Potential Challenge points?

More
10 Dec 2015 11:50#1 by jbrvenik
Potential Challenge points? was created by jbrvenik
I've been watching the developments in various areas for a while now and keeping a keen eye on Maryland Shall Issue developments. I'm curious if there are challenges in areas that have not been explored to date. Let me explain.

- Does the recent continuance of mass shootings and terror linked shootings constitute "good and substantial"? Has this been tested?

- While I am not a business owner, my chosen career puts me at odds with criminals daily and creates a tension with international crime syndicates. The effect threats have causes chilling effects on my and my peers ability to fully interact with and shut down cybercriminal operations on the internet. Has the "good and substantial" requirement been tested against the chilling effects of being defenseless has?

- I am a Florida, Utah, and Nevada Non-Resident CCW Holder. I may carry in most states though because they are non-resident permits I am denied the right to lawfully carry in states like Pennsylvania. Doesn't this mean that because Maryland will not issue me a permit and as a result Pennsylvania denies me the right to carry, that both Maryland and Pennsylvania fly afoul of equal protections?

- If it does not fly afoul of equal protections (like how gay marriage has been found to) doesn't it fly afoul of the Privileges and Immunities clause?

I would welcome a discussion on these topics.
Thanks,
Jason.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 Dec 2015 12:50#2 by 6Pack
Replied by 6Pack on topic Potential Challenge points?
There has been movement in the areas of terror threats, but from what I know it's been aimed at military and DOD personnel.

If you'r employer will give you a letter saying they want you to carry, that may work. I've not heard of someone attempting a permit for cybercriminal threats. Are they documented?

You're last two pieces I'm not familiar with those clauses; someone with more legal knowledge will be along I'm sure.

MSI Board of Director member
NRA Certified Instructor: Pistol, Rifle
CCW: Maryland, Pennsylvania, Utah

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
10 Dec 2015 13:45 - 10 Dec 2015 14:50#3 by jbrvenik
Replied by jbrvenik on topic Potential Challenge points?
Not only have the threats been documented from cyber bullying, stalking, and real-life intrusions to cyber professionals. We have seen them go so far as usurp our own systems to invoke threats. EG: Swatting - krebsonsecurity.com/tag/swatting/

My employer is massive and worldwide, they have varying policies though I've not yet found one directly relating to concealed carry.

Hoping others are familiar with the other areas or if there have been challenges.
Last edit: 10 Dec 2015 14:50 by jbrvenik.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
14 Dec 2015 17:38#4 by RonK
Replied by RonK on topic Potential Challenge points?

jbrvenik wrote:
- I am a Florida, Utah, and Nevada Non-Resident CCW Holder. I may carry in most states though because they are non-resident permits I am denied the right to lawfully carry in states like Pennsylvania. Doesn't this mean that because Maryland will not issue me a permit and as a result Pennsylvania denies me the right to carry, that both Maryland and Pennsylvania fly afoul of equal protections?

- If it does not fly afoul of equal protections (like how gay marriage has been found to) doesn't it fly afoul of the Privileges and Immunities clause?


Common sense wise it would appear to be a good argument to me, but common sense seems to be in short supply in regards to 2A. I'm curious as well if anyone has actively pursued under equal protections as you described and if any courts were willing to listen...

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
22 Dec 2015 11:56 - 22 Dec 2015 11:57#5 by dblas
Replied by dblas on topic Potential Challenge points?

jbrvenik wrote: I've been watching the developments in various areas for a while now and keeping a keen eye on Maryland Shall Issue developments. I'm curious if there are challenges in areas that have not been explored to date. Let me explain.

- Does the recent continuance of mass shootings and terror linked shootings constitute "good and substantial"? Has this been tested?


We have no real clue as of yet, as MSP does not supply any information on why permits are issued. The only way to find out is if people apply for a wear and carry permit using these things as G&S and are then denied, and then appeal the denial to the HPRB.

jbrvenik wrote: - While I am not a business owner, my chosen career puts me at odds with criminals daily and creates a tension with international crime syndicates. The effect threats have causes chilling effects on my and my peers ability to fully interact with and shut down cybercriminal operations on the internet. Has the "good and substantial" requirement been tested against the chilling effects of being defenseless has?


If the threats are documented, and can provide affidavits (per MSP) from witnesses of the threats, then you have a fairly good shot at a wear and carry permit. If the MSP denies a wear and carry permit, I would encourage you to request an appeal hearing (not a review) from the HPRB, and state your case to them.

jbrvenik wrote: - I am a Florida, Utah, and Nevada Non-Resident CCW Holder. I may carry in most states though because they are non-resident permits I am denied the right to lawfully carry in states like Pennsylvania. Doesn't this mean that because Maryland will not issue me a permit and as a result Pennsylvania denies me the right to carry, that both Maryland and Pennsylvania fly afoul of equal protections?


