maryland gun rights now exist outside the home

S

SmarterthanYou

rebel
Ruling in the case of Woollard v. Sheridan, – the U.S. District Court for Maryland ruled that “The Court finds that the right to bear arms is not limited to the home.”

U.S. District Court Judge Benson Everett Legg noted, “In addition to self-defense, the (Second Amendment) right was also understood to allow for militia membership and hunting. To secure these rights, the Second Amendment‘s protections must extend beyond the home: neither hunting nor militia training is a household activity, and ‘self-defense has to take place wherever [a] person happens to be’.”

This is awesome news.
 
Maryland submitted it's first brief today to ask the court to make permanent the hold on issuing concealed handgun permits and it's rank with misinformation and practically dares the public to commit suicide.

http://monachuslex.com/?p=577

The state made several arguments in their brief which can only be described as jaw-droppingly misleading.

They start by expressing deep concern for those who do have a “good and substantial reason” to receive a handgun permit and how unfair this ruling could be to them because in the event that the state wins their appeal, they plan on revoking any permits issued during the interim. They fail to mention that “good and substantial reason” is often a code word for “campaign donor” in may-issue states such as Maryland.

They then go on to make the astonishing argument that, despite the almost universal experience of the rest of the country to the contrary, “shall issue” laws “likely increase the rate of aggravated assaults.” Without going into too much detail here, I will direct you to page 35 of Guy Smith’s Gun Facts for an excellent summarization of the data and studies which debunk this particular assertion.

The next argument they make is to parrot the thoroughly discredited VPC claims about permit holders committing crimes.

Finally, they made the assertion that a restriction on handguns did not foreclose armed self-defense since long guns could be legally carried openly for self-defense outside the home. I imagine that the first Baltimore citizen who tries such a thing will be treated with all the courtesy that the Baltimore PD can muster.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
Maryland submitted it's first brief today to ask the court to make permanent the hold on issuing concealed handgun permits and it's rank with misinformation and practically dares the public to commit suicide.

http://monachuslex.com/?p=577

The state made several arguments in their brief which can only be described as jaw-droppingly misleading.

They start by expressing deep concern for those who do have a “good and substantial reason” to receive a handgun permit and how unfair this ruling could be to them because in the event that the state wins their appeal, they plan on revoking any permits issued during the interim. They fail to mention that “good and substantial reason” is often a code word for “campaign donor” in may-issue states such as Maryland.

They then go on to make the astonishing argument that, despite the almost universal experience of the rest of the country to the contrary, “shall issue” laws “likely increase the rate of aggravated assaults.” Without going into too much detail here, I will direct you to page 35 of Guy Smith’s Gun Facts for an excellent summarization of the data and studies which debunk this particular assertion.

The next argument they make is to parrot the thoroughly discredited VPC claims about permit holders committing crimes.

Finally, they made the assertion that a restriction on handguns did not foreclose armed self-defense since long guns could be legally carried openly for self-defense outside the home. I imagine that the first Baltimore citizen who tries such a thing will be treated with all the courtesy that the Baltimore PD can muster.
Click to expand...

i'm still laughing at the underlined.

muskets anyone?
 
Yurt said:
i'm still laughing at the underlined.

muskets anyone?
Click to expand...

If you want I guess, I'd carry this:

RFB.jpg
 
Alan Gura and Cary Hansel have submitted their brief to the judge and they tore apart the state of marylands brief.

http://monachuslex.com/?p=828

Plaintiff’s attorneys quickly latched onto the concession in footnote 1 of the state’s brief wherein the state concedes that the court has no discretion to grant a stay as-applied to the plaintiff. They note that this case involves “the widespread denial of a fundamental constitutional right” and that since the state has “never claimed that Woollard is differently-situated than anyone else, or that they erred in applying the ["good and substantial reason"] requirement against him … f the Court lacks discretion to stay the injunction in Woollard’s favor, it lacks discretion to stay the injunction in the public’s favor.”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top