Md. Gun Law Found Unconstitutional

BALTIMORE (AP) — The Second Amendment right to bear arms is not limited to the home and Maryland’s requirement that residents show a “good and substantial reason” to get a handgun permit is unconstitutional, according to a federal judge’s opinion filed Monday.

The right to bear arms has historically been understood to allow for militia membership and hunting, which extends the right beyond the home, U.S. District Judge Benson Everett Legg wrote. States can channel the way residents exercise their rights, but because Maryland’s goal was to minimize the number of firearms outside homes by limiting the privilege to those who could demonstrate “good reason,” it had turned into a rationing system, he wrote.

“A citizen may not be required to offer a `good and substantial reason’ why he should be permitted to exercise his rights,” Legg wrote. “The right’s existence is all the reason he needs.”

Plaintiff Raymond Woollard obtained a handgun permit after fighting with an intruder in his Hampstead home in 2002, but was denied a renewal in 2009 because he could not show he had been subject to “threats occurring beyond his residence.” Woollard appealed, but was rejected by the review board, which found he hadn’t demonstrated a “good and substantial reason” to carry a handgun as a reasonable precaution. The suit filed on Woollard’s behalf by the Second Amendment Foundation in 2010 claimed that Maryland didn’t have a reason to deny the renewal and wrongly put the burden on Woollard to show why he still needed to carry a gun.

“People have the right to carry a gun for self-defense and don’t have to prove that there’s a special reason for them to seek the permit,” said his attorney Alan Gura, who has challenged handgun bans in the District of Columbia and Chicago. “We’re not against the idea of a permit process, but the licensing system has to acknowledge that there’s a right to bear arms.”

The lawsuit names the state police superintendent and members of the Handgun Permit Review Board.

“We disagree with this ruling,” Assistant Attorney General Matthew Fader said in a statement. “In light of the very important implications of the ruling for public safety, the defendants will be appealing to the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals. The defendants will also be seeking a stay of the ruling pending appeal.”

Jonathan Lowy, director of legal action project at the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which assists states and cities in facing gun law challenges, expects the 4th Circuit to overturn the ruling.

“The Supreme Court has recognized the right to have guns in homes, but there is no right in public places,” Lowy said. “What Maryland does is reasonable. It allows law enforcement to make judgment based on substantial reasons why someone needs to carry a loaded gun in public. That’s not rationing and certainly not unconstitutional.”

But Gura disagrees, noting that many states require gun permits, but six states, including Maryland, issue permits on a discretionary basis. He’d like to see Maryland develop a licensing system that is “objective and straightforward.”

This suit is one of several federal suits the foundation is bringing across the nation, but it is the first time the foundation has had success before reaching the appeals level, according to foundation Founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb.

“Momentum is moving in our direction,” he said.

Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, a western Maryland Republican who has introduced a bill to protect the right to obtain a firearm for self-defense or to protect one’s home or family, applauded the ruling.

“As Judge Legg correctly ruled, the burden should be on the government to prove that an American is unfit to exercise this Constitutional right,” he said.

(Copyright 2012 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

Comments

One Comment

  1. Sam says:

    God in heaven. Can it be possible? I can’t believe what I’m reading. Is it actually possible that MD might let citizens defend themselves? Is it possible that police and criminals are no longer the only people allowed to carry a gun? Is it possible that I soon won’t have to tell my daughter that she should just lie still and comply when someone grabs her on a jogging trail and rapes her so she has a better chance of surviving? Is it possible that the next time I’m at the harbor and I get robbed of the last $20 I have I can do something about it? It can’t be…..

    Senator Frosh must be having a heart attack right now…..

    1. Jim In Frankfort says:

      Unfortunately it just means they will change a few words in the law and the cycle will begin again.

      1. Kingfish says:

        Bo, Bo, whatcha gonna do, whatcha gonna do when they come for you.

      2. lexicon says:

        They will keep pushing this until they are able to take the guns from us.
        GOOGLE EXCLUDED INCOME
        Make government obey our written laws.
        Less tax money = less government.

      3. WhatConstitution says:

        I wonder what this judge would make of treason, torture, the coup, and the cover up. Unelected officials playing God have taken over Washington and the media. Fact of the matter is we have no president, no democracy, and freedom of press is dictated by the Homeland.

        The next election is shaping up to be as big of a sham as the last. Do you know why Sarah Palin’s bus tour was really canceled? Do you know why she stayed 30 miles away from the second debate and chose the death of Steve Jobs to announce that she’s not running? Know what leaked out? Sarah Palin and Cain aren’t in the race for the same reason, the truth leaked out. Search PalinsDirtyLittleSecret for the biggest cover up in history

      4. American with a Cause says:

        @WhatConstitution

        You owe me the last 90 seconds of my life.

        I am now dumber for having searched for and read that nonsense.

      5. Mel Gifford says:

        “What Constitution” Thank you for opening my eyes. I can only imagine how mad the government would get with something of this magnitude leaking out. Excellent job. Keep spreading the truth I know I will.

      6. Seriously? says:

        @WhatConstitution

        BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. You dumb. And my work here is done🙂

    2. David Kramer says:

      You forgot the security guards that the rich and politicians have. well and the politicians themselves. See, you are not a citizen, you are a serf. Get it right there buddy.

      1. Scott says:

        Those evil rich people! Pooooooor little you.

      2. MDABE80 says:

        And David seems to forget about all those thugs who have their own guards…you know…those gangs? Selective on that David??

      3. SparkyVA says:

        You just don’t understand. Some citizens are more equal than others (Animal Farm). They get the guns.

    3. Chris says:

      The way our Constitution is sometimes interpreted, we will have to register our religion next.

      1. Jerzey Boy says:

        Excellent post Chris!

      2. Willene says:

        Chris — AMEN!! I’m really tired of the State, Local, and Federal Government trying to take away at our Constitutional Rights all the time. They all keep “chipping” away at these rights and it’s as disheartening as it is disgusting politics by most of the idiots sitting in Washington.

      3. Deskboy says:

        Good point, especially since Maryland was the colony that was tolerated religious freedom and why Catholicism grew there.

      4. Victor says:

        Already there. Heard of Obamacare?

      5. The Bishop says:

        Religion is ALREADY licensed! It’s called “501(c)(3)”!

      6. ella funtz says:

        You haven’t already??????

      7. Joe Potus says:

        Bishop has it! Religion IS REQUIRED to be registered. Every dollar you give in charity MUST be tracked. Even when you share a meal.

        REMEMBER Obamacare requires you to file a 1099 to everyone you bought more than 600 dollars worth of goods from. Been to Sams or Walmart this year?

      8. Jahnke says:

        I hate liberals.

      9. nswclb says:

        Chris if you feel your right to bear arms is at stake, you cannot blamd the President or the liberal party. Our government left the issue to bear arms to the interpetation of each state. So if your rights are being threaten then you need to blame those whom you elect for your state. In my state we can cary canceal or no without a permit. Different states different and the voters are the ones to blame.

      10. Modahed says:

        @ nswclb Are you nuts? Did the government leave the right to free speech open to the states? What about the right 5th amendment? The Bill of Right supersedes any state law.

      11. BFM says:

        @nswclb: Do we allow each state to decide on 1st Amendment Freedom of Speech or rights of women to vote? Then why should the law be applied any differently on the 2nd Amendment?

      12. Federalist #79 says:

        @BFM and Modahed:

        We actually do allow states to use their police power to make reasonable restrictions on the first amendment and the Supreme Court seemed to indicate that would be the approach to the second amendment in Heller. Why is it people love states’ rights until they get in the way of their political preferences?

      13. DEEBEE says:

        Imagine if MD had asked for a “reasonable” standard on a “discovered” right like abortion

      14. Charlie says:

        @Federalist #79 The “Bill of Rights” are a list of rights endowed by our creator and outside the scope of any government, federal or state, to regulate in an arbitrary manner. The BOR’s didn’t create the rights it simply acknowledge them as already existing. For this reason there can’t be 50 different versions of the right. That is why it falls outside the scope of state government to regulate and infringe on in an arbitrary manner. Maryland’s law was arbitrary and failed to pass muster.

      15. john says:

        You’re required to do this if you join the military.

      16. slackware says:

        Not any more Obama will just tell you what to practice.
        Gee does that sound familiar to anyone else from england?

    4. August says:

      The Police ARE CRIMINALS!

      1. David5300 says:

        OH… They can be ,as much as anyone can be. Right now there are so many federal laws against one thing or another you are most likely in violation of at least one right now.

      2. josh says:

        Where did the police comment come from? Go back to your hood, nimwit.

      3. HoobaDooba says:

        Ninety-five percent of police give the other five percent a bad name.

      4. Lloyd says:

        So are doctors and lawyers and school teachers but you probably happily use their services.

      5. GarytheObserver says:

        Liberals LOVE to criticize the police but they are not smart enough to realize cops are merely carrying out the power of the government to impose powers and control over YOU! They are not a bunch of collective renegades operating on their own. They are faithfully (as a whole) exercising the power and force of government officials over we the populace. We the foolish populace have gladly ceded our liberties, freedoms, and sovereignty to those in govt. Do NOT blame the police as a group… blame the government who direct their actions. The idiot who calls the police “pigs” is the same idiot who votes for government leaders who direct and empower the police to carry out their edicts. Funny how liberals cannot connect the dots from the police back to those who order the police around. If you want to criticize the police as a whole… START WITH THEIR BOSSES and believe me, it ain’t us… the populace. We are loosing OUR power daily… because one, they are taking it from us, and two, we continue to allow it.

      6. RS says:

        Gary – does that explain why the hoodlum police in Baltimore City beat people up who are lawfully expressing their right to videotape police activity? So it is okay for Big Brother to watch everything we do, but we have no right to provide evidence when they partake in wrongdoing? Stop blaming everything on “liberals,” and just face the truth.

    5. Michael L says:

      Excellent news.
      Dear Original Framers: Rest easy: your Constitution and BIll of Rights is still holding on, though barely.
      Dear Maryland lawmakers: **** you.

    6. Bob says:

      so now the feds say we can carry in Maryland, great only problem is if we use the weapon for self defence we could still go to jail. Maryland’s castle doctrine law only aplies to in your own house or business, and that just passed in 2010, on the street you still have to run away and only if you have nowhere to run AND you are in imediate danger ( like a bullet in your head )can you use deadly forse. Its a start but we still have a long way to go, we need castle doctrine stand your ground laws that aply the the victim not the place.

      1. SirGareth says:

        C’mon mouse, turn and fire. Or do you want to take one in the back as you flee?

        I wont find you guilty as long as the story is credible – if you don’t trust your MD neighbors judgement you had better get of of Dodge.

    7. Jim in Houston says:

      Maryland isn’t doing it, it’s a federal judge and that itself is a minor miracle.

      1. Kingfish says:

        The government is just drooling over all the revenue from the sales and taxes on the guns and ammo. Next month a another court will strike the law down, just watch!

    8. disappointedvet says:

      My favorite part is? his right to bear arms is reason enough”. Outstanding judge!!! Now, if only the judge had followed that up with…BECAUSE HE CAN!!! it would be perfect.

    9. leelee says:

      The criminals carry them regardless. At least us have a chance to defend ourselves should we need to and not have to be a cop to do so. COPS cant be everywhere.

      1. Darwinkle says:

        Remember this!
        When seconds count the cops are only minutes away!

      2. RS says:

        Even when they’re around, they can’t be relied on to do anything.

    10. kev b says:

      The sad part is that most people in this country pay no attentionto what is going on. But they know who is on American idol, or who won the oscars, or the superbowl.

      1. Annie Oakley says:

        Amen!

    11. John Byrd says:

      What do you expect? The United States is no longer a Republic. We
      are now a two-party dictatorship. And the problem with Obama? When
      he was elected President, he did not know he was expected to make
      decisions. Reminds us of the unemployed bum who won’t get a job
      because he is afraid he will have to do something. Fate, it would seem,
      is more unexpected than unavoidable. We are now the American Empire,
      the New Rome.

      1. Dan says:

        You sir are not only dead wrong about President Obama, but you are a complete moron as well. Obey your ten commandments, sir! Thou shall not bear false witness!

      2. Do What says:

        @DAN. The morom is in the White House illegally. He was born in Mbassa, Kenya in 1961. His Kenyan grandmother said so! I’ll never get a permit to do what the 2nd Ad. allows me to do already.

    12. BikerBen says:

      Actually, our second amendment right is God-given, not state-given. This is what the courts have again validated. The fact that you’ll probably still have to get a permit is absurd. After all, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.” And, of course, as with all of our enumerated rights under the Constitution, there is a corresponding responsibility. One should know how to handle the firearm, and maintain sufficient ammunition to help protect this country from tyrants and dictators. We are and will remain a free country only if people are willing to fight to maintain our freedoms.

    13. steelers01 says:

      NO! Maryland is not letting anybody do anything. They are liberal pukes. It is the LAW and the CONSTITUTION that made these liberals follow the law.

    14. rootvg says:

      California currently has “may issue” but this may lead to “shall issue” as it is in Ohio, Pennsylvania and many other states.

    15. John says:

      It is possible that you will enjoy your rights as we do in Virginia. Maybe we will be able to cross state lines!!!!

    16. JohnnyBoy says:

      It’s interesting, the stuff they teach in J-School:

      “States can channel the way their residents exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms, but because Maryland’s goal was to minimize the number of firearms carried outside homes by limiting the privilege to those who could demonstrate “good reason,” it had turned into a rationing system, infringing upon residents’ rights, U.S. District Judge Benson Everett Legg wrote.”

      In J-School, it seems the Right to Bear Arms is taught as a “privilege.”

      Here in America, we know it as a Right.

    17. john smith says:

      I think this Judge of ther Inner Circle Marxists Is unwilling to obey the Constitution.

    18. Worry01 says:

      It is simply a backdoor way to regulate a right out of existence. It is actually reminiscent of the way the Old South virtually eliminated the right of Blacks to vote, even though it was supposedly guaranteed by the Fifteenth Amendment.

    19. Steve says:

      The tree of liberty must be fed with the blood of Patriots from time to time.
      Thomas Jefferson
      Time for a revolution anyone?

      1. Jeff Thomason says:

        (Picture me as a black lab waiting for you to throw the ball….)

        YES ! Time for a R3VOLUTION !!!!!

      2. rbblum says:

        The best battleground for a revolution to rejuvinate a tired, old republic can be had with the fortitude of patriots presenting thoughtful arguments via the computer. . . . How many truly know and understand the history or our republic; much less what is presented within the Constitution or the Bill of Rights?

      3. The Federal Farmer says:

        Just remember, you’re gonna be waterboarded at gitmo or spilling your blood for liberals who hate you if you go that route.

    20. Freeland Dave says:

      Now if we could just the State of California to turn over their illegal laws that are doing the same things the state of MD was doing with their restrictive gun laws. If you have to prove to the Sheriff or the City Chief of Police of your “need” to have a weapons permit it’s just as restrictive as what MD was doing.

    21. Miseur Bastille says:

      Sacre Bleu, the next thing they’ll be trying to get away with is outlawing GILLOTINES !

    22. simon lomax says:

      obama won’t be happy. i sense a “natural causes” death coming for a certain judge. hope not.

    23. Ed G says:

      This does not compute…I live in Vermont where WE HAVE ZERO GUN LAWS…(correction – we are not allowed to carry a loaded long gun in the car so we don’t poach deer – handguns can be loaded) – we also have one of if not THE lowest CRIME RATES in the country…none of the liberals can explain this but its really quite simple – you break into a house here and you are very likely to get your ass shot off. We also have about the most liberal state government in the country but they are scared to death to mess with the gun owners up here….

      1. TheLastBrainLeft says:

        There’s a measured correlation between strict gun laws and high crime rates amongst the states.

    24. Bob in Silver Spring says:

      Wait a minute. You have $20 left? Gov. O’Malloy and his people will be knocking at your door any minute. The state needs your money, children will starve and old people will be thrown out in the street. You sir, are selfish trying to keep your own money.

    25. Jim50 says:

      Everyone in Maryland has a good reason to carry a gun. Because the government doesn’t want them to carry a gun! This is EXACTLY the reason for the 2nd Amendment!

  2. JustAGuy says:

    Reason #128 why freedom loving Americans should NOT live in a blue state.

    1. Jude says:

      Plenty of reasons out there to live in a blue state, though.

      In fact, that’s just about the only reason I can think to not do it.

      1. SAO says:

        Like the high taxes, burdonsome laws, excessive fees, and endless gov’t spending. I guess that’s why the blue state are hemorrhaging residents and AZ, GA, SC, FL, and TX are gaining residents

      2. JustAGuy says:

        Like what?

        I lived half my life in a blue state, I now live in a red state. The red state is much better.

      3. mark says:

        Interesting…I live in Democratic dominate Oregon, but we have the best gun laws around for good citizens and no restrictions on NFA items. Unbelieveable but true.

      4. Americagreat says:

        Would love to here the reasons Jude.

      5. RHO says:

        Oh, sure. Like having lots of Marxist neighbors. That would be the big reason to live in a blue state.

      6. Ry says:

        JustAGuy, I’d say living in a Blue State makes me much smarter than average when compared to my neighbors. If I moved to Texas, I might just be “average”…

        Don’t worry, I’m coming as soon as I can…

      7. BornInTheUSA says:

        @SAO. Preparing to sell the house and move to one of those States you mentioned… preferring Florida.. because I will start a new business and expect to hire single digit to start, and end with around 50, but that might increase. Bye Bye New York… for all the Freedom and Constitution reasons.

      8. The Federal Farmer says:

        Starting a business? Out the the frying pan, into the fire.

      9. Jude says:

        SAO, you do realize that red states, with the exception of Texas, primarily, get more money in Federal Tax dollars than they put into it? And that most blue states get less back than they put into it? I wonder if those “excessive fees” you mention have anything to do with it? It seems like blue states know how to live within their means and red states do not.

        As for burdensome laws? What? Plenty of red states have insanely burdensome laws about plenty of subjects. Some have made it harder to get an abortion, others have made it illegal to buy sex toys, others have made gay marriage illegal, and some even still have laws WHICH THEY ENFORCE (even though it is unconstitutional to do so) barring unmarried people from cohabitation. Talk about burdensome! Red states are constantly invading the bedroom of people that live in them.

        The biggest burden I see in MD is this stupid gun law, and now that it should be biting the dust, we’re all better off. This great state just got close to perfection.

      10. JustAGuy says:

        Ry, you say living in a blue state makes you smarter?

        You may have reasons why you prefer living in a blue state, but saying it makes you smarter pretty much lacks intelligent reasoning.

      11. NoName says:

        JustAGuy: Smarter by comparison. You aren’t helping the argument by missing that.

      12. Yo Yo says:

        @JUDE (2nd comment)

        “with the exception of Texas”….you said it all right there.

      13. JustAGuy says:

        @Jude, PLEASE!!!! Retire that tripe. I looked it up. The best source I could find was citing obsolete data. This is Obama’s America, don’t use stale, old data.

        You actually say blue states know how to live within their means and red states don’t? You say that with a straight face? I submit to you, California, Illinois, and New York. I rest my case!

        I also see you consider states that make it harder for mothers to kill their unborn babies a burdensome law. Duly noted. Please give an example of your statement that red states are currently invading the bedroom.

      14. JustAGuy says:

        @NoName

        That was an arbitrary comment without substantiating argument and facts to back it up. If you live in a blue state, your comment impugns the point you’re trying to defend.

      15. NoName says:

        @JustAGuy… did you miss the last sentence of Ry’s comment? Did you miss the part “compared to my neighbors”? Did you mis the “on average” qualifier? Jeesh… you are actually destroying his argument and might be proving that blue states are truly smarter and not just by comparison or any average. Don’t take this as supporting blue states or red states. Just take it as you missed his point.

      16. Brenda says:

        Blue states live within their means?? ARE YOU KIDDING ME?? Have you ever heard of New York, Illinois, New Jersey, California??? THEY ARE ALL BANKRUPT….just like EVERY STATE with a DEMOCRATIC RUN LEGISLATURE.

      17. Red John says:

        Hey Jude..

        “As for burdensome laws? What? Plenty of red states have… made it harder to get an abortion”

        GOOD! I believe it’s “Suffer the little children” not “Puree them”.

        “.. others have made it illegal to buy sex toys”

        So play with your self.

        “…others have made gay marriage illegal”

        No, no YOUR self, not his.

        “and some even still have laws WHICH THEY ENFORCE…”

        Tell the truth. THAT’s what really differentiates a red state from a blue one and ticks you off most of all isn’t it?

      18. CK says:

        Got one that you can show us, Jude?

      19. Aston says:

        Jude, while your comment about red states getting more federal money than they contribute is a correct statement, your analysis is incorrect. The primary reason for red states getting more federal money is quite simple. The federal government transfers huge sums of money to the state dot’s (departments of transportation) to maintain the federal interstate system. Take that money away from the official rolls and you have a much different situation.

      20. JustAGuy says:

        @NoName, what does that “compared to my neighbors” comment illustrate? Does it mean Ry moved from a blue state to a red state and his neighbors are imbeciles?

        If, in Ry’s opinion, red state residents are big dummies, what does that make him? Especially since he has moved from a SUPERIOR blue state, to a state full of dummies? IF all that were true, and I don’t accept that premise, it makes Ry seem given to making foolish decisions.

        Secondly, it makes Ry appear to be an arrogant individual who places himself on a pedestal and looks down his nose at his neighbors. If that’s so, it’s reasonable to conclude Ry is a jerk!

      21. Tony G says:

        @Justaguy: Ry was making a humorous comparison. He CURRENTLY lives in a blue state and seems like a rocket surgeon compared to his lib neighbors. He’s afraid that if he moves to a red state, that he’d be just an average guy compared with his new neighbors.Borrow a sense of humor for the afternoon !

      22. Renfield says:

        I lived in dark blue New Jersey for 54 years. I like it FAR better here in dark red Alabama.

      23. FusterCluck says:

        @ NoName – Well played.

      24. SAO says:

        Sorry Jude. The federal gov’ is printing money and spending far more than it takes in. Stop using that lame argument that only works when the budget is balanced.

      25. Rick says:

        Jude,
        I thought you were supposed to be listing the BAD things about living in a red state?

      26. Deskboy says:

        Not enough for my taste. If blue staters keep electing Obama, and Steny Hoyer and the like you can have it…

      27. Don says:

        Blue states get fewer Federal Dollars because the population of Blue States are on the Federeal Dole…. no contributions…. no return…. its the Red State people that make all the contributions…

      28. disappointedvet says:

        Yes, when you expect the gov’t to give you handouts it’s great to live in a blue state.

      29. Ben says:

        “GOOD! I believe it’s “Suffer the little children” not “Puree them”.”

        A cluster of undifferentiated cells isn’t a “little child” any more than an unfertilized egg is. Until there is a nervous system, all you have are cells. Not a person. Not a child. Nothing.

        Until you learn to distinguish between abortion on early terms and abortion of actual fetuses, your argument is shrill and pointless.

        Even so, there are fetuses that should not be brought to term: The product of rape; a body without a brain; that kind of thing. The mother has every right to consider her body before that of the child, if she so chooses. She isn’t your “vessel” to cook up kids in, she’s a person with rights to see to her her own safety and more.

      30. Tom says:

        I have heard of this opinion before. I do not hold such an opinion, When the sperm penatrates the egg, pufe, you have a humane being. Fetus, infant, toddler , child, teenager, adult, elder are stages in a human beings life cicle. they not things and they are their own body. I just wanted to share my position w/ u. There soo many different topics on this thred

      31. E.T. says:

        I love Los Angeles it’s the people I can’t stand.. a little twist on Linus philosophy.

      32. Dyler Turden says:

        @ Tony G : I too perform surgery on rockets.

      33. Phil says:

        Jude,
        Did you know that MD is trying to become the first state to ban mail order cigar orders? legislation was passed in Maryland in 2010 which made it a felony to sell a cigar over the internet, by mail order or telephone to a Maryland resident. That law went into effect on May 1, 2011. However, Maryland State Comptroller, Peter Franchot, received a deluge of emails, letters and phone calls from Maryland cigar lovers objecting to the ban on consumer cigar shipments. As a result, Comptroller Franchot elected NOT to enforce the ban and recommended that the Maryland General Assembly revisit the law at the earliest possible juncture. I’ve also had to personally go to Annapolis to try and stop a 1000% tax on ammo. Had to take vacation time to sign up to speak. We showed up to speak and were told that bill had been pulled so we couldn’t speak. Cheap trick to try and push gun control through the tax committee and a demonstration that constant vigilance is the price of liberty. Maryland is definitely a nanny state wannabee.

      34. Tony G says:

        @Dyler Turden: LOL ! I live in IL I also suffer in the same vocation

      35. RS says:

        Actually, you might be surprised at how many of us Democrats support the right to bear arms.

      36. Pat Jameson says:

        Unelected officials have taken over Washington and are orchestrating the daily news. Most of the comments and replies you’re reading online are government created too. With many stories the COMMENTS ARE CREATED BEFORE THE STORY IS REPORTED. They are designed to generate a response to engage “dangerous people” in real time.

        The oldest, first, highest, best, and most popular rated comments are almost all government propaganda. They are conducting Psy-ops (psychological operations) for domestic spying. They have 1000s of user names and are determined to bury the truth or ATTACK anyone leaking it.

        The next election is shaping up to be as big of a sham as the last. Do you know why Sarah Palin’s bus tour was really canceled? Do you know why she stayed 30 miles away from the second debate and chose the death of Steve Jobs to announce that she’s not running? Know what leaked out? Sarah Palin and Cain aren’t in the race for the same reason, the truth leaked out. Search PalinsDirtyLittleSecret for the biggest cover up in history

      37. ChuckW says:

        Just a quick comment. I left California and moved to Texas and then Virginia to get away from all the bleeding heart liberals and their union cronies. Virginia is a Right to Work state and anyone can open carry their sidearm. I prefer concealed carry and had no difficulty obtaining the permit, they require that you not be a felon and know how to use the weapon safely. The surrounding states, with the exception of Maryland, recognize my permit. As far as other social issues, I fully support any legislation that reduces the murder of children within the commonwealth. Let those that wish to abort their children hop across the state line into MD if they don’t like our laws. I don’t support any law that limits what an individual does in the privacy of their own home as long as it doesn’t endanger his neighbors or infringe upon other citizen’s rights. After reading this article and the comments I feel compelled to go vote for Paul in the primary.
        Semper Fi

    2. sanity says:

      agreed. all you crazy right wingers should move out of the north and into the (backwards) south. you can go back to thinking this is the 1700s.

      1. JustAGuy says:

        You may think I’m crazy, but I shoot tight groups!

        Just remember, should the Obama Economy descend to the point of civil unrest,, and the Obama Zombies are on a rampage, just tell them you voted for Obama too, and they won’t mug you and steal your stuff.

        And YES!!! It can happen in the USA: New Orleans, Los Angeles!

      2. Renfield says:

        People have been fleeing the north for the south for the past two decades. While MA, CT, NJ, NY, PA, OH, IL, MI have all been hemorrhaging electoral votes, FL, GA, NC, VA, and TX have been gaining, and only LA has lost one (because of Katrina).

      3. disappointedvet says:

        LOL, as he uses his first amendment right to critize our exercising of our second amendment right….probably doesn’t realize they were written by the same guys.

      4. JustAGuy says:

        @disappointedvet, don’t confuse the liberal. All he likely knows about the Constitution is the Separation Of Church And State, and freedom of leftists to say anything anywhere and at anytime.

        Even though you can’t find any of that text in the Constitution, leftists are certain it’s in there….

      5. Snitch-in-Time says:

        sanity: First off, you picked a oxymoron for a name. Liberalism is neither mentally competent nor is it sane. Through political correctness, liberals have lost the ability to relate causes to effects which, in legal contemplation, makes liberals mentally incompetent. (This is why you don’t understand this court decision, BTW.) In addition, by rejecting transcendent values, liberals assume that there is no standard higher than their own ever changing liberal consensus. Thus liberals cannot distinguish between right and wrong, good and evil, or vice and virtue because liberals have no standard by which to do so. This makes liberals, by legal definition, criminally insane. So, no we neither live in 1700 nor do we plan to go back to 1700. Instead we plan to make 2012 the beginning of the Recovery of American Liberty. So, lose the quaint and outmoded 1930s liberalism. It doesn’t work now and, truth be told, didn’t work then either.

      6. Relocated to FL says:

        Hey “Sanity”, I took my family out of that “Peoples Republic of Maryland” back in 2004 and went to SW Florida. NO REGRETS!!!! I went back this past summer. Any doubts my wife or I may of had were quickly erased. You can have your class warfar and anit-business envireoment from Gov O’Mally. No business = no jobs = no residents that produce=no tax base. I have my freedoms, security and a safe family enviroment down here.

      7. Gork says:

        @sanity: Not everyone lives two blocks away from a police station in this state. We have a saying where I live: When Seconds count, the police will be there in minutes. Out here, the police can take around 10 minutes or more to get to the scene. How do I know? I have a police scanner and I listen. We’d all like it to be better, but our taxes have limits and I’m willing to take responsibility for my own defense.

        I think it is great this law was struck down. I don’t think this state has any business telling me what to use to defend myself. I’ll use whatever I need to. And if the tool i choose happens to be a handgun, who is the state to tell me that I can’t?

      8. rootvg says:

        The media isn’t reporting what’s really going on, and it has little to do with guns.

        We’re splitting into two nations. All of us are well acquainted with the whole north versus south thing but this is more about the increasingly secular and affluent, highly educated, high cost of living coastal areas versus those who live in flyover country.

        You can see it coming. There’s a huge differential between California and Texas even in the better parts of that state. Boston and New York and San Francisco (and to a lesser extent Los Angeles) still attract most of the top drawer young professionals and college graduates while taxpayers in places like Ohio, Pennsylvania and Indiana are left holding the bag for their state sponsored university educations. Upper middle class and upper class Ohioans retire in Arizona, Florida and North Carolina while those left behind end up paying to take care of the half blind retired diabetic autoworker and his wife who never saved anything because they had no quality of live in their prime earning years and spent every dime they had. Forty percent of Ohio’s state budget now goes for indigent healthcare…and it’s gonna get a whole lot worse before it gets better.

        THIS is why people are up in arms and scared and angry. We are splitting into two separate nations as surely as I am sitting here writing this.

      9. JohnnyBoy says:

        You’ve got a deal: since we’re so backward and, of course, racist, all the Blacks and Browns will have to move out of the south. Being the enlightened, progressive souls that you are, you will of course welcome them. Never mind that the North is actually more segregated than the South – Google it if you don’t believe me – we’re trading horses here.

  3. Makeem Stop says:

    Thank you Judge Legg! Please… can you also remove all those responsible for violating our Constitution – from their positions? Heck, jail time and a fine would also be nice too.

  4. Sum says:

    Any Government Official that steps on your Consititional Rights is a Crimminal.

    1. Kevin says:

      The only thing wrong with the constitution was that it did not set out specific penalties for violation of its clauses and amendments.

      1. Max says:

        the penalty is the 2nd amendment.

  5. siylencedogood says:

    A judge that understands and rules according to the constitution in Blue England? That’s encouraging.

  6. 9mm +P says:

    Hell is preparing to freeze over…

  7. Kevin says:

    Well we have at least one federal district court judge who can read the constitution. It’s pretty much black and white, with their being no room for weasel words to restrict law-abiding citizens the right to be safe in their homes, workplace, and in their general lives. Watch and see how fast crime plummets once the criminals realize that there’s a good chance their potential victims might be armed.

  8. NoFear says:

    God bless you Judge Benson Everett Legg.

    1. edleary1227 says:

      Finally, law-biding citizens can be more than the 1.8% that have been issued a permit for self-defense since ‘good and substantial’ was enacted.

      No longer are we a minority in the U.S.

  9. judge says:

    Take back your country. Restore the republic. Prison time for traitors. youtube: walter cronkite hillary clinton wfa

  10. MoMo says:

    Holy snit shacks unreal a judge who knows the Constitution!

  11. Guest says:

    A “permit” law is an infringement. Period.

    1. Fritz says:

      Agreed. God bless this judge.

      1. BornInTheUSA says:

        Get him into the SC to replace poor ol’ Ginsburg who did some traveling at our expense of course to meet with an Egyptian official and warn him that Egypt should not copy our Constitution because people like her have a hard time working under such an old, out of date, Constitution. She recommended Egypt copy an European Constitution developed after WWII. We know that those Constitutions were not based on Christian Principles. That must be Mz Ginsburg’s problem. What does an Oath mean to that skunk? She took an oath not to uphold an out dated Constitution, but just to get her lifetime $$ with all that power. Set her in the street, and put THIS Judge in her place. We can do it. Our House can impeach her. She must be impeached, tried as a traitor and jailed. The House impeached SC Justice Chase a signer of the Constitution yrs ago for showing Federalist leanings, but the Senate blocked it saying he had a right to his opinion. Well, this isn’t just an opinion or a view… it is a traitorous deceit of the SC Justice’s Oath not to damage our Constitution.

      2. BornInTheUSA says:

        correction… he was a signer of the Declaration of Independence

    2. TGC says:

      I agree 100%! Read the Constitution…it doesn’t mention ANYTHING about a permit, a fee, a class, or a license!

    3. willie says:

      Ah but the permit to carry is also de-facto registration because (at least here in california) you have to list make model and serial number of any firearm you intend to carry.

      1. FusterCluck says:

        @willie – If, and I mean IF, you can get a concealed carry permit in the first place. It depends on what county you live in and it definitely helps to know a cop.

    4. Desert Eagle says:

      I can’t afford a permit and what is needed to obtain one. Do I criminalize myself and carry to protect from the criminals? I’m sure our Forefathers would be proud.

  12. Terry Rohan says:

    this is a divisional class warfare by the race baiters, like Obama and Holder. They know white Americans are the ones obtaining firearms legally, so they are safe to go after anything to do with defending yourself. Does that mean they perceive themselves as part of the human crime wave of the 21st century, YOU BETCHA!

    1. Army for Life says:

      come on! are you serious? I am a 20 year Army vet and I love my firearms. Oh, did I mention I just happen to born as a non-white. If you want a true constitutional country then include “We the People” and stop with the Separatist race baiting.

      1. Paul says:

        Well said, and thank you for your service, Sir! I am sick and tired of the race-baiting on both sides of the political isle.

      2. peterkuck says:

        we are one people divided by the politicians.
        thank you for your service my brother.

      3. Sam says:

        Amen Brother. and thank you for your service.

      4. AK says:

        Good friend of mine, ringer for Obama and an Air Force Lt Col. Few weeks ago were at the range wringing homebrew loads out of his Freedom Arms .475 Linebaugh.

        Someone tell me again how all the right-thinking gun owners are white…?

      5. Snitch-in-Time says:

        Thank you for standing up and speaking the truth that real Americans come in all colors. America is a grand experiment where men from all over the earth can can together under the banner of a really BIG idea that men can successfully govern themselves in Liberty through the laws of nature and nature’s God.

      6. LTCB says:

        Go a step further and ARM THE NATION. ALL who are legally allowed to own a firearm should be REQUIRED to own one and know how to use it. Massive layoffs in police I think would result. Fewer court cases too.

      7. Do What says:

        Statistics don’t lie. Obama’s used the race-card since ’08, so tough turkey!
        I’d cut the race based hiring out in flash, if I could.

      8. Bloodyspartan says:

        they you Know damn well what is going on and you sir are an exception.

        BUT I had a great friend of color years ago and he always told me it would be black first , second and third always.

        Right or wrong .

        He said he would never go there but he die eventually.

      9. JohnnyBoy says:

        Your military record and your race do not make your advice any less bad. And in fact, your advice is bad. Liberals play the race card every chance they get, and we should return the favor. When your enemy uses biological warfare or nukes, you don’t cry about treaty violations; you reciprocate with bioweapons or nukes. That simple logic should be apparent to a soldier.

        The gentleman was right; laws like this have “disparate impact” (in the logical, if not the narrow legal sense) and should be decried as “racist.” The race card is perfectly applicable here.

        Conservatives, rightists, whatever, need to stop acting like they have to be the only ones who play nice. Losers play nice. Winners do whatever they have to do to win.

    2. Jude says:

      What? Obama has done nothing but GIVE more firearm freedom. Anybody that tells you otherwise is a liar. The guy isn’t a great President, but he’s left guns alone when it came to restrictions.

      1. gunner says:

        Jude: I WILL tell you “otherwise.” Operation Fast & Furious was a back door attempt at trashing the Second Amendment. Hitlery Klinton is pushing for U.S. ratification of the U.N. small arms treaty (which will essentially make the Second Amendment null and void). And if you want to call ME a liar, please come and do it to my face.

      2. ConnieCon says:

        That’s only because Fast and Furious blew up in his face (and unfortunately Brian Terry’s). Until Officer Terry’s death, Obama and Hillary were out there every week blaming the second amendment for the drug ring deaths in Mexico. Their plan, once they got all the guns over the border, was to prove that the second amendment needed to be abolished because it was affecting other countries.
        Also, have you checked the cost of ammo since dear leader has taken office? There is always more than one way to skin a cat.

      3. HammerNH says:

        Your MOST nanny-state comment Jude. Rights are NOT ‘given’ nor can they be (legally) taken away. MA0bama is a direct threat to our freedom because he hates those who ‘cling to their gun and religion…’
        Enjoy Marxism-lite whichever ‘blue; state you live in.

      4. CK says:

        Because he saw what happened in ’94 and he has an election to worry about. If he wins in ’12, I think he’ll be changing his tune to a more anti-gun chorus.

      5. AK says:

        His attack on 2A is long-view, pure Marxist. Not through legislative proces, which he (and his party) would lose, as they did in ’94, but by SCOTUS appointments. That way his party dosn’t get the direct blame when Heller and McDonald are overturned. Look at the way Kagan and Sotomayor are voting…..

        Until then, why, he’s a moderate centrist.

      6. Ken Nobbs says:

        Jude, he’s been intentionally quiet on the subject to stay under the radar and help get himself re-elected. IF he gets a second term, that will be when he springs his anti-gun agenda on us. He has historically aligned himself with the anti-gun movement.

        Check out this article that was in The Washington Times:

        http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2012/feb/10/nra-official-obama-wants-outlaw-guns-2nd-term/

      7. K. Hunter says:

        Adtually Obama has taken a different tack. Rather than try to limit our ability to defend ourselves by forbidding us to carry guns he has gone after the ammunition manufacturers by requireing micro id on shell casings and imposing limits on the types and quantities of ammunition that can be manufactured legally. Your handgun isn’t particularly useful if you can’t get ammo because its either too rare or too expensive. The DOJ has also supported each peice of antigun legislation that has been challenged in court.

        Do your homework people.

    3. B says:

      White Americans obtaining firearms legally? Hate to burst your bubble, but I know many black, asian and hispanics who have concealed carry permits. And not all white gun owners are entirely legal. This isn’t a white or black thing. Its an American thing.

      1. Sam says:

        Absolutely True!

      2. BeauW says:

        With the exception a a few closeted racists, most of us are behind you, B! More women are joining our ranks as well.

        —From a white conservative Christian gun owner!

      3. Modahed says:

        Well put B!

  13. tdrag says:

    How much longer will this judge be allowed to sit?

    1. ChurchvilleMile says:

      Until he retires, they carry him out feet first, or he’s impeached. Federal judges have lifetime appointments.

  14. Jim says:

    You DO NOT NEED A PERMIT! The Constitution is all the PERMIT anyone needs. The right to bear arms…………PERIOD.

    1. John Adams says:

      The Constitution is NOT A PERMIT. It is only a list of enumerated (numbered/finite; see 9th amendment) restrictions on the Federal government’s powers. Our freedoms and rights (unenumerated; see 10th amendment) do not come from the government, or the Constitution.

      People need to remember this crucial distinction. Rights are naturally attained by just being human. Our governing laws were to restrict what the government can do to you.

      Of course the Judiciary and the rest of Congress including the Executive branch have done all they can to undo the greatest plan for a free country ever designed. Through rulings, and alphabet agency regulations, we have de facto law that would never have passed the founding father’s muster.

      1. davec says:

        ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

        This idea that the C grants rights is a deadly lie, because when it does, then it can be Amended to take them away.

        The Bill of rights is separate. God gave us, and we took, our rights.

        The C does two things:

        1.) establishes LIMITED Government
        2.) FORBIDS it to infringe.

        In this time of war with an enemy, and claims by Government that this enemy is within, IMO, it rises to TREASON to attempt to infringe on the RKBA

      2. gunner says:

        Our founding fathers believed that our “rights” were God given. That’s why most libturds are athiests.

  15. Marshall KGUN says:

    I live in Arizona and I’m confused. What’s a “handgun permit”? To me, a “handgun” is “permitted” by the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment. End of Story.

    1. Sam says:

      LOL……welcome to MD. Check your guns at the gate. Please leave your checkbook with the Comptroller at the gate. A waste basket has also been provided for any copies of the Constitution you may be carrying.

      1. KJV says:

        EPIC Sam, EPIC. LOL

      2. Pull says:

        MD is not as bad as New Jersey, but it is close. Did you know that in Maryland, if you are on your way to the skeet range with your shotgun locked in your trunk and you stop for gas, you have committed a crime.

    2. K. Hunter says:

      Have you not read of the recent arrests of legal gun owners in New Your, et al? This is one of those cases where the administration recognizes the tenth amendment to the detriment of second, the constitution generally and ultimately the citizenry. These people don’t even recognize their tyranical behavior, they believe instead that they are protecting us from our baser instincts. Like the urge to protect ourselves, our families and our property from the ravages of criminals in and our of government.

  16. Patrick Duffy says:

    The idea of a “permit” is unconstitutional. As long as a citizen has not commited a past crime, there is nothing in the constitution forbidding any lawful citizen from carrying a gun at any time. No government “permission” is required. All gun laws should be struck down because they restrict lawful citizens from exercising their God-given rights, and it has nothing to do with what is written on a piece of paper in Washington DC.

    1. davec says:

      You made a false statement:

      “As long as a citizen has not commited a past crime

      The Second Amendment does not allow such an exclusion.

      What part of SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED dont you get?

      OK, so the distinction is “committed a crime”

      OK, now owning a gun si a crime.

      Your’e a criminal for just owning a gun.

      No gun rights.

      See where that traitorous game goes? It goes EXACTLY the same way it went in Castros Cuba in the 1950s.

      Apparently you have missed what “RIGHT” means?

      Rights for you but not others.

      1. TJP says:

        Well, isn’t being in jail rather damaging to your “liberty” or “pursuit of happiness”? Why are we locking up anyone? Let’s face it, if you’ve committed a felony, especially a violent felony, you have violated everyone else’s rights, and as such have no right to anything except perhaps life (and not even that if you committed a rape or murder, imho). This is not the government taking away your rights, it’s you choosing to commit a crime and nullifying your own rights.

        I have no objection to a basic criminal check, or requiring gun owners to have taken a gun training course (or alternately, passed an exam, if they already know how to shoot). But not having done so and getting caught should be a fineable offense, not a felony, so long as you’re not a felon and so long as you don’t shoot someone by mistake. If your life is in imminent danger, you don’t always have time to go through days of background checks and gun training.

      2. BeauW says:

        Voting is a right as well…but felons have that right taken away as well. Now the real problem is that sometimes someone is accused of something unjustly…so in states like Maryland, if you are under a restraining order, you are denied the right to buy a firearm. While restraining orders are sometimes given to truly protect someone, fairly often it is used as a tactic to make an accusation towards an ex spouse or estranged spouse.

  17. DASA says:

    Whether the anti-gun folks like it or not, the rights in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution are no less sacred than those of any other. We would cringe if someone said you need a “good and substantial reason” to criticize your government or to practice your religious beliefs. Not only is it contrary to our founding principles it is too arbitrary. The words “good” and “substantial” mean different things to different people making the rule unenforceable in addition to being unconstitutional. Good decision by the judge.

    1. davec says:

      If theres a 10 round magazine ban, then Journalist can only say 10 words.

      Get it, Main Sleaze Media??

      1. K. Hunter says:

        But rules like that would only apply to those who write things that are offensive to the current powers that be. We can’t have pople trashing our wondrous political class if we wxpect them to maintain the high levels of self esteem so necessary to their continued excellence..

  18. Dan says:

    Yea-what part of “Shall not be infringed” is so hard to understad???

    1. Jude says:

      I know, right!? Somebody should inform congress over their lovely new “you can’t protest where we say you can’t protest” bill. The House just passed this POS that basically makes it a crime to protest whenever DHS wants it to be.

      1. B says:

        I just read about this too. Talk about scary. It doesn’t even have to be protesting. You can be thrown in jail for even accidentally entering an area without knowing someone will be there even if it wasn’t announced or planned, even if you were there first. So if you’re a CHL holder and you’re in a waffle house and Joe Biden stops in for a bite, the Secret Service finds out you have a valid CHL and are in no other way violating the law, you are now under arrest and will lose your 2nd amendment rights. Crazy.

      2. Renfield says:

        Some university built a campus “First Amendment Square,” too, to celebrate freedom of religion, freedom of speech and of the press, and the right of the people peaceably to assemble. At that “First Amendment Square,” however, “political speech” is PROHIBITED.

  19. Bill O'Riley says:

    There is a reason liberal judges trample on your 2nd Amendment rights…because they don’t fear the citizenry. Perhaps, if some of these liberal activist judges were found face down in a dumpster, the rest of the judges would think twice before trampling our rights.

    1. davec says:

      they fear the Citizenry now. Gun and ammo sales are off the charts. 100 million armed Citizens and no one knows how many multiple owners there are.

      And, of course, Citizens have nothing to fear from Police, who are going around executing people in the streets for no good reason.

      Nothing at all…

  20. Jonhn Yaya says:

    There is only one gun law in this country, the 2nd Amendment. All else is bureaucratic nonsense that I choose to comply with or not at my discretion.

    The world is filled with violence. Because criminals carry guns, we decent law-abiding citizens should also have guns. Otherwise they will win and the decent people will lose.

    1. davec says:

      ..as has already been proven the case.

      Notice all the crime ridden cesspools of gun violence are big cities which have GUN LAWS. Chicago, DC (besides the other crime there in the District of Corruption) LA, Atlanta…

      Then theres Kennesaw GA. no crime. Everyone by law has to be armed (house):

      http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1818862/posts

  21. BadKosh says:

    Liberals will believe anything! As long as you explain the fiction/lie in the most convoluted and complex way – they think is shows intellectualizm….

  22. davec says:

    All gun laws are un-Constituitional. A law that says you cant shoot someone hinges on damages, not gun ownership, but crooked Legislators and lawyers have seized on that for agenda purposes.

    YEAH !!!!!

    What part of SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is difficult to understand?

    Then this scam:

    “He says it isn’t sufficiently tailored to the state’s public safety interests.”

    1.) the State belongs to the People

    2.) since when does one parties private property ownership interest trump anothers, to deprive them of possession of their property (gun)?

    Especially since the State HAS NO RIGHTS. All rights belong to the People.

    second-amendment.tripod.com

  23. Larry says:

    I carry a handgun. I have no permit. I will never get a permit. PERIOD.

    1. davec says:

      DITTO.

      Besides, no CC law for rifles, why discriminate against handguns?

  24. r charles says:

    weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

    1. davec says:

      I got that one.. excellent comment!!!!

      weee wee weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

  25. Ellie Lightt says:

    yes about time
    MD joins other states in supporting the 2nd amendment

    1. BeauW says:

      Except so far, it’s only 1 judge…Who’s gonna convince our legislatures since it’s dominated by Liberal Democrats who are primarily from just 3 of the 23 local jurisdictions in Maryland?

  26. Rusty Shackleford says:

    When Law abiding citizens are allowed to defend themselves, crime rates go down…I ‘heart’ Utah and our low crime rate.

    Looks like the good Folks in Maryland need to clean out their state house and elect some Pro Law abiding citizen types. Criminals don’t follow laws. It is not that hard to understand.

    1. Do What says:

      Utah doesn’t have blacks with bad attitudes! That’s the real difference.

  27. dwg says:

    If you voted for O’taitor, we will defeat you. I can only hope that your kids will thank us

    1. The Mom says:

      Did you mean owebama, or owemalley? Both are incompetent. It’s becoming unbearable ‘living’ in md
      And now with the new proposal of mayor rawlings’, it will be absolutely horrible. What is wrong with people,
      don’t they know how to reasonably lead anymore? jmo

  28. CommonCents says:

    Qutoe: … he was.denied a renewal of his permit in 2009 because he could not show he had been subject to “threats occurring beyond his residence.”

    The ‘threat beyond his residence’ is Obama, the DNC, and every other Marxist.

  29. AZsmitty, Arizona says:

    Welcome to the United States of America, Maryland, so nice of you to join us. The second amendment is the teeth of the watchdog that keeps governent honest. Here in Arizona we continue to re-instate all properties of the second amendment. Law abideing citizens need no reason to arm themselves….period!

    1. Renfield says:

      Do not forget, however, that we are just one Obama Supreme Court appointment away from losing ALL our rights regarding firearms.

      1. amplitude jones says:

        only if we acquiesce!!!!!!

    2. Buddy says:

      You are obviously being factious with your comments regarding Maryland joining the USA. But in thinking about that, would it not be nice that we in the west were not tied down to old European thinking and could go our own way.

      Is there any good for us to be tied to such myopic rules and regulations?

  30. Shea says:

    “Good and substantial reason?” “Amendment 2, US Constitution – a right given by our Creator to defend oneself.”

    “Rejected.”

    Glad to hear there are some remaining courts that are not tied too closely to politics. The courts are supposed to be, in part, guarantors of personal liberty, and have become the opposite.

  31. mark edward marchiafava says:

    the 2nd amendment has absolutely nothing to do with protecting one’s self from the boogeyman. NO, it’s to protect yourself from tyranny, exactly what we have today.

    1. davec says:

      Exactly right, and the scam the anti gunners use is that the Police will somehow protect us from criminals.

      Id say “Haw Haw” except not only is that a farce, but now weve got an epidemic of police going around killing unarmed Citizens for no valid reason.

      Google “Native american in seattle killed for having a pocket knife”

      “Man killed for having a garden hose”

      1. Sam says:

        The police are under no obligation to protect you. They are only obliged to investigate and apprehend after the crime is committed.

        And just remember that when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

    2. TripWire says:

      Good post, Mark. Whenever you hear about 2A rights in the media, its always about sporting use or sef-defense from street crime. The 2A was included precisely to allow the people to defend themselves against the government, should it become necessary.

    3. nikki D. says:

      fuc u mark.

  32. Mikey says:

    While this decision is encouraging, I find it very disturbing that the person in question could not RENEW his permit because he had not been threatened or attacked outside his home yet. What kind of government would say that you have to be a victim before you can defend yourself?!?!

    Pure insanity.

    1. Renfield says:

      NJ is like that, too. Utterly ridiculous. You pretty much have to show that you have recently suffered a possibly deadly attack before they will issue you a permit. Of course, celebrities, politically connected people, and people willing to pay stiff bribes can obtain permits.

  33. Ranger01 says:

    The Judge is Wrong! He is trying to disarm law abiding citizens, but the criminals will find a way to get a gun. The Judge is taking away the constitutional right to bear arms, and protect ones family and self.

    1. Ken Nobbs says:

      Sorry, but you have it backwards. The judge ruled that the current requirement that an applicant must have a “good and substantial reason” to be granted a permit is unconstitutional. Previously, the applicant had to justify why they needed to carry a concealed weapon. Now, the burden is on the government to prove why they cannot be granted the permit.

      1. TripWire says:

        You would think a guy claiming to be a “Ranger” would at least be able to read.

  34. Mahakala says:

    It’s a good start

  35. tricky says:

    Don’t worry, the Obama regeime will fight the ruling.

  36. Mike says:

    Maryland only wants the criminals to have guns…

  37. Buckeyebubba says:

    Excellent! The People’s Republic of Maryland looses one!!! Great decision.

  38. lyn says:

    What is the meaning of the word “right” that they don’t understand? They should also know that a woman has a right to her own body! Some people just want to control everybody! There should be a law that would prevent Rights from being compromised!

    1. Snitch-in-Time says:

      Where do rights come from lyn? Hint: Read the part of the Declaration of Independance referring to us being “…endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights…” Where do you think that “Creator” stands on the right to murder one’s offspring?

      I am quite certain that the “Creator” is OK with innocent people having the means and the tools to defend their lives against attack. That is the difference between the two issues.

  39. Cash says:

    I think a lot of people are misreading this decision. What the judge just did was find the requirement that a person has to show a “good and substantial reason” to be unconstitutional In other words, the person seeking the permit shouldn’t have to show cause. That is a win for the right to carry folks.

    1. davec says:

      ..the permit is still un Constitutional

      proof? Someone without a permit cannot bear arms.

      The Govt made the permit so its un Constitutional

      The lawyers dont want that overturned, it makes them money.

      1. B says:

        Yes it is, but it is a step in the right direction.

  40. sans culottes says:

    O’Malley’s march !

  41. DemsNuts says:

    Hey Barry – one down and on 56 states to go……

  42. Dans DNA says:

    The NFA, NY’s Sullivan Law, and every other infringement on the 2nd needs to go as well.

    1. Snitch-in-Time says:

      Don’t forget GCA-68 and the improperly passed maching gun ban attached as a 11th hour rider to FOPA-86.

  43. B says:

    Maryland?? HOLY SH!T! Wow! NJ, NY, CA, and IL you’re all next!

  44. Wiseguy says:

    Yeehaa……..

  45. Mike0oSS says:

    I’m glad Judge Legg sided with the citizens of Maryland. A wise reading of the Constitution.

  46. TexasRick says:

    Does Maryland also require that protestors be able to factually support their opinions before being allowed to protest under the First Ammendment right to freedom of speech.

    1. davec says:

      not quite, but just last week, the CONs in CONgress passed a law against demonstrating in the presence of a Govt official (paraphrased)

      They’re workigg on it. Theye set up a Straw Man called OWS just for that purpose.

      http://news.yahoo.com/us-lobbyists-aimed-smear-occupy-wall-street-report-203329702.html

      Yahoos buried the story

      1. TexasRick says:

        A society that lives in fear of its government is called tyranny…..a government that lives in fear of its ciitizenry is called liberty. When you get right down to it, the Second Ammendment makes all the others possible.

  47. Wiseguy says:

    …..just what Maryland needs…….one more friggin’ thing to tax to the hilt.

  48. davec says:

    “States can channel the way their residents exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms,”

    CHANNEL? Since when does the US or State Constitution allow “channeling?”

    No such permission was ever given by the People.

    “Channel” means “control”

    second-amendment.tripod.com

    1. Eric says:

      There are reasonable limits to ALL rights, and always have been.

      1. Renfield says:

        Maryland’s aren’t reasonable.

      2. Snitch-in-Time says:

        What part of “shall not be infringed” do you not understand?

        Infringe: transitive verb
        1: to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another
        2obsolete : defeat, frustrate

  49. Goob says:

    I just moved back to Maryland after spending 4 years in North Carolina. I have my CCW permit in NC and have done everything possible to educate and protect myself.

    It’s absolutely amazing that I cannot protect myself in a city that is one of the most violent in the country.

    This is a step in the right direction but I have a feeling it’s far from over.

    1. KJV says:

      Same here, I hated not being able to transfer my permits to MD from NC. It was disturbing that I have to “retreat” if I can before I defend myself because I could be persecuted.

      Criminals will get guns regardless of the laws or not. They don’t care…This was a great ruling IMO, now I can go get my gun and protect my home. I grew up here too, and I was seriously contemplating leaving this state. Might still but this is a good start in the right direction for MD!

  50. David Kramer says:

    I think abortions should be regulated as tough as guns are.
    I think speech should be regulated like guns are.
    I think contraception should be regulated like guns are.
    I think gays should be regulated like guns are.
    I think religion should be regulated like guns are.

    Hehehehehhehehe, throw their crud right back in their faces.

    1. Snitch-in-Time says:

      Can you imagine the howling and shrill screaming if liberal had to fill out anything like a Form 4473 to do any of these things? Or how about the training and fee requirements for obtaining a CCL? This is a great post! My hat is off.

  51. davec says:

    ““Most states that choose to regulate the right to bear arms have licensing systems that are objective and straightforward,” Gura said. “That’s all that we want for Maryland.””

    “Regulate” means INFRINGE beause Citizens who do not choose to allwo the State to “regulate” their INDIVIDUAL RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS are infringed against.

    Lawyers playing manipulative games to keep the ball bouncing to make MONEY.

    Let me tell you about these subversive lawyers like those at SAF, they are NOT in it for the Constitution.

    Id contacted two of these attorneys (wont say which ones but you might guess who one is) about a 2A action in WA State and both agreed to represent me, UNTIL, I stated I wanted to bring charges against Govt that included TEETH such as abuse of authority and Civil rights.

    Basically, prison time for Govt officials.

    BOTH went back on their word to represent me.

    Cash in hand.

  52. amplitude jones says:

    EVERY supporter of gun control treasons that disarm victims, is guilty of every murder of a disarmed American!

  53. Herb says:

    “The right’s existence is all the reason he needs.”

    Yeah. You have the right as long as you apply and pay the government for a permit to exercise that right. Lol. This is a good step, but I’d like to see the removal of permits altogether.

  54. Eric says:

    Wow. A Federal judge said that citizens don’t have to show a reason WHY they need to exercise civil rights?

    Obviously he wasn’t appointed by a Democrat.

  55. Gman says:

    Yeah! I don’t mind getting a permit to carry the state should look at this as a way to generate millions of “new” dollars. I don’t carry if it caost me $100 or $200 dollars to get a permit there is no cost on protecting yourself or family from crime.

    Question is when can we apply under the new rules????

  56. Eric says:

    Only one state, Vermont, assumes the right of the law-abiding citizen to keep and bear arms, and does not require a “permit” of any kind.

    Which explains why Vermont is such a notorious bloodbath, I guess.

    1. Mikey says:

      You forgot Alaska, Arizona, Montana and Wyoming, but your point still stands.

      Also Texas (my home state) is working on an open carry bill in the state congress. Hopefully we can get to Constitutional Carry soon…

  57. Harry says:

    Don’t forget….MD is Biden’s home state so nobody should be surprised that intellect and reason is absent in the political apparatus there. A liberal bastion eager to destroy the concept of free-born men exercising their natural freedom…and they will stop at nothing to grind him into the ground.

    1. JustAGuy says:

      That reminds me of when Biden was running for president back in 1988, Biden confronted a reporter and told the reporter that he’s smarter than him. Then Biden went on to embellish his credentials. Biden ended up having to drop out of the race shortly after.

      That whole exchange is on YouTube. You can watch it for a good laugh! 😀

    2. Fred says:

      Biden is DEs embarrassment.

      MD foisted Mikulski on an unwitting America.

  58. Marbran says:

    We are all Breitbart now!

  59. SharpShtik says:

    Since almost all violent criminals are Democrats according to simple comparisons of FBI and voting statistics, it’s easy to see whay Democrats do not want armed citizens interfering with their business of crime and want free attorneys, awesome incarceration conditions and felong voting rights.

  60. biskitts says:

    “States can channel the way their residents exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms, but because Maryland’s goal was to minimize the number of firearms carried outside homes by limiting the privilege”

    Therein lies the problem that most people don’t get. Gun ownership is not a “privilege.” Gun ownership is a right.

  61. BHirsh says:

    Told ya, didn’t I?

    Uh-huh. New York, Illinois, Hawaii, New Jersey et al, YOU’RE NEXT.

    “Resistance is futile.”

  62. Ace says:

    If I have to have a background check, a waiting period and a registration to exercise my God-given Second Amendment right as a citizen to carry a gun then, logically, shouldn’t similar rules be in place if I want to exercise my First Amendment rights of free speech? Oh wait, I’m just being impatient, aren’t I? I’m sure there’s probably a bill in the works for that, as well. “Land of the Free” has become a sad, ironic punch line.

  63. Evil Buddy P says:

    I live in Maryalnd and I carry a concealed weapon becasue a police officer was to heavy and bulky to carry.

    An armed society is a polite society

    1. Snitch-in-Time says:

      I live in Texas and I carry a pistol because sometimes one need to fight his way back to his rifle.

  64. AD-RtR/OS! says:

    Alan Gura has several suits before CA courts on this same issue.
    One can only hope that the judges in CA will giver due deference to the ruling of this Federal District Judge in MD.

  65. Bob BOB says:

    I guess Maryland doesn’t have history books or has ever read the constitution.

  66. Dgutes says:

    I think this article is confusing a premises permit and a carry permit. I think the plaintiff was granted a premises permit but not a carry permit.

  67. RightStuff says:

    Heavenly days! The good guys won one today!

  68. Sam says:

    Made my day! There is still hope.

  69. Harry says:

    When you pause to reflect…..you cannot deny the fact that in the United States, the prisons are jam-packed to overflowing with liberal Democrats…think about it. They are the product of the confused and corrupted non-values of the criminals masquerading as politicians, who claim to care for the common citizen. Every social program is really a money grab where the funds are ultimately diverted to pals and supporters. Take Obama’s CZARS ! Can anyone name even one?? Can anyone cite three things any of these despicable “takers” has accomplished??? A prime example of payoffs to pals with our money!!! Angry yet?

  70. Brodave says:

    Great news. There is at least one Federal Judge in America that rules according to the USA Constitution.

    Note to my fellow US Citizens:

    Never, ever vote for a Democrat again. Never! Ever!

  71. MontereyZman says:

    In my County = Monterey Co.,Ca. our Sheriff is the oly one that issues carry permits which for years meant that you can get one only if you are a wealthy friend or a politician. Now our Sheriff has put a new hurdle you must jump to be considered of a carry permit …. = A Psych Review !!!

    To me I would think that is way over the top … ???

  72. No More Victim Disarmament says:

    Oh no, an evil Judge that actually believes in the constitution!?!? Someone do something quick before MD residents start defending themselves against tyranny.

  73. Sam Duncan says:

    Many years ago in FL, at least 30+ years, a CCF law for private citizens was enacted by FL’s legislature for statewide application. The commentary that evening out of NY on Nightline, Ted Koppel and the boys, was nothing more than left wing liberal antio-gun extremist radical gibberish. FL was going to be the wild west. Criminal homicides would soar and on-and-on. It was so silly. The opposite has occurred. The Maryland private citizens have a Constitutional right to bear arms and to protect themselves as they see fit without unreasonable interference by the Sate. Period. It’s a Constitutional guarantee. Maryland might want to look at FL’s CCF law for reasonable direction in crafting a CCF law for Maryland. FL’s law works…it’s effective…it’s strikes balance. Sam Duncan, Lake City, FL

  74. Htos1 says:

    Awesome!what a severe blow to the leninists and alinskyites!

  75. Will says:

    Gun control is victim disarmament

  76. Mike G says:

    Of course Fuhrer Obama and his minions will fight this as far as they can. A legally armed populace would be a major stumbling block to his coming Chavez like tyranny.

    1. Brian says:

      They wont fight this. Obama is not going to directly attack the 2nd Amendment. He will use the UN’s Small Arms Treaty to start to attempt to disarm us.

  77. Robert O Kelley says:

    What next, freedom of speech.

  78. Robert O Kelley says:

    Does this include Indians?

  79. Joe says:

    New Jersey is even worse than Maryland. Not only does NJ require a carry permit applicant to provide a very strong justification (self defense is not acceptable) but NJ first outlaws all guns, all gun possession, all gun purchases, all ammo and then only allows some partial gun rights, after NJ state law grants certain limited “exemptions”. The entirety of New Jersey guns laws are unconstitutional and illegal. NJ police do not want its citizens to carry guns for self defense, they want to remain the only special people ln their state. It’s a power/status thing.

  80. nick says:

    Only two years to reach a verdict?

  81. mbhandball says:

    Years ago I had a CC and carried. Big mag Browning 9mm. Witnessed a crime against property and ALMOST intervened. Then processed the what ifs.
    I pull it and he charges, do I shoot? If yes, I’m down for murder. MAYBE get a no-bill (Texas law). Maybe not. Lose job/house.
    I pull, he charges I don’t shoot I’ll eat it.
    I pull it, he runs, what then? I shoot to wound? Goes against training. Also assault with intent. (No threat). Fire for effect?
    Same outcome with me going down again.
    Result? Didn’t get involved. No good outcomes, just complications I invited. I was a passive, armed, spectator. Not a foolish participant. Decision time. For real.

  82. LizardLips says:

    If you’re armed, you’re a citizen, if not, a subject.
    What part of “shall not be infringed’ don’t people get?

  83. John Galt says:

    All the commie bastar=rds that came up with this law should be hung for treason.

