Page 1 of 1

Federal judge rules Maryland gun permit law unconstitutional

PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2012 2:25 pm
by Tim Nunan
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/03 ... itutional/

BALTIMORE – A federal judge has ruled that Maryland's handgun permit law is unconstitutional.

In an opinion filed Monday, U.S. District Judge Benson Everett Legg says a requirement that residents show a "good and substantial reason" to carry a handgun infringes their Second Amendment right to bear arms. He says it isn't sufficiently tailored to the state's public safety interests.

Plaintiff Raymond Woollard was denied a renewal of his permit in 2009 because he could not show he had been subject to "threats occurring beyond his residence." Woollard obtained the permit after fighting with an intruder in his Hampstead home in 2002.

The lawsuit, which names the state police superintendent and members of the Handgun Permit Review Board, was also filed on behalf of the Bellevue, Wash.-based Second Amendment Foundation

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/03 ... z1oGvwQ8xY

Re: Federal judge rules Maryland gun permit law unconstitutional

PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2012 6:11 pm
by Sky King
In a conversation I have had, I asked if this could help us in our work to get the parking lot bills passed here. Based on this statement in the judge's remarks:

"Judge Legg's ruling takes a substantial step toward restoring the Second Amendment to its rightful place in the Bill of Rights and provides gun owners with another significant victory," said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. "The federal district court has carefully spelled out the obvious, that the Second Amendment does not stop at one's doorstep, but protects us wherever we have a right to be."

While this ruling is concerning Maryland's law and this statement is not part of the ruling itself, I feel it sould carry some weight as it IS from a Federal court AND the comment is about the United States Constitution, which applies to all of us, not just Maryland.

Possibly some of our constitutional scholars and lawyers, along with John could weigh in here.