Maryland returns unprocessed handgun permit applications

[Dreamer]

I can only guess that the NRA's focus of the Right To Bear Arms instead of the more important Right To Form A Militia is politically motivated. This appears to be deliberate misdirection by the NRA. Anyone with military background knows that the first place a tyrannical government will attack is the enemy's weapon's cache.

Such an absurd post can only be the product of a sock puppet or agent provocateur...

I shouldn't even honor this post with the dignity of a response, but you apparently are so utterly clueless that you are practically BEGGING for a schoolin'...

Does anyone realize this might be the reason the US Government insists upon gun registration? .

Actually a Federal registration system is prohibited by Federal Law, and almost NONE of the States require registration. You are wrong, wrong, wrong on this one...

Our greatest strength against a tyrannical government is the right of all citizens to form a militia regulated by itself which is completely free of government control. Without establishing this NOW we remain defenseless. I must assume the NRA is intelligent enough to know this, yet this most important constitutional ammendment holds second place in their efforts. Why? My opinion is that the US government by the second ammendment has absolutely no jurisdiction regarding our weapons. None! Their having any ability to access information regarding citizens weaponry will only serve to erode our effectiveness against government tyranny. All of this should be common sense. But frighteningly it is not. Do not forget these words, hopefully we will never regret the day we ignored them. A MILITIA BY DESIGN TO BE PREPARED AGAINST A TYRANNICAL GOVERNMENT MUST KEEP THE LOCATION OF ITS WEAPONS CACHE SECRET.

The Second amendment is NOT about protecting the "right" of a militia to keep and bear arms. It is about the PEOPLE having the RKBA, so that if they need to, they CAN form a militia from the populace, using firearms they personally and privately own. The "Militia" has nothing to do with "arms caches" or organized paramilitary groups or whatever.

The 2A recognizes and protects a PERSONAL RIGHT. That would mean it is a right that pertains to INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE.

SAF, NRA GOA and all the rest are right by not focuing on the "militia" aspect, because the existence of the "militia" has nothing to do with the rights protected by the 2A. This is a personal right. If it is preserved, all other rights will follow, and all the power held by the people will be preserved.

 

[Gray Peterson]

PA changed their permit issuance policies last year. You can no longer do mail-in applications, the excuse being that they are using new cards (plastic IDs like a DL) and their system requires that they take your picture themselves.

Actually the REAL reason is that the counties (like around Philly, and Pittsburgh) that do not follow strict PA "shall issue" policy were getting pissed that counties like Center County were raking in tens of thousands of dollars each year on permits, and decided the way to fix the problem was NOT to just follow the law themselves and issue permits like everyone else, but to pass a law that made it nearly impossible for Center County to cash in on their permit issuance.

But the requirement to apply in person so they can take your photo IS a change, and it was pushed into law by the counties that don't like to issue non-resident permits because they were jealous of the income stream that counties like Center County had created by following the PA state law and issuing them in Shall-Issue fashion...

Do you have proof of the above, or just completely unsubstantiated statements & supposition?

 

[Sig229]

Do you have proof of the above, or just completely unsubstantiated statements & supposition?

I believe he is right. Its been a while sine I applied for my PA LTCF.

Also, in PA different counties are allowed to have different rules. Except they cannot change the price ($20) for the LTCF.

I still believe there are a couple of counties tat are accepting mail in non resident applications.
I just dont know which ones. I know my county isnt.

 

[Dreamer]

Do you have proof of the above, or just completely unsubstantiated statements & supposition?

I was told this by one of the Deputies in the Centre County Sheriff's office when I called about changing my address on my current PA non-res. permit.

 

[Dreamer]

I believe he is right. Its been a while sine I applied for my PA LTCF.

Also, in PA different counties are allowed to have different rules. Except they cannot change the price ($20) for the LTCF.

I still believe there are a couple of counties that are accepting mail in non resident applications.
I just dont know which ones. I know my county isnt.

I believe ALL counties in PA have changed over to the new systems, and any NEW permits (resident, and non-res) will be required to use the new system, meaning no more mail-orders.

Replacement non-res permits (like for change-of-address) for the old style cards will continue to be done through the mail, and they will continue to issue old-style replacements, until they come up for renewal.

Centre County stopped accepting mailed-in apps on 31 March 2011.

http://www.co.centre.pa.us/211.asp#license


Many of the "urban" counties (like where Pittsburgh, Philly, and Harrisburg are) have their own special "requirements" like requiring that you own property in the county, or documenting business transactions in the county, or requiring letters of recommendation by residents of the county--ALL of which are illegal under PA law. For some reason, the PA AG refuses to address these counties gross over-reach of authority and brazen disregard for PA statute, and they get away with it.

The "urban counties" pretty much drive the legislature (like in MD) so what they want, they get. They know that places like Centre County (which follow PA Statute) make a LOT of money on permits. And although the urban counties are generally run by greedy sociopaths, their lust for control far exceeds their lust for money, and so they would rather hurt small counties like Centre Co. by limiting their ability to issue permits than submit to State Authority and abide by the State Requirements for the issuance of permits.

 

[mrjam2jab]

PA updated the computer system that they use for issuing LTCF. Every county has the same computer and every county now issues the same card. Previously, depending on where you went you might receive a hard card or a piece of paper. Now all counties must issue the hard card.

Every county is supposed to follow the same guidelines for issuing. There are some counties...not just the urban ones...that illegally create their own "requirements" for the applicant to follow. They will continue to get away with it until applicants start fighting the issue. In my county of Bucks, the sheriff was charging $21 over the legal fee. When I discovered this, I had my wife apply, since I already had mine, and insist on the correct fee. The counter woman said "We don't have that here. This is the correct fee." Then another woman overheard this and said "No, they are right. But for the lower fee they get the paper version, not the card version. It has always been the option of the applicant as to which version/fee they get." Obviously not since the first woman didn't know there was a difference and there was nothing on paper or the website stating such. We got the lower fee. There was a right up about it in the local paper....we had a Council person looking into it. Now all the counties are charging the same.

 

[Gunslinger]

Can't speak to this.



She had it for 1 year during a direct threat in the late 1970's. She let it expire and never had it since. She does not have a carry license. I would know if she did.



Can't speak to this. Massachusetts doesn't allow this info to be public at all for anyone, since LTC A's are required to possess handguns in the home.



She does not, neither in unincorporated Marin County (where she lived) or Riverside County (the city she lives in is patrolled by Riverside Sheriff's).



He does not. He did, but having a stolen plus all of his DV stuff caught up with him. It's been revoked for over a decade.



This is true, and verifiable via Public Records Request.



I know plenty of liberals who believe in the full measure of RKBA. Numerous ones testified in front of the Seattle Parks Board when Mayor Nickels tried to ram through his regulations unlawfully. Two of them were plaintiffs in the state preemption case that was filed against Seattle.

This isn't an invite to argument, but a correction to some of the stuff in re Boxer and Feinstein mostly.

The PDR of MA only requires a firearm ID for any gun in the home. The LTC, A or B, is only required for a handgun to be taken off the owner's property.

 

[Gray Peterson]

PA updated the computer system that they use for issuing LTCF. Every county has the same computer and every county now issues the same card. Previously, depending on where you went you might receive a hard card or a piece of paper. Now all counties must issue the hard card.

Every county is supposed to follow the same guidelines for issuing. There are some counties...not just the urban ones...that illegally create their own "requirements" for the applicant to follow. They will continue to get away with it until applicants start fighting the issue. In my county of Bucks, the sheriff was charging $21 over the legal fee. When I discovered this, I had my wife apply, since I already had mine, and insist on the correct fee. The counter woman said "We don't have that here. This is the correct fee." Then another woman overheard this and said "No, they are right. But for the lower fee they get the paper version, not the card version. It has always been the option of the applicant as to which version/fee they get." Obviously not since the first woman didn't know there was a difference and there was nothing on paper or the website stating such. We got the lower fee. There was a right up about it in the local paper....we had a Council person looking into it. Now all the counties are charging the same.

Philadelphia required fingerprinting and interviews and their own app. When challenged in court, the courts stated that individuals did not have standing to challenge preempted laws. This is being addressed in legislation to allow any person or organization to have standing to challenge, fine localities, charge attorney fees, etc (similar to what Florida passed).

 

[TechnoWeenie]

Philadelphia required fingerprinting and interviews and their own app. When challenged in court, the courts stated that individuals did not have standing to challenge preempted laws. This is being addressed in legislation to allow any person or organization to have standing to challenge, fine localities, charge attorney fees, etc (similar to what Florida passed).

So you can't sue them because the law isn't valid, which means a court won't order the non-existent law to not be followed, and because there is no court order saying that the law is invalid, they continue to do what they want.

Is that the gist of things?

 

[mrjam2jab]

So you can't sue them because the law isn't valid, which means a court won't order the non-existent law to not be followed, and because there is no court order saying that the law is invalid, they continue to do what they want.

Is that the gist of things?

The court challenge was determined to "not have standing" because the folks doing the challenging don't live in Phila so they were not affected by the procedures. It will take a couple Phila residents to challenge it.

 

[Dreamer]

I do not understand why nobody is bringing to light the illegal standards that are being set by MD's "GSR" requirements.

Under MSPs interpretation, a GSR generally means one of three things:
1) you have a real, documented, and immediate threat to your life from another person,
2) you transport large sums of money, or
3) you transport "sensitive" or "valuable" items like drugs or jewelry or precious metal coins.

However, under MD law, it is ILLEGAL to use deadly force (or even the THREAT of deadly force, i.e. "brandishing" to defend property, money or goods. Under MD law, the ONLY acceptable situation for justifiable use of deadly force in self-defense is in a personal attack against a person. Not theft, robbery, or burglary, and CERTAINLY not to defend cash, drugs, or diamonds...

The VAST majority of MD permits that are issued are NOT issued for "reason 1". In fact, it has been estimated that fewer than 120 permits are currently acrtive in MD under the "GSR" of pure self-defense.

So the MSP are REQUIRING people to state that they need a gun to defend things that, under MD law, are NOT legal to defend with deadly force. And they are issuing nearly 90% of all the permits for reasons that are, in their opinion, "good and substantial", but under MD law, are NOT things that may be legally defended with deadly force or even the threat of deadly force.

In essence, the MD State Police are CREATING a dangerous situation where nearly 90% of their permit holders may think they have a legal right to defend property, inventory or cash with their handguns--which is a LIE. MSP is setting up a situation with their permitting process where nearly 90% of the people with permits are actually PROHIBITED BY LAW from using the gun their permit allows them to carry, for the reason they used to get the permit in the first place.

Once one realizes the monumental legal fraud being perpetrated by MSP with their "GSR" requirement and the way it is actually implemented, it becomes clear that either MSP is a large-scale criminal enterprise, or they are TRYING to set up gun owners for prosecution by fooling them into thinking that their permit allows them to use deadly force in situations that are, in fact, PROHIBITED BY MARYLAND LAW.

I was going to bring this up during my testimony for HB-45, but the Chairman cut me short. I did, however, bring it up in conversations with a few Delegates after the session, and have discussed this with several other prominent "activists" from MD. But for some reason, this issue is never addressed in "official channels" like the Courts, or during Legislative debate, or in the press.

The "GSR" requirement in MD is on it's face, immoral, unethical, and arguably illegal, because it requires that an applicant show they need to defend something with a firearm that the law prohibits them from defending with a firearm.

Please, MSI, SAF and Mr. Gura, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, bring this to the attention of the press, the AG and Judge Legg!!!

 

[Sonora Rebel]

Having previously lived, worked and been a cop in MD... the problem with the state, it's government and law enforcement is that it's a culture of entrenched legal 'clutter' and corruption. The MSP in particular has a long-standing culture of 'them vs. us'. I've known many of them. Some were regular guys, but the majority were JBT's with attitudes... even toward other LEA's. The legislature is entrenched stupidity and corruption personified.