  84. Tom says:

    How does one respond ti this porpaganda piece? Like this, in this hit peice you read, to get a handgun PERMIT, why he should be PERMITTED to exercise his RIGHT., don,t have to prove that there’s a reason to seek a PERMIT, but the LICENSING process has to acknowledge that there’s a RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS, attorney gereral’s STILL REVIEWING, these challenges have NOT succeeded in U.S. DISTRICT COURT, most states that choose to REGULATE the rights. and this kills me- states have An OBJECTIVE & STRAIGHTFORWARD SYSTEM. Propaganda = deception and distortion. After reading this comment section I KNOW America has been DUMBED DOWN for sure

  85. THe Padu says:

    About F’ing time!
    Waiting to see what the dummies in Annapolis will do to try and get around this………
    For the first time in my adult life I am proud of my federal judicial system. Ha Ha Ha

  86. Missouri_Mule says:

    God bless this judge and the work of Alan Guera. That said ,I disagree with Mr. Guera – WHAT PART OF MAKE NO LAW ABRIDGING THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BARE ARMS DON’T THEY UNDERSTAND?

  87. Ben says:

    “Most states that choose to regulate the right to bear arms have licensing systems that are objective and straightforward”

    …and _every_ _one_ of those laws outrageously violates the constitution: “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” doesn’t mean “we can infringe a little”, or “we can infringe if we want to” or even “we can infringe if we think we need to.” It bloody well means SHALL NOT.

    It’s a RIGHT. They no more have any authority to tell you that you can only keep and/or carry with a “license” than they do to tell you that you can only SPEAK with a “license.”

    If they want to change this, see article V. Otherwise, they’re completely out of line.

  88. David5300 says:

    Congradulations! Your will find that Washington will be a nicer place to live in now the criminals and street thugs,gands, and car jackers will be afarid to attack someone who MIGHT be carring.
    This may very well put a end to a thugs, dispite what the “experts” may say( an expert is a commentator who lives more than 75 miles away, and there are many “experts” that are as dumb as the inside of a soap bubble)
    Crime goes down, and I have noticed civility goes up.
    You all have a nice day, God Bless.
    And THANK YOU judge for having the courage to show both backbone and commen sence.

  89. David5300 says:

    Opps I apoligize I thought this ruling was from washington State, but don’t worry I don’t carry conceled …… yet

  90. btruth says:

    Everything makes more sense when you know that the USSA and ALL countries were taken over by the ELITE BANKING MAFIA FAMILIES, like the ROTHCHILD’s.
    THEY bought their way into EVERY position of power and CONTROL THEM UTTERLY.
    The PRESS
    THE MILITARY (ALL BRANCHES)
    THE JUDICIAL, LEGISLATIVE,EXECUTIVE BRANCHES
    ALL MAJOR COLLEGES
    THE EDUCATION SYSTEM
    ALL RESOURCES
    ALL MAJOR CORPORATIONS (because we are all now corporatist after all)
    ETC. ETC. ADD NASEUM!

  91. Rich says:

    How many people in Maryland died in the last 5 years from shooters with a legal permit to carry? ANY? It’s almost like liberals want to protect the armed robbers with illegal guns from getting shot.

    1. Martin says:

      Burglary and Robbery are professions just like the one you have. They should be allowed to conduct business safely. See my posts down 3. There are many stories around here of homeowners, drivers and customers taking out bad guys with legally carried guns. Those Good News stories must have an effect on the criminals.

    2. Ben says:

      “Almost”? How much money goes to police departments? To the companies providing gear and propaganda for the (ridiculous) “war on drugs”? How much money goes to government employees who manage these unconstitutional permits and licenses? How much power do people have when they can say “no gun rights for you!” How many guns has the CIA trafficked in? How much illegal drug traffic is done by the CIA? How much money goes to prisons?

      The more crime there is, the more money they make. Why would you even *think* they’d want to reduce crime. No, they want lots of crime, and then they want to “fight” it, and then they want you to praise them, and pee down your leg in sympathy if one of them gets hurt in the process.

      It is NOT to their advantage to reduce crime. Hence our overcrowded prisons with 30 MILLION people in them, hence the permanent bottom rung existence of those who have paid their debt to society, hence the media hysteria and lies about recidivism, etc. (what do they EXPECT an ex-con to do if they make sure he can’t get a decent job? Are they STUPID? No, they’re not… they WANT them to re-offend.)

      As long as you are convinced the government is doing this for “right”, you’re bewildered. They’re doing it for the MONEY and the POWER and for the COMMERCIAL interests that receive all this money — so it can be funneled to them in the form of bribes, overcompensated speaking engagements, “fact finding trips”, escorts, LEGAL insider trading, and yes, even those special parking places.

    3. amplitude jones says:

      no, not ALMOST at all! They want AMERICANS TO BE MURDERED>

  92. cm says:

    in the mind of a liberal, self-defense is immoral

  93. RobMc says:

    If the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms was as vigorously defended as the “discovered” right to an abortion, you’d not only be able to own a gun anywhere anytime, the federal government would pay for it.

    1. Snitch-in-Time says:

      In light of the HHS birth control ruling, maybe we should demand an ammo subsidy? After all, my gun and ammo are a major part of my personal health care plan.

  94. Martin says:

    I grew up in MD. Also lived in Baltimore City. i would not go back after being allowed for 20 years to carry in GA. Shall issue state. If you are not a criminal they have to give you the permit. The South is Polite. It is more polite when the bad guys don’t know who has a gun. We also have Stand your ground and a specific law addressing open season on CarJackers. It does not happen much.

  95. Martin says:

    One good upside of a permit is that it is your background check. Want to buy a handgun, you give the store your permit and drivers license and money. Fill out the federal form and walk out with it. No phone call or fee. Start to finish in 15 minutes.

  96. MerkMan says:

    I don’t see registration as an ‘Infringement”, I also don’t see listing the make and model as ‘infringement”. The States are well within their rights to “regulate” but they most not “infringe”.

    1. Tom says:

      a well regulated militia, I AM NOT A MILITA, I am a Citizen. show me the states rights to regulate me the CITIZEN. and thanks for sharing you thoughts with us, I really enjoy talking politics

      1. Ben says:

        Tom: Two things, both good news. 1; all men of age and capacity to carry and use ARE militia by the definition used to write the 2nd amendment; it does NOT mean “national guard”; and 2, “well regulated” meant “brings with them standard amounts of powder, bullets” etc. Look it up, you’ll see that’s exactly the correct reading for the time. So that’s what they meant: They expected YOU to be armed; they thought that in order that you be armed WELL, you should have certain things. They didn’t rule anything ELSE out, and they certainly didn’t intend that the government had to be asked if you could keep, and/or carry. Also, they knew about guns, and they didn’t say guns — they said ARMS. So this includes knives, caltrops, brass knuckles, etc., etc. The anti-gunnies are utterly wrong on this one from start to finish.

  97. JungleCogs says:

    Gee, maybe MD would like the right to regulate free speech too (or any of the others).

    1. Snitch-in-Time says:

      Careful what you ask for. Maryland already has a Department of Mental Hygene.

  98. Scaryland says:

    Living in Maryland is a “good and substantial reason” alone to have a gun. Baltimore and all the areas in MD near DC are crime ridden cess pools.

  99. John Patrick Ryan says:

    Bravo, Judge Legg !! Bravo, plaintiff Wollard !!! Bravo, attorney Gura !!

    And now, as far as the Review Board and the Maryland AG are concerned:

    You can all go stick that red-hot poker right up your collective arses!!

  100. HMichaelH says:

    Excellent decision. I am American Citizen who lives in the State of Maryland, and I want to exercise my right to carry a weapon for self defense. I should not have to prove why I want to exercise my Constitutional Rights…..but I have never applied for a permit to carry because Maryland actively denies my right because they don’t think I have a need to carry a weapon. The State has been wrong all these years. I can’t wait to now apply for the permit.

    And on top of that, CBS now tells me I am commenting too quickly. They actually have told me to “Slow Down!” Can you believe it? Who do they think they are???? The State of Maryland? How soon is too soon for CBS?

  101. KY gentlemen says:

    don’t think for a minute that the Democrats from east to west will ever stop
    until only law enforcement and outlaws are armed. The 99.9 % in this country
    will always have to fight for their righjts to protect themselves. Obama and
    his cronies run guns to Mexico so they can convince the American people
    just how bad and out of control our gun movement is, and lo and behold their
    plan bickfires, and they get caught with their ‘FAST AND FURIOUS’ pants down

  102. walter12 says:

    ONLY A FOOL WOULD LIVE IN THE STATE OF MARYLAND TODAY. IT IS A CESSPOOL OF COMMUNISTS, MARXISTS, TRAITORS, MISFITS, DEADBEATS, CRIMINALS, AND DOPERS.

    1. Buddy says:

      Perhaps you might enlarge your comment to include fools who live in states under the same federal jurisdiction . . .?

  103. Elvis says:

    The government that fears guns in the hands of its citizens…. should.

  104. yarply says:

    “Most states that choose to regulate the right to bear arms have licensing systems that are objective and straightforward,” Gura said. “That’s all that we want for Maryland.”

    More accurately stated would have been; Most states which violate the constitution by regulating peoples right to bear arms have licensing systems which are more straightforward and are not so in your face about the restrictions they place on people while they’re violating those rights.

    Could go on to say; These other states like Md and NY are more in your face about their denials and violations to the constitution which causes a backlash which is not helpful to the established agenda to -quietly- restrict and in the future ban firearms.

  105. yarply says:

    I miss the good old days when there was NO, I mean NONE at all, paper work to fill out to buy a gun. You just walked in and picked one. Laid down the cash and walked out. No questions asked.

    And I miss the days when, if you had a stump in your back yard and needed to blow it out instead of paying someone to use a backhoe to pull it out,, you just went down to the hardware store and bought a stick or two. And blew it yourself.
    Or a bag of fert., and some kero.

    Nope those days appear to be gone for good.

  106. Earl Eakin says:

    New comments should display at the top, not the bottom. When new comments display at the bottom, no one ever reads them.

    1. Voice says:

      Fuc you duke of earl pearl.

  107. SerfCityHereWeCome says:

    Hmmm…the people who’ve invaded your home are opening fire on you as we speak? Sorry, you’ll have to wait seven more days to ask us if this is a “good and substantial reason”. Btw, we’ve taken the liberty of registering the tattered bloody shreds of your corpse as a Democrat or ten since it sounds like you won’t be around of November 6th. Hail the Glorious Worker’s Paradise of Maryland. Yours truly, Gov O’Marxy.

  108. Voice says:

    All of you NRA cowboys out there should be happy. Hope one of your kids kills his sister or brother with a gun in the house or a thief uses it to kill & it’s traced back to you. Better yet, get drunk & use it in a moment of anger in a bar. Yeah.

    1. JustAGuy says:

      That would NEVER happen with an “NRA cowboy”. You ignore the fact that “NRA cowboys” tend to be disciplined and mature with firearms.

      But an “NRA cowboy” could put down an Obama Zombie trying to break into his house for a little Hope and Change at the owner’s expense.

    2. Pat Henry says:

      Why is it that you people are so full of hate that you hope for the death of an innocent child to prove a point that does not exist? Blow it out your a$$, liberal.

      1. Buddy says:

        Voice is not necessarily a liberal. Probably more like a psychopath which underlines why having self defense is a good and substantial reason.

    3. SerfCityHereWeCome says:

      I don’t usually bother to feed the hater-trolls, but hopefully you gun-grabbing useful idiots will be on your knees sobbing to the home invaders about the cops being only minutes away as they laugh at you and have their way with your family.

    4. Brian says:

      Are there any more talking points you could parrot?

  109. Pat Henry says:

    The simple fact that one is required to have a permit in order to be armed is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. The gov’t doesn’t need to register guns. By getting a carry permit or a hunting license, you are registering yourself at the state and county level as a gun owner. That’s all they need when the time comes. And it will come …

  110. Jens says:

    Anyone who is willing to let a politician or judge tell you that you do NOT have the right to protect yourself or your family – is just plain dumb. Now I’m not saying that every law abiding citizen should carry guns around – it is a personal choice – but don’t let government tell you that you can’t! This judge was 100% correct!!

  111. Dave says:

    Oh my Goodness… I can’t believe it…. where am I, this can’t be America…can it??

    A federal judge who actually reads the Constitution and understands its plain intent… WOW… NOW THISI NEWS!

  112. M says:

    THIS is just ONE of the many reasons I left Maryland YEARS ago. A mini-communist state full of liberal dung. FINALLY, a smart decision by a judge who understands the constitution. FINALLY the criminals might think twice about attacking innocents on the street. FINALLY, the tide is turning !

  113. Ross staben says:

    Thank God we have people like U.S. District Judge Benson

  114. Tmos says:

    Just another example of Liberals using any means possible to force you to live by their rules. Pesky Bill of Rights getting in the way is it?

  115. VAXHeadroom says:

    Gun control means using both hands.

  116. B C says:

    Fantastic. A case law example of how a right does not need any justification to be exercised. Now, let’s move on to the Federal Government targeting American citizens…

  117. Tmos says:

    In DC, the red tape, cost, and time required has been increased so much, most people cannot, or will not, deal with it. JUST AS THEY INTENDED.
    In Ca., the voters rejected Gay marriage, but the Supreme Court of California based on an equal protection argument overturned it.

    The hypocrisy coming from the left is staggering.

