Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: SAF takes on Maryland

  1. #1
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691

    SAF takes on Maryland

    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.”

    This filing looks like a no brainer. A good precedent for Calif to notice if SAF prevails.
    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.

  2. #2
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660
    Good for SAF and Gura! Should be a no-brainer slam dunk. However, wasn't it Scalia who said concealed carry may not be constitutional under 2A? Loosely paraphrasing here, of course.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691
    Quote Originally Posted by coolusername2007 View Post
    Good for SAF and Gura! Should be a no-brainer slam dunk. However, wasn't it Scalia who said concealed carry may not be constitutional under 2A? Loosely paraphrasing here, of course.
    I don't see much difference between OC and CC. One way you see it, the other way you don't. You still have a gun. Let the people with anxiety disorder get professional help. I would suggest exposure therapy.
    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.

  4. #4
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660
    Gundude, would you be suggesting we invite the entire Supreme Court to a UOC event?! I like it, it would be like a liberty learning field trip for them! Imagine the benefits if they could actually experience liberty for themselves! What a great idea!

  5. #5
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691
    Quote Originally Posted by coolusername2007 View Post
    Gundude, would you be suggesting we invite the entire Supreme Court to a UOC event?! I like it, it would be like a liberty learning field trip for them! Imagine the benefits if they could actually experience liberty for themselves! What a great idea!
    A SOCTUS/anitgun politicians UOC event. That would be enough exposure therapy to cure them in one shot. It would be the biggest meetup in history. I want the foreign and domestic video rights.
    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.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •