Maryland license to carry

[ABuck]

Those qualifications are something that every gun owner should voluntary commit themselves to mastering.

They are bare minimal standards. If you can't pass that qual you should not be carrying a firearm.

I'm not 100% sold on government mandating it. But I do think each individual should personally mandate that on themselves.

Agree, it should not be mandated. It*s another burden to a basic right. Unfortunately this is one issue that could take a while to get addressed legally. NJ requires 50 shots with every weapon. So besides the cost of the course, you are going to need to purchase your weapons before even knowing if you can carry it, and burn through a box or two of ammo. Not exactly conducive or even possible for so many low income citizens. The ones that often live in some of the worse neighborhoods.

[Spaceballs]

Permits are not valued in MD in state parks, state forrests, or on dredge boats.

Only dredge boats. Sailboats, speed oats, fishing boats, crabbing boats, paddle boats, river boats, canoes, kayaks, steamships, cruise ships, tug boats, gravy boats..... all find. But don't you dare take a firearm onto a dredge boat in Maryland.

No one ever accused the Maryland legislature of making laws that make any sense.

Excuse me I have to go clean the HBAR on my AR that has no real definition.

Screenshot_20220705-123355_Opera.jpg

[Spaceballs]

So as I read the rules I am to understand that as an honorable discharged veteran I only need to pay the fee, have the fingerprints done, and pass the background check.....and the wait forever until the MSP feels like processing it.

Is that correct?

I don't need any training or safety course certificates?

I lived in MD for 43 years but never bothered to try to get a permit because I didn't own a business. Now that I left MD I am trying to learn the steps.

(But I can't promise to stay off of dredge boats....because those are there the action is)

[ABuck]

Time, place, manner restrictions were specifically mentioned in the decision. They will eventually be whittled away. NY is going to find out, as they are really pushing the issue. Directly sticking their thumb in the eye of a SCOTUS justice won*t end well for them.

As far as state parks and forests, it*s good that coyote, groundhogs, and nutria have such liberal hunting regs. You have to use the laws as you can.

[ABuck]

So as I read the rules I am to understand that as an honorable discharged veteran I only need to pay the fee, have the fingerprints done, and pass the background check.....and the wait forever until the MSP feels like processing it.

Is that correct?

I don't need any training or safety course certificates?

I lived in MD for 43 years but never bothered to try to get a permit because I didn't own a business. Now that I left MD I am trying to learn the steps.

(But I can't promise to stay off of dredge boats....because those are there the action is)

Yes, your DD214 exempts you from the training requirement. Everything else is the same, with *good and substantial* now removed. Livescan prints have to be done within 30 days. Another burden, as it*s not like our prints change every 30 days.
90 days is recognized as a standard of being approved or denied for the CCW. Some get them earlier, but after 90 days I believe you can appeal. Some are planning lawsuits if it goes that long.

[Spaceballs]

Time, place, manner restrictions were specifically mentioned in the decision. They will eventually be whittled away. NY is going to find out, as they are really pushing the issue. Directly sticking their thumb in the eye of a SCOTUS justice won*t end for them.

As far as state parks and forests, it*s good that coyote, groundhogs, and nutria have such liberal hunting regs. You have to use the laws as you can.

"No dredge boats" does seem overly restrictive. Clarence Thomas is about to go into a chorus of "ALL BOATS MATTER"

[ABuck]

"No dredge boats" does seem overly restrictive. Clarence Thomas is about to go into a chorus of "ALL BOATS MATTER"

As I posted before, I want him to be like the kool aid man, bursting through the wall, yelling *CONSTITUTION MOTHERFUCKERS!*. We have had enough BS with a protected right. These shenanigans would not stand up for any other right, so I hope he smacks them down hard.

[STBear]

My son lives in MD. It would be nice to be able to carry when I go to visit him.

[OwnTheRide]

Time, place, manner restrictions were specifically mentioned in the decision. They will eventually be whittled away. NY is going to find out, as they are really pushing the issue. Directly sticking their thumb in the eye of a SCOTUS justice won*t end well for them.

I hope you're right, but I think you may have underestimated PRNY's stubbornness here. I've been watching courts across the nation ignore Heller, seemingly without consequence, for over a decade now. What enforcement mechanisms do you see that would cause this to "not end well" for PRNY?

[tl_3237]

I hope you're right, but I think you may have underestimated PRNY's stubbornness here. I've been watching courts across the nation ignore Heller, seemingly without consequence, for over a decade now. What enforcement mechanisms do you see that would cause this to "not end well" for PRNY?

IMO with the recent affirmation of a Constitutional right to carry, any enforcement of state statutes that egregiously thwart that right would be ripe for a 42 USC §1983 suit by the aggrieved parties. An obvious person qualifying as a targeted defendant would be, inter alios, the state AG.

42 U.S. Code § 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights

Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.