    1. Tom says:

      D.C. the district of columbia is Federal Territory. If u pull out your constution it will explain that that several states are under a different standard

      1. Tom says:

        opps ” the” before several

  118. dblari says:

    I don’t have a problem with carry permits; it’s the concealed part that bothers me. I question anyone’s motives who wants to hide a gun. Also, if we’re goiing to become a shall-issue state, we should require insurance for permit holders.

    1. Tom says:

      Like we don’t have enough insurance forced onus already. ie car insurance, and conceled is not hiding. I sorry you sound so scared, really

    2. TripWire says:

      Carrying concealed gives me a tactical advantage against any would be aggressor. Why should we carry insurance? Isn’t the gun insurance enough?

    3. Brian says:

      I carry concealed because if I am somewhere and an armed criminal comes in and sees my holstered gun I am likely the first person he is going to shoot. Before I even know what’s going on I’ll be dead. And also, if you read Voice’s post above you’ll see that some people have an irrational fear of an inanimate object and would likely cause a scene I would rather just avoid. It’s no one’s business if I carry. I live in Indiana where we are simply issued a license to carry a handgun. Whether we carry open or concealed is up to each person.

  119. Reed Cook says:

    What part of this statement don’t you understand: ” A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

  120. Alan M says:

    Any one ever try to get a carry permit in New York City. I would love to see that Attorney go to work here.

  121. Pokey says:

    Alan Gura is a true warrior in the battle against infringement of our God given rights.
    Thank God Gura ignored pressure from the NRA to drop the Heller case because the NRA feared he would lose. Who was on the Supreme court steps when he won claiming victory? The NRA. What a bunch of sleazy cowards. The NRA is nothing more, or less, than yet another big beltway lobbying firm. It is all about the money with them.
    Thank God for real men like Alan Gura. We owe him more than we can ever repay. A true warrior for Freedom.

  122. Daniel says:

    I carry a concealed handgun on a daily basis and I REFUSE to get a license or a permit. I have the RIGHT to bear arms. I would no more submit to my right to bear arms being licensed, than I would submit to my right to free speech being licensed. Granted, I may end up imprisoned for my actions, but that is a price I am willing to pay. People you need to wake up. The only way government won’t take your rights, is if you prevent them from doing so.

    1. Bilbo says:

      Agreed…too bad you mostly stand alone. Greater numbers would force the issue. Many have died to defend the constitution…unfortunately most are only willing to just chatter to defend it now.

    2. Nick says:

      should we also stop licensing the right to vote?

      1. Brian says:

        If you’ll read the Constitution it does not say you get to vote. It simply says there are four reasons they can’t prohibit you from voting:
        1. Age over 18
        2. Gender
        3. Race
        4. Failure to pay a poll tax.
        They can place any other barriers to your voting that they choose. It is not a right, it is a privilege granted by the State. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is specifically spelled and and any infringements are prohibited. Voting requires the State. Without the State there is no need to vote. Defending yourself is a natural right possessed regardless of government’s or written constitutions.

  123. Bilbo says:

    Why don’t people understand that if they can take away a constitutional right to bear arms then they can take away a constitutional right to anything…free speech, religion, assembly..you name it. You want to ban guns then change the constitution and let the states decide…or else we may have to defend the constitution the old fashioned way.

    1. Mookester says:

      The Founders of this Republic must weep seeing what we have become. They would have gone to option one many many years ago and reined in Government’s role in our evaporating freedoms and Liberties with extreme prejudice. We are sliding down that slippery slope to serfdom.

      Ben Franklin upon being asked what form of Government was being created in the Constitutional Convention responded:
      A Republic, If you can keep it.

  124. STRAIGHT TALK HAWK says:

    HEY MARYLAND! DO A CHECK OF ALL THE MEXICAN ILLEGAL ALIENS, ESPECIALLY THE DRUG CARTEL GANGS RUNNING YOUR CITIES, TO MAKE SURE THEY HAVE COMPLIED WITH THE GUN LAWS!!!

  125. BobStrebs says:

    It’s a right, and not a “privilege,” to bear arms. Educate your writers, CBS, before you are embarrassed any further.

  126. Nick says:

    How many of you own guns because you are part of a well-regulated militia?

    1. Ben says:

      In the parlance of the day, “well regulated” meant consistently armed: so many bullets, so much powder, etc. “militia” meant of an age to bear a weapon and march. It didn’t mean “national guard” or “army”, it just meant citizens (males, really) that could fight if called upon.

      So the answer to your question is, the vast majority of us own guns, and form a well regulated militia this very day.

      Furthermore, the operative portion of the 2nd amendment is not dependent on the precursor: It specifically indicates the rights to keep and carry “shall not be infringed upon” and it provides absolutely zero wiggle room.

      The lawyers have this one right: In argument, where you hope to prevail, never ask a question you don’t understand, or to which you don’t know the answer. That’s exactly what you just did.

      1. Nick says:

        The Random House College Dictionary (1980) gives four definitions for the word “regulate,” which were all in use during the Colonial period and one more definition dating from 1690 (Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd Edition, 1989). They are:

        1) To control or direct by a rule, principle, method, etc.

        2) To adjust to some standard or requirement as for amount, degree, etc.

        3) To adjust so as to ensure accuracy of operation.

        4) To put in good order.

        [obsolete sense]

        b. Of troops: Properly disciplined.

        that seems to imply that there must be ‘regulations’ on the militia, not just a ‘more the merrier’ outlook on arming citizens

      2. Ben says:

        Nick, it’s #2. As an example, check out this act of congress from that timeframe:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Acts_of_1792

        Here, you’ll see the very specific focus on standards, amount, degree. There were also other laws that used the term regulate the same way, but that’s a big one, and it’s directly relevant as it deals specifically with militia.

        Here’s the relevant verbiage, taken right from the congressional legislation:

        “…a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of power and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided”

        That is what “well regulated” meant to them, and consequently that is how to read the 2nd amendment correctly.

        Basically, it boiled down to “this is what you should bring when you show up” So the point of the well-regulated phrase in the 2nd was to leave the citizens completely unmolested in their ownership of weapons so that there would be no impediment to them being sufficiently armed and equipped. But again, the “shall not infringe” phrase is not dependent upon the well regulated phrase. It’s an explanation, not a precursor.

      3. Nick says:

        well i appreciate you’re intelligent debate and responses, i’d like to see more people like that on here. i do however still believe that it is necessary and appropriate to regulate gun ownership

      4. Ben says:

        i do however still believe that it is necessary and appropriate to regulate gun ownership

        That’s what article V of the constitution is for.

    2. joe says:

      I could be completely wrong, but the Founding Fathers may have seen the need for a standing Army to protect the newly formed country since the regular militias did not have the proper military training to compete with the British. However, they felt a need that the Citizens should be armed in the event that the government should ever use this new well regulated militia against its own people. Just my interpretation based on history

  127. freddylee says:

    Yo Dan………did you vote for Osama Obama because he’s black? Only a moron would think everything is hunky dory with that as$hole as president. Worst president ever. 98% of blacks voted for him (only because he’s one of them) and 100% of the morons (like you) voted for him.

    1. Ben says:

      You are an embarrassment to the entire human race. For crying out loud, learn to be civil. If you have *legitimate* disagreements with the President, I’m positive you could find a way to express them and bring people over to your side, instead of hurling invective about like an addled schoolchild and ensuring that people know your thought processes run at about the level of a child. People like you make me *want* to vote for the man.

      1. Tim says:

        If his statements make you WANT to vote for him, that means you probably already did vote for him once before. Why would his comments make you WANT to vote for Obama unless you were already inclined to do so?

      2. Ben says:

        Because when I see lies and invective about someone coming from the opposition, I begin to doubt that they have anything of worth to say against the candidate. If you have something valid to say, say it. Otherwise, you’re only hurting your own cause.

  128. Netshark says:

    “Most states that choose to regulate the right to bear arms have licensing systems that are objective and straightforward,” Gura said. “That’s all that we want for Maryland.”

    BS. A guy already has been invaded and attacked and it still isnt good enough reason for liberals that the guy be able to defend himself.

    Bureaucrats dont get it through their thick skulls, the constitutions is to protect us from power mongers like them. And judges. Dont even get me started on that.

  129. phillysmart says:

    a victory for th good guys…the communist in th white house would like to disarm all law abiding citizens and declare himself dictator

  130. phillysmart says:

    obama is a communist its a proven fact..doesn’t that explain a lot

  131. The Federal Farmer says:

    The lawyer sed: ““We’re not against the idea of a permit process, but the licensing system has to acknowledge that there’s a right to bear arms.””

    So wait, you’re ok with having to beg and pay government for granting you permission to exercise a right you already possess but….what??

  132. Rich says:

    let see , Right of the People to Keep and Bear arms shall not be infringed,. keep, means I own it, bear means I have it right here with me. Unless you are brain dead anyone can see the peoples right just like the reat of the 10 amendments. 90 million gun owner stand betwen tyranny and freedom. A few dispersed Taliban has held off the best equiped army in the world. 90 million dispersed gun owners should be able to do better.

  133. Lloyd says:

    Would someone remind me how far Maryland is along the path to requiring its citizens to need a permit, after they have shown “good and substancial reason,” to exercise their 1st Amendment rights?

  134. docpsych34 says:

    People who want to keep their Right To Keep and Bear Arms just need to stop electing Democrats. Democrats all lie. They will tell you they are for your rights but when in office they turn on you.
    Never ever Vote for a Democrat!!

  135. Darwin Doug says:

    only in america does this story and the comments make sense. Thank God there is about as much distance as physically possible between america and me.

    1. Brian says:

      That’s the difference between being free and being slaves. Enjoy your servitude.

    2. Tom says:

      When china invades DON’T CALL US

  136. k says:

    The best way to implement gun control is to simply remove the second amendment as it is only an amendment after all…

    1. Brian says:

      Doesn’t matter. There is nothing in the powers granted by the Constitution to the federal government that allows them to disarm us. The right has been recognized as part of Common Law since the time of the Magna Carta. We had the right as colonists and nothing in the Articles of Confederation or the Constitution revoked that right or gave government power to tamper with that right.

    2. Brian says:

      And you also do not understand the nature of the Bill of Rights. It was a guarantee made to the States in order to get them to ratify the Constitution. The Amendment didn’t change anything, it added safeguards against encroachments.The right to protect ourselves our families and our property is a natural right. The Second Amendment did not grant the right. It merely tells government to keep their hands off our guns. Shoot, the Revolutionary War started because the British marched on Lexington and Concord to seize the colonists arms. Do you get that??? The War for Independence started to defend our right to defend ourselves.

    1. Tom says:

      BILL OF RIGHTS

  137. Samuel Colt says:

    Extending this logic to other rights: Do have a “good and substantial’ reason to vote? A good and substantial reason to practice a religion? A good and substatial reason to exercise free speech? Maryland politicians are enemies of freedom!

  138. padutch says:

    How is all the hope and change working out for all of you? I hope there is a change coming in November!

    1. The Federal Farmer says:

      If anyone but Ron Paul is elected, we’ll have 4 more years regardless.

  139. just another repressed denizen says:

    To anyone that thinks these discretionary licensing systems are fair in anyway, think twice. In a very enlightened county in New York, for example, your medical records are probed and your entire life is exposed for a judge to make a decision. I was denied a pistol permit because I take an ADD medication and on one occasion I was driving without my license. Conclusion – a clear and present danger to society. I already legally own two rifles, which is the ironic part. You can give as much as you want to the city in taxes and charity but unless you know (and pay) the right people, you’re just out of luck.

  140. Joe Blancher says:

    Terrifying. I strongly recommend that you load up on all the guns and ammo (lots of ammo) that you can, while you still can. This fascist government is hell bent on taking away our second amendment rights. Once the guns are gone, there is nothing stopping them from herding the public into FEMA camps. It will be Nazi Germany all over again. The founding fathers knew what they were doing. That was why they made freedom of speech the FIRST and the right to bear arms the SECOND.

    1. The Federal Farmer says:

      There are plenty of good, honest Constitution abiding men and women in the military and in law enforcement. A NAZI style confiscation will not be tolerated. When the time comes you “law and order” types will voluntarily turn in your firearms. You always do.

  141. American Heretic says:

    California also requires a good reason for a CCW. The arbitrary and capricious nature of the system was challenged in Peruta v. San Diego, wherein the court refused to review California’s system of issuing CCWs citing that the citizen had an alternative of carrying openly. However, on January 1st California enacted a new law against open carry. It is therefore ripe for the picking. California’s congressmen, when voting for the law, stated that they believe that they were voting for an unconstitutional statute. So much for the oath to uphold the Constitution.

    Clearly, California’s system of discretionary issuing of CCWs when coupled with the new law against open carry is a violation of the Second Amendment. Anyone petitioning for judicial review in Federal District Court should win. However, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has always been part of the looney left, so a trip to SCOTUS may be necessary, ala Heller vs. D.C. and McDonald vs. Chicago. Thank God everyday for John Roberts.

    I hope that there is some brave soul willing to B1tch slap the land of fruits and nuts.

  142. R.M.B. says:

    FYI ~ to the author of this article. Illinois does not have a ban on handguns. Chicago may have a ban. But in the rest of the state, a citizen only need have a FOID card to legally purchase a handgun or anyother legal firearm.

