Maryland Concealed Carry Permit


JOgershok

JOgershok
I can't say I would be terribly surprised if troop was MSP. They think they're above the law. We all know how good the police are when it comes to carrying. They only shoot their own in Baltimore.

Oh SNAP! You really know where to hit...
 

JOgershok

JOgershok
So cold, hard facts

The response time for protection is 10 minutes can one afford to WAIT for protection?

The state of Vermont where "every idiot can legally carry a gun everywhere" hardly bears resemblance to the country of Iraq!

So Troop where are you getting your facts from and maybe you can tell us when was the last time one of the local Md thugs registered a handgun?

Never, ever forget THE POLICE HAVE NO DUTY TO PROTECT YOU unless you are in their custody. If they exceed the "so called" reasonable response time or don't show up at all, you can NOT sue them. The only person who has a duty to protect you or your family is you.

Unlike the recently touted "right to health care" which does NOT appear in the Constitution of the US or its amendments, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." is specifically delineated. It is a RIGHT not a privilege - big difference.

When was the last time T2T was in Iraq or Afghanistan for that matter? How about some real facts for T2T to quote: Baltimore has a 34.8 per 100,000 people murder or non-negligent manslaughter rate (only major cities of New Orleans (52.9) and St. Louis (40.5), exceed the rate.) [Link Removed Sounds like "gun control" has "done a bang up job" in Baltimore.

{City of Baltimore: Pop 639,929 with 223 incidents in 2010 of murder or non-negligent manslaughter.**
 
Last edited:

JOgershok

JOgershok
What the founders said about "keep and bear..."

-- George Washington:
A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.

Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence ... From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that is good.


-– James Madison:
Americans have the right and advantage of being armed – unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.


-– Samuel Adams:
The Constitution shall never be construed … to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.


-– Alexander Hamilton:
The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.


-- George Mason:
When the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor...


-- Patrick Henry:
Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?

Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined.


-– Thomas Jefferson:
The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that... it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.

A strong body makes a strong mind. As to the species of exercise I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Let your gun, therefore, be the constant companion of your walks.
 

LUV2JOURNEY

New member
Mary land is not a Maryland

The newest posts on here are almost 3 years old and the underarm pits that are still running the state into the ground. The crook's carry their weapons brazenly, without a care in the world. But tax paying, law abiding citizens who follow state laws are treated like a the lowest form of life on the planet!!
 

Abacab

New member
Perhaps not for much longer. Federal court ruled that Maryland's good and substantial is unconstitutional.
 

JOgershok

JOgershok
T2T,

According to the court in the Woollard Decision, this is what Bear means: Heller’s definition of one of the Amendment’s central terms, “bear,” further suggests that the right, though it may be subject to limitations, does not stop at one’s front door: “To bear arms,’ as used in the Second Amendment, is to ‘wear, bear, or carry... upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose . . . of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person’” 554 U.S. at 584
 

Farmhood

New member
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
 

Stiofan

New member
“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.
 

Ricochet

New member
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.
 

Swinokur

New member
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.
 

JOgershok

JOgershok
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.
 

Darkmagus

New member
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?
 

Tricky

New member
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.
 

Bttbbob

New member
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.
 

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,498
Messages
624,365
Members
74,345
Latest member
zoesmith
Top