Posts tagged right to carry
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling yesterday could have major implications on Maryland’s concealed carry law. The ruling opens the door for a potential Supreme Court Case regarding the Constitutionality of concealed carry permitting.
Last year, the 4th District Court of Appeals struck down a US District Court ruling that Maryland’s requirement to show “good and substantial” cause for a permit was unconstitutional.
California’s permitting requirements are similar to Maryland. It is a “may issue” state. Permitting depends on the local sheriff or police chief from county to county. The law says you have to show good moral character and in San Diego, you also have to show good cause to get one. As in Maryland, self defense is not considered “good and substantial” reason. In its ruling, the 9th circuit said the county’s narrow view of good cause violates the 2nd amendment right to bear arms for self defense. article
Gun Rights resources:
The policies and actions of the Governor and Democratic Controlled State Legislature has resulted in not only loss of individual liberty, but also the loss of economic advantage. Businesses like Beretta USA which had plans to expand in Maryland, but scrapped it after last years gun ban was passed, have packed up and left town.
Below is the letter written by CEO and president of Beretta Holding S.p.A, Ugo Gussalli Beretta- it is well worth the read.
My family has operated our business from the same small town in northern Italy for 500 years. This means that when we make a commitment to a local community, our hope is to do so for decades, if not centuries, to come.
We apply this same philosophy to all of our factories and locations throughout the world. Such a commitment is not a one-way street, though.
In return for our investment in jobs, facilities and assistance to the local economy, we ask for respect and a supportive business climate.
We deserve such respect. We make the standard sidearm for the U.S. armed forces. We also make firearms that police and consumers use to save their lives and the lives of others.
We also make sporting firearms that are enjoyed by tens of millions of people worldwide, from Olympic shooters to weekend hunters.
Our business has grown in recent years, and because of that, we needed to expand production in our U.S facility, located in Accokeek, just outside of Washington, D.C., in the Maryland suburbs.
Unfortunately, as we were planning that expansion, Maryland’s governor and legislature voted in favor of new regulations that unfairly attack products we make and that our customers want.
These regulations also demean our law-abiding customers, who must now be fingerprinted like criminals before they can be allowed to purchase one of our products.
We have seen these types of legislative proposals in Maryland before, and they never seem to reduce crime. Maybe this is because the proponents of such legislation blame the product instead of human misconduct.’
But in any event, because of these new restrictions and the pattern of harassment aimed at lawful firearm owners we have seen in Maryland over the decades, we decided to expand our facilities in a state that shows more respect for citizens who exercise their Second Amendment rights.
We chose Tennessee for our new facility expansion. Our plans for that location are extensive and long-lasting.
We chose Tennessee because the governor and legislators in that state understand what it means to support businesses (such as through job recruitment and training programs) that improve employment in the state without treating companies as a necessary evil.
We chose Tennessee also because the vast majority of its residents and their elected officials have shown that they respect and honor the American tradition of personal freedoms, including the right to bear arms.
Ugo Gussalli Beretta
The following are summaries of gun bills introduced in the 2014 Legislative Session. If you feel strongly about any of them, please click on the link for the sponsor for their contact information.
This bill is a repeal of the requirement that the State Police determine “good and substantial” justification for issuing a Concealed Carry Permit.
This would require Maryland recognize Concealed Carry Permits issued by other states.
This bill would permit possession or transport by a nonresident of the State of an assault weapon or a detachable magazine that has been legally purchased outside the State for the purpose of using the assault weapon or detachable magazine to participate in an organized military activity, a target shoot, formal or informal target practice, or a sport shooting event, having the assault weapon or detachable magazine repaired at a bona fide repair shop, or traveling through the State for a lawful purpose. This bill intends to resolve the issues created by SB 281 which would make non residents engaging in military or sport shooting events in Maryland or traveling through Maryland “criminals” and subject to potential arrest.
This bill requires the Secretary of State Police to issue a handgun permit to a person who has been issued a handgun qualification license. The HQL is now a requirement for all purchases of handguns in Maryland as per the new assault weapons ban of last year.
This bill would prohibit a person from using any material to create or modify a detachable magazine and prohibits a person from using a 3-dimentional printer to manufacture a firearm receiver.
Would ban 8th day transfers, allowing the MSP to shut down handgun sales simply by not acting on applications. The 8th day release was implemented because of the risk that MSP would use the approval process to shut down firearm sales.
This bill creates a task force to study implementation of requiring GPS devices on every firearm. This would also open the door to a firearm registry. And expenses and compensations to the members of the task force would be funded by your tax dollars.
This bill would extend the prohibition of “deadly weapons” including firearms and knives on school property to include Private School property. While this exempts police and any potential school guards, it’s clear that such laws do not actually stop criminals from bringing weapons onto school property.
The 2014 Legislative session is underway. I will be using this site to post updates and track bills of special interest to the cause of liberty and constitutional governance in Maryland.
To kick things off I’d like to highlight a couple of bills that have already been introduced in the MD House of Delegates by Delegate Frank Conaway
This bill states that you have no right to respond to violence with anything other than retreat and that self defense can only be used as a defense if you can prove that you had no means of escape.
In other words, it does not matter that a violent criminal is in your home with a gun threatening you, your wife and your children, you may not defend them so long as you can crawl out the window, climb down a fire escape and run down the street for” help”.