This entire permit system is unconstitutional. Rights cannot be bought or sold. Bearing arms is NOT a privilege given by the state. The 2A is a very simple statement. No 'interpretation' is required or was even considered at the time it was written.

"The Second Amendment extends prima facie to all instruments which constitute bearable arms. The amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existance of the right and declares only that it shall not be infringed.": SCJ A. Scalia (2008)

“Surely a most familiar meaning is, as the Constitution’s Second Amendment indicates: ‘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.’ ” Although the phrase implies that the carrying of the weapon is for the purpose of “offensive or defensive action,” it in no way connotes participation in a structured military organization." Muscarello v. United States SCJ R.B. Ginsgurg (1998)

Anything else is 'clutter'. It's also the imposition of tyranny under color of law.

 

[Gray Peterson]

Having previously lived, worked and been a cop in MD... the problem with the state, it's government and law enforcement is that it's a culture of entrenched legal 'clutter' and corruption. The MSP in particular has a long-standing culture of 'them vs. us'. I've known many of them. Some were regular guys, but the majority were JBT's with attitudes... even toward other LEA's. The legislature is entrenched stupidity and corruption personified.

This entire permit system is unconstitutional. Rights cannot be bought or sold. Bearing arms is NOT a privilege given by the state. The 2A is a very simple statement. No 'interpretation' is required or was even considered at the time it was written.


Anything else is 'clutter'. It's also the imposition of tyranny under color of law.

You don't ask SCOTUS to strike down a state's interracial marriage ban in 1930....

 

[Dreamer]

You don't ask SCOTUS to strike down a state's interracial marriage ban in 1930....

Yes, but if a State still had poll taxes and interracial marriage laws on the books in 1980 (about 16 years after the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964) then you sure as hell WOULD tell them to toe the freaking line, and treat their citizens like CITIZENS, not serfs or slaves.

Shall-Issue Concealed Carry was existent in the majority of states (30) in the US by 1998. By 2006 it was almost universal, with some states slowly moving toward "Constitutional Carry", and the VAST majority of States recognizing Unlicensed Open Carry as a fundamental right.

Maryland is somewhere between 6 and 14 years behind the curve with regards to 2A rights and policies, compared to the VAST majority of the other States in the union.MD is literally SURROUNDED by states that have had unlicensed OC and Shall-Issue CC for decades and they ALL have lower crime rates than MD by literally HUNDREDS of times.

Maryland gun laws in 2012 are EXACTLY the same as if Virginia still had poll taxes, inter-racial marriage prohibitions, and separate water fountains in 1980. Difference is, VA got sued over their interracial marriage laws in 1967 (Loving Vs. VA--really you can't make this stuff up) and LOST, and has pretty conducted itself in in accordance to the law ever since.

When MD gets a smackdown by the Federal Courts regarding their racist, classist, oligarchical 2A laws, rather than take the hint and get with the program and join the REST of the nation, they literally thumb their nose at the Courts, drop their pants, and take a huge steaming dump on the US Constitution and the authority of the Federal Courts...

Governor O'Malley is LITERALLY the George Wallace of the 21st Century 2A movement.

And "minority folk" in MD need to wake up and smell the REAL racism coming out of Annapolis, and stop swallowing the "gun control" propaganda hook, line and sinker. They need to realize that the REAL reason the government doesn't want black folk in MD having easy access to lawful carry is BECAUSE it keeps them hostage to the criminal element, and dependent on the system--which BTW has NO DUTY or legal obligation to do ANYTHING to ensure the safety of individual citizens.

MD's "gun control" laws are nothing more than a Bureaucratic Plantation System, and Massa O'Malley and Overseer Gansler are STILL cracking the whip 15+ years after the rest of the country declared "emancipation"...

[video=youtube_share;RaX3EM-fsc8]http://youtu.be/RaX3EM-fsc8[/video]

 

[Sonora Rebel]

You don't ask SCOTUS to strike down a state's interracial marriage ban in 1930....