- If it does not fly afoul of equal protections (like how gay marriage has been found to) doesn't it fly afoul of the Privileges and Immunities clause?

I would welcome a discussion on these topics.
Thanks,
Jason.[/quote]

The answer to the two above scenarios would be for someone that has multiple carry permits from other states, apply for a wear and carry permit with personal protection as their G&S, here in Maryland. Then be denied by MSP, and appeal the denial tot he HPRB and be denied there. The next step is a lawsuit in local Circuit Court and have the denial upheld there, and then appeal that ruling to the Federal District Court for Maryland. And from there well, depending on the rulings then additional appeals to the 4th Federal Circuit Court of appeals, a potential end banc review by the entire 4th Circuit, and then a request for a Writ of Sertetory from the Supreme Court (which isn' guaranteed).

And the above is no small change, because yo have to get material presented at the HPRB presented to be part of the record to be considered at the local Circuit Court. After the HPRB, then the money starts to be needed, but with little reward, because if the local Circuit Court overturns the HPRB and MSP, that ruling only applies to you and you alone.

You literally have to play to lose at the first couple of levels to be able to get to a judicial level to make any difference in the big scheme of things, and that takes money.
Last edit: 22 Dec 2015 11:57 by dblas.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
09 Jan 2016 13:26#6 by NYCBlueBlood
Replied by NYCBlueBlood on topic Potential Challenge points?
new guy on msi, handgun shooter (mostly Worcester county range). haven't caught up with previous posts yet so perhaps this point has already been made: the qood and substantial' roadblock can be so easily remedied it is ridiculous. it is the state police who have the discretion power to rule what good and substantial entails, the state police superintendent works for and answers to Hogan, if Hogan had the will all he has to do is whisper in the superintendents ear that self defense is to be considered a good and substantial reason. no laws need to be passed, no hearings need to be held,, no political fanfare at all. of course, the dems could try to pass legislation to reverse it, but to do so they would have to take the precarious political and constitutionally legal position of going on record declaring that self defense is not a good and substantial reason for carrying a self-defense weapon.

and btw, if the state police tells us that self-defense is not by definition a good and substantial reason for carrying a weapon, why do troopers need handguns? the answer of course is that they carry weapons for self-defense, and basically the only time they are supposed to use those weapons is in self-defense situations..

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
09 Jan 2016 20:29#7 by dblas
Replied by dblas on topic Potential Challenge points?

NYCBlueBlood wrote: new guy on msi, handgun shooter (mostly Worcester county range). haven't caught up with previous posts yet so perhaps this point has already been made: the qood and substantial' roadblock can be so easily remedied it is ridiculous. it is the state police who have the discretion power to rule what good and substantial entails, the state police superintendent works for and answers to Hogan, if Hogan had the will all he has to do is whisper in the superintendents ear that self defense is to be considered a good and substantial reason. no laws need to be passed, no hearings need to be held,, no political fanfare at all. of course, the dems could try to pass legislation to reverse it, but to do so they would have to take the precarious political and constitutionally legal position of going on record declaring that self defense is not a good and substantial reason for carrying a self-defense weapon.

and btw, if the state police tells us that self-defense is not by definition a good and substantial reason for carrying a weapon, why do troopers need handguns? the answer of course is that they carry weapons for self-defense, and basically the only time they are supposed to use those weapons is in self-defense situations..



So, self defense is already defined as a G&S reason per MSP and it's SOP, and has been for about eight years. The issue isn't the definition of G&S, but MSP's blatant overreach of their statutory authority, granted by state statute and COMAR, with regards to the documentation required to prove the need for personal protection.

BTW, Welcome to MSI.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.723 seconds

Latest News

MSI October 2018 Update

1. Litigation Updates
2. Medical Marijuana
3. Attorney General Frosh and the Maryland Defense Act
4. Southern Maryland Wear and Carry Permit Seminar Friday!
5. Lots of Gun Shows in November!
6. December Membership Meeting
Read more ...

Gun Owners of Maryland: BEWARE!

YOUR ATTENTION AND ACTION ARE NEEDED IMMEDIATELY

Read more ...

Contact Info

Headquarters:

Maryland Shall Issue®, Inc. 1332 Cape St. Claire Rd #342 Annapolis
MD 21409

Phone:   410-849-9197
Email:  
Web:   www.marylandshallissue.org