This bill makes it illegal for you to not follow the orders of a 9-11 operator.
This bill establishes a task force to study the “feasibility, utility and costs” of using GPS technology to track every firearm sold and possessed in MD. You read that right, it lays the ground to potentially put gps devices on every legally owned firearm in MD. The bill also establishes that state money (your dollars) be spent conducting this “study”
If you have any questions about these bills you can contact Delegate Conaway by email firstname.lastname@example.org or phone 410-841-3189
Regretfully, Maryland refuses to recognize the legitimate Constitutional right to Keep and Bear Arms under the 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. There is no Constitutional provision that supports Maryland’s position that all firearms must be registered with the State and that you must hold a State issued permit to lawfully carry a firearm. I have always held and voted that every Law-Abiding citizen has the right to own and carry a firearm without a permit. After all, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Vermont, Wyoming and Oklahoma, do not require a permit to carry a firearm in public. Click Here for additional information on Constitutional Carry states.
other helpful links:
Press Release: Citizen Delivers over 20,000 Pages of Testimony in Opposition to O’Mallys Gun Grabbing Agenda
Today, Delegate Don Dwyer received and delivered to the House Judiciary Committee, about 20 thousand sheets of written testimony submitted by Mr. Mike Endzel of Easton on behalf of citizens opposing the many gun ban bills being heard on Friday March 1st, including HB 294 the Governor’s so called “Firearms Safety Act”
Mr. Endzel and Chris Dingler created a website www.nationalbands.com to provide a venue for people who are not able to come to Annapolis in person, to submit written testimony for what has become a galvanizing issue for many Marylanders.
Mr. Endzel had not previously participated in the Legislative process, but was moved to do so because of this issue and had come to Annapolis on February 6 along with close to 4,000 other citizens. He said that his inspiration for the idea came after he stood in line to sign up to testify for over 5 hours but in the end was not afforded the opportunity to speak. Mr. Endzel said that he received emails from disabled veterans who stated that they would not be physically capable of coming to Annapolis to testify in person, thanking him for providing a means to have their voice heard. Mr. Endzel committed to printing the required 70 copies at his own cost and delivering the testimonies to Delegate Dwyer.
“I think it is a wonderful thing he has done. The Legislature has never before seen the amount of emails, phone calls and people out in opposition to these “gun control” bills. I commend Mike for what he has done to help give people a voice in the process.” Said Delegate Dwyer
You numbered so many that they had to close the building for safety reasons at the request of DGS Police and State Police because of the fire code capacity.
This has never happened in Annapolis! And you all did it!
I want to assure each of you that came and signed in but was not able to speak- your name is recorded and entered in the record as opposing this legislation. Please do not go away with the thought that because you couldn’t testify, your voice was not heard, or that your time was wasted. More than individual testimony, it was critically important that you show up in solid numbers, you did and your voice was heard!
I will call on you again- this is not a one day fight, but an ongoing battle. These bills and many others will be heard in the House of Delegates and I will contact you when the date of the hearing is announced. We need each of you to come back and bring more people. We can show them that we won’t back down defending our civil rights.
Don H. Dwyer, Jr.
Below I am posting the letter that I have sent to the Maryland Sheriffs Association regarding their Oath of office to uphold the Constitution and urging them to defend the right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights against any unconstitutional law which infringes on that right.
Maryland Sheriffs’ Association
Sheriff Michael A. Lewis
410 Naylor Mill Road Salisbury, MD 21803
Thursday, January 31, 2013
Dear Sheriff Lewis,
In light of President Obama’s intent to infringe the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Citizens across America by way of Executive Orders, I am calling on you and the members of the Maryland Sheriffs’ Association to follow the lead and example of the Utah Sheriffs’ Association in defending the Constitutional rights of Maryland’s Citizens.
I have enclosed a copy of the letter dated 1/17/2013 and sent by the Utah Sheriffs’ Association to President Barack Obama, whereby they refuse to deny the Citizens of their state, the Constitutional protections of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and are prepared to take all action to defend those rights.
It is my hope that the duly elected Sheriffs will remember and honor their vow to uphold the Constitution, rather than enforce any unconstitutional laws stripping Americans of their rights.
On behalf of the Citizens of the State of Maryland,
Delegate Don Dwyer, Jr.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Office of the Attorney General
200 St. Paul Place
Baltimore, MD 21202
Dear Attorney General Gansler,
In light of the most recent Supreme Court decision of MCDONALD ET AL. v. CITY OF CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, ET AL. No. 08–1521. Argued March 2, 2010—Decided June 28, 2010) regarding the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, I would like to know how the decision effects Maryland’s current policies, procedure and law regarding a Maryland Citizens right to carry a firearm regardless of concealed or open carry.
More specifically, does this ruling reverse the current Maryland standard of “good and substantial reason” for the issuance of a carry permit? If not, why not?
Additionally, will Maryland continue with its practice of placing specific limitations on carry permits such as someone only being permitted to carry to or from work or while carrying large sums of cash?
As you might expect, I have many constituents who heard about the decision on June 28th. As result there are questions being asked that I am not able to answer. Your prompt response is greatly appreciated.
Delegate Don Dwyer, Jr.
Anne Arundel County District 31