What that has to do with the Legg decision and MD's hostile stance on the 2A I haven't a clue.
This 'show cause' permit crap didn't even exist in MD 'til '72 and Annapolis acts like it's been carved in stone since the Calverts dropped anchor off St. Clement's Island.

 

[Gray Peterson]

What that has to do with the Legg decision and MD's hostile stance on the 2A I haven't a clue.
This 'show cause' permit crap didn't even exist in MD 'til '72 and Annapolis acts like it's been carved in stone since the Calverts dropped anchor off St. Clement's Island.

Read your legal history in re Charles Hamilton Houston and Thurgood Marshall, the men who killed "Jim Crow", except when it came to 2A issues. Read up specifically how they targeted "equal" before they targeted "separate" in Brown v. Board of Education. Start with Missouri ex rel Gaines v. Canada. From a perspective of their work, I would say that the Missouri case would be the Heller allegory.

You and I can say whatever we generally want. Some of us believe that the end game is to strike down all required licensing of carry. I think it's possible to argue that in approximately a decade after we've answered a few fundamental questions about the nature of the right itself. Is it appropriate to even license a right? Would licensing the right without an unconstitutional prior restraint (which is considered a discretionary act) be appropriate? These are all questions that cannot be even asked yet in a proper context in a courtroom, not without engaging in major legal malpractice.

 

[Dreamer]

What that has to do with the Legg decision and MD's hostile stance on the 2A I haven't a clue.
This 'show cause' permit crap didn't even exist in MD 'til '72 and Annapolis acts like it's been carved in stone since the Calverts dropped anchor off St. Clement's Island.

Actually, Rebel, as I illustrated in the above post, and have been shouting from the rooftops for over 5 years, MD changed it's gun laws (banning the carry of loaded guns without a permit, restrictive "approved firearms lists" and such) as you said in 1972, BECAUSE the folks in Annapolis were responding to the events of the Baltimore Race Riots.

You know about the Calverts, and I'm sure you have read my rants about how MD government hasn't ever gotten past the idea of the State and ALL it's contents (including PEOPLE) as being the chattel and personal property of Annapolis ever since. So you part way to seeing the connection...

The idea that law-abiding black folk would DARE to take up arms to defend their neighborhoods, families and businesses against violent rioters just didn't sit well with the "white shoe boys" in Annapolis. And so the way they assuaged their fears against the idea that law-abiding black folk could actually DEFEND themselves against lawless predation was to pass laws that made it impossible for anyone--except the wealth and well-connected--to obtain a permit to carry.

MD Gun Laws have a LOT to do with the civil rights movement of the 30's, 50's and 60's--because much like the Jim Crow laws and segregation laws--they are a DIRECT result of prejudiced white Democrats and brainwashed black Uncle Tom politicians who believe in their heart of hearts that, in fact, common black folk can't be trusted to own or carry firearms.

The people who put the MD Gun Laws into place (like then-Delegate Frank Conoway, who is now the Clerk of the Court in Baltimore, and is part of the Conoway Dynasty in Maryland) actually believe--even though they themselves are black, that if a black person gets a gun, they can't HELP themselves, but to be transformed into a violent criminal. They REALLY do blame the guns for the violence.

The frustrating thing about this situation in MD is that large parts of the African-American community are SO brainwashed that they actually accept this blatant racism as a good thing. When you try to point out to them that they are being denied a Fundamental Human Right for RACIST reasons, under the guise of "safety", they often respond with hatred, violence and they call YOU a racist for pointing out that they have bought into their own voluntary self-enslavement. When you show them the fences they have build to keep themselves on the plantation, they accuse you of being a racist.

The African American community in Maryland is perhaps the most racist establishment in MD politics--but the twist is their racism is aimed against their own people. The entire racial/political dynamic in Maryland is a brilliant example of mass brainwashing, and is perhaps the most perfect example ever to exist on the planet of engineered Stockholm Syndrome.

Maryland is not so much a "State" as it is a mental disease...