Seriously, its like $150 for lifetime, and $15 for a year.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,290 Posts
With all of the conflicting decisions floating around in the district and appellate level courts, scotus is going to have to get involved.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,290 Posts
With all of the conflicting decisions floating around in the district and appellate level courts, scotus is going to have to get involved.
 
1 - 20 of 176 Posts
Top