  143. Hypocrisy says:

    This is an actual right not Health Insurance or Birth Control

  144. Keith G says:

    It’s profoundly disturbing in this day and age that people are still arguing for a right to own destructive weapons whose only intent is to kill fellow human beings. All guns should be banned, period. There is no justifiable, no good-intentioned use for guns in a civil society. If it were up to me, every gun owner in America would go to jail for life.

    1. rootvg says:

      It seems to me that the Supreme Court, via Heller and McDonald, just threw sand in your face. Game over.

  145. newjerseybt says:

    I don’t think the 2nd amendment alone will save America from all out tyranny. What no one ever considers is that the military must hold the Constitution higher than a dictator president. They must swear allegiance to God, country and our constitution first. If they don’t, your puny weapons will be useless against a rogue government plus a rogue military.

  146. Elrod Skilly says:

    Their rationale was like saying that you don’t need police to patrol your part of the city, unless there have been three murders there in the last year. Guns, like police, can be used to deter crime. And they are certainly handy for putting a stop to it, once it is in progress.

  147. johninlongmont says:

    what an asinine law…thank God some judge knows the Constitution

  148. DG says:

    It has taken Maryland 230 years to learn that the Constitution means what it says about the right of the people to keep and bear arms? Doesn’t say much for respect for the Constitution, does it.

  149. Ray says:

    Sound’s like a big glad hand is in order here for a Judge who finally got it right. That’s one for the good guy’s!

  150. Tim says:

    We all have rights. Who will support your right if you do not support theirs? The constitution is a rule against government tyranny. The way the constitution is interpreted by the Democrats is it is a negative charter. As stated by BO or BS what ever his name is. Anyways to have rights you have responsibility. Responsibility to defend others rights even if you disagree with them. However abortion is stealing the right of an infant to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness therefore is unconstitutional. 2nd amendment. =)

  151. Michael S says:

    Does Maryland require “a good and substantial reason” for citizens to exercise their other constitutional rights? Speech? Religion? if not now it won’t be long.

  152. mark says:

    LISTEN UP KALIFORNIA AND GET A CLUE!

  153. rbblum says:

    Praise be to any individual having the fortitude to stand before the judicial system in order to assure that the rights of our republic’s constitution and Bill of Rights are honored.

  154. Bob says:

    No citizen need apply for a “license” to exercise a RIGHT! Citizens have rights. RESIDENTS HAVE NO RIGHTS! Residents apply for a license to exercise a PRIVILEDGE.
    Residents are CORPORATIONS that exist at the pleasure of the state. Corporations HAVE NO RIGHTS only privilidges.
    its one or the other folks.
    Learn the difference between citizen and RESIDENT / SUBJECT / PERSON / INDIVIDUAL / TAXPAYER / CORPORATION / CITIZEN. Also, MAN AND OTHER ANIMALS.

  155. Dan says:

    Breaking News: U.S. District Judge Benson Everett Legg found dead of “natural causes”. Obama appoints new judge.

  156. Rico says:

    I will justify my “need” to exercise my Second Amendment rights, when The State of Maryland begins requiring leftists to justify their need to exercise their First Amendment rights.

  157. Rico says:

    If you are unwilling or incapable of looking after yourself, then a Blue State is for you, because they are all run by and for the benefit of parasites. If you are willing to assume more responsibility for your own welfare, with less interference and bloodsucking from your government, then a Red State is the place to be.

  158. SmarterThanLibs says:

    They require residents show a “good and substantial reason” to get a handgun permit…

    Just include a copy of the US Consttution in your application with the second amendment highlighted.

  159. Kim Bailey says:

    We demand Liberals and Knee grows obey the Constitution which is the Law of the Land.

  160. Trigger Happy says:

    All of your rights are transportable, no matter what the Left-leaning states say.

  161. George says:

    when your life or the life of a loved one is in danger you have seconds.. YOU are your first responder…
    The Police, though they do their best will NEVER be there in time to save your ass…
    Always stay prepared to protect your self and your loved ones…
    It’s better to be judged by 12 then carried by 6..

  162. eric says:

    did you know that it is against the law to own a bb gun or pellet gun in Baltimore. did you know you can’t sell bullets in Balimore Maryland . Thank Gov martin o’malley and his replacement sheila “gift card” dixon. This is the same person with “zero tolerance” who locked up thousnds of city residents for no reason and would kick them out of central booking with no charges in the middle of the night. Why do Maryalnds voters keep voting for these democrats?

  163. HerrStig says:

    The mess the left has made of this country during the past 50 years is starting to blow up in their smug faces. The country is growing more conservative, despite the best offorts of the “mainstream media” to bullbleep us into thinking it’s all someone elses’ fault. Lefty marsupial judges are being questioned on why they can’t read plain english when the “policy” of their string pullers is involved. Good for US. Never vote democrat.

  164. Mike says:

    Good reason? Look at all the criminals killing, raping, and murdering innocent citizen of this state…..

  165. Ken says:

    Endless gun laws, yet another violation of our rights. The gov’t constantly violates our rights.
    They violate the 1st Amendment by caging protesters and banning books like “America Deceived II”.
    They violate the 4th and 5th Amendment by allowing TSA to grope you.
    They violate the entire Constitution by starting undeclared wars.
    Impeach Obama, support Ron Paul.
    Last link of “America Deceived II” before it is completely banned:
    http://www.amazon.com/America-Deceived-II-Possession-interrogation/dp/1450257437

  166. tim says:

    The governement at all levels always looks for work-a-rounds for supreme court decisions and that nusance the Bill of Rights and Constitution. Why does America Hate Freedom so much?

  167. Al says:

    They still won’t change the “Castle Law” so even if this gets changed, it puts the gun owner in more jeopardy for defending themselves. In other words, you may be able to have the gun, but you won’t be able to use it legally. Therefore, any change will be an empty change.

  168. Maud St James says:

    There would be a lot less crime if all decent citizens carried a gun – and weren’t afraid of legal reprisals if they used it to defend themselves.

    Why shouldn’t decent citizens possess/carry guns without government intervention? The criminals do. I thought the government wanted ‘a level playing field.’

    1. Al says:

      Definitely! Check Kennesaw, GA gun law. Mandatory gun ownership and no crime.

  169. Abilene says:

    The second amendment is my gun permit. I need no other reason, law, or regulation.

  170. C. Y. Pitre says:

    Is it really time for the American Spring to develop. Are we no less than our forefathers were.

  171. Ronchris says:

    Imagine that there was a 7-day waiting period for an abortion. Imagine that you had to ask the state health department for an abortion permit. Imagine that you had to pay the state hundreds of dollars in fees and ALSO pay the clinic.

    And then consider that the Bill of Rights clearly spells out the right to bear arms, while the “right” to an abortion was magicked up out of thin air by some left-wing judges.

  172. Ellie says:

    You people are such fools. Winning this one little skirmish is a joke. When Obama is re-elected, all the shackles are off. There will be NO guns allowed anyuwhere in the US except by those specifically permitted by the Administration. You fools need to give up now becuase you have already lost. Social Justice is coming. Hope and Change is here, baby.

  173. Ed Martin says:

    As I watch this adminstration operate I more and more think of Nazi Germany in the early 1930″s

  174. Dave says:

    Perhaps there is hope for Maryland after all, and we will not have to move from here upon retirement.

  175. Al says:

    BTW, I don’t know why so many folks on here are blaiming the current administrtaion for this situation. First, it is the GOP that advocates states rights. Second as far as perceived erosion of rights, that was increased by the Patriot Act which was signed by who?

  176. Bryan Abbott says:

    You CANNOT obtain a handgun permit in Los Angeles. I work in a dangerous industry and I would like to be armed for protection but it is acknowledged by everyone I know in LA that you CANNOT exercise your second amendment right, you cannot obtain a concealed carry permit in LA. Only the criminals and the corrupt police force are allowed to carry in LA.

    1. rootvg says:

      Gray Davis couldn’t get one when he was governor! He never lived in the governor’s mansion, electing to live in his West Hollywood condo where I understand he resides today.

      It’s California. It’s blue and it’s gonna stay blue.

      Having said that, if something happens at the Federal level to render “may issue” illegal, California won’t have anything to say about it anymore.

  177. Wiseguy says:

    YEEE HAAAA…..annie get your gun.

  178. Odins Acolyte says:

    Our government is afraid. It should be.
    Shame on the Supreme Court. Shame on Congress. Shame on the Administrative Branch. You have betrayed us. Be afraid.

  179. Rim Devil says:

    Up here on the Rim here in northern Arizona tonite some of us are getting together for dinner and we will hoist a toast to Judge Legg. We still have our freedom here without the need to get concealed carry permits or sny of that nonsense. We call it freedom and we hope those parts of the nation that have lost theirs will someday have it back. That will be psrt of our toast.

  180. Hurf says:

    “A citizen may not be required to offer a `good and substantial reason’ why he should be permitted to exercise his rights,” he wrote. “The right’s existence is all the reason he needs.”

    Judge Benson Everett Legg for supreme court!

  181. LTG says:

    Finally! Someone that will stick up for the 2nd amendment! Open carry laws would really put a damper on crime!

  182. John C says:

    Liberals think gun ownership should be a privaledge, conservatives know it is a right.

  183. SirGareth says:

    Here is the important points for everyone to keep in mind:

    The constitution does not grant you any rights: none. Therefore the constitution does not grant you the right to keep and bear arms.

    If the government “gave” you this “right” it is not a right but merely a permission which can be taken away from you at the pleasure of politicians.

    Rights are self claimed so even if the constitution was silent or even said explicitly that citizens must be completely disarmed your right to keep and bear arms still exists as long as you wish to claim it. As long as your fellow citizens support you then this right is not threatened by the state.

    I have a carry permit but it it was not grated I would carry anyway; it is my “right” I dislike apply for permits to exercise my “rights” but it is often wise to pick ones battles with the state.

    1. Archangel208 says:

      No, but the Bill of Rights, amendments to the Costitution, does…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. We also have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We are the only country that I know that has the guaranteed right to the pursuit of happiness. Of course this right is not absolute…such as, if it makes me happy, I should be able to blast the guy that cuts me off in traffic.

  184. malcom says:

    how much more proof does anyone need that liberals, especially WHITE liberals are the enemy of America, the enemy of our Constitution and the enemy of Freedom?

  185. We Win says:

    The 2nd Amendment dosen’t permit states to restrict Gun Rights. Well guess what Gansler now wants to appeal the decision. Well he is done.

  186. Fight for your Rights says:

    Well if we are going to change this its time to bombard this guy and anyone else who wants to put there name in the mix just how we the 99% really feel about this issue. You know he has a carry permit or a protection detail. we just have to wait till after something happens for the police to react. there is his Office # and his E-mail

    410-576-7906

    mfader@oag.state.md.us

  187. Wiley Coyote says:

    Escape From Totalitarinism

    Having escaped from the clutches of the money-hungry politicos of the “Free State of Maryland,” I now carry an FL CCW good in a majority of states, EXCEPT, of course, Maryland/DC.. I wonder why that is

  188. Tom Payne says:

    Carry, anyway. I do.

    1. SirGareth says:

      You do not need a permit to carry, it is your right. Rights are not permissions. Permissions may be denied for any number of reasons; rights are granted by your maker, not the constitution or a city ordinance.

  189. MJH says:

    There is an old joke that goes something like this. A police officer pulls an elderly woman over for speeding. During the stop she explains to the officer that she has a concelled weapon in her purse. She again informs the oficer she has one under her seat and on in glove box. The officer seems surprised and asks the woman “What are you afraid of”. Her respnse was direct but goes like this ” NOT A FU@&ING THING”. Long live the 2nd admendment.

  190. slackware says:

    I thought the SCOTUS finally incorporated the 2nd amendment, so all these illegal state laws are moot.

    I’ve carried in Maryland, and guess what. I didn’t shoot anyone, I didn’t threaten anyone. But if a cop were to go for his gun, I would have DEFENDED myself.
    Since they were the only ones with guns, they were the only criminals I worried about. Bet that dumb banker wished he had thought of that when they stood around while the DC police and nut cases were intimidating and threatening his family.
    But since carrying a sword is also ok in maryland, I don’t see why you aren’t wearing one every time you leave the house. A good sharp sameri should deter the normal nut case threat. Then if they take it from you then you are justified in pulling your gun and shooting them. You have proven that only the gun worked for the jury, and they are the only ones that matter.

    But what good is a gun when they will just ban the bullets for the gun. In DC he had a SCOTUS decision for himself, and still they denied him his gun. No only giving them the gun one bullet at a time will work with these goons.
    After you replace enough political hacks and cops, they will get the idea that there views are wrong and change them.
    I remember they only had to throw out one sheriff in Alabama, and all he did was raise the permit fee $20. Maryland seems to be a lot more stupid about holding there officials accountable.

  191. Mulch 47406 says:

    Very good site thank you so much for your time in writing the posts for all of us to learn about.

  192. articles spinner.eu says:

    My brother suggested I may like this blog. He was totally right. This submit actually made my day. You can not imagine just how much time I had spent for this info! Thanks!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

More From CBS Baltimore

Track Weather On The Go With Our App!
Your Podcast Network Play.it

Listen Live