That looks like "gub", it doesn't look like "gun".
Posted on 03/05/2012 9:14:02 AM PST by George - the Other
Victory For The Constitution in Maryland
We just received word that the United States District Court for the District of Maryland has granted a motion for summary judgement for plaintiff Ray Woollard in the Woollard v. Sheridan case that challenged the good and substantial requirement for issuance of a permit to carry a handgun.
"Because the ―good and substantial reason requirement is not reasonably adapted to a substantial government interest, the Court finds this portion of the Maryland law to be unconstitutional. Woollard is entitled to summary judgment. "
"A law that burdens the exercise of an enumerated constitutional right by simply making that right more difficult to exercise cannot be considered ―reasonably adapted‖ to a government interest, no matter how substantial that interest may be. Maryland‘s goal of ―minimizing the proliferation of handguns among those who do not have a demonstrated need for them,‖ id. at 40, is not a permissible method of preventing crime or ensuring public safety; it burdens the right too broadly. "
"At bottom, this case rests on a simple proposition: If the Government wishes to burden a right guaranteed by the Constitution, it may do so provided that it can show a satisfactory justification and a sufficiently adapted method. The showing, however, is always the Government‘s to make. A citizen may not be required to offer a good and substantial reason why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs."
(Excerpt) Read more at listbox.com ...
That sound you are hearing are the heads of the southern branch of the Kennedy clan (the Townsends, et. al.) exploding!!
This almost sounds like it could be used by a felon to reclaim his right to keep and bear if a reasonable time and some sort of payment to society has been met ..
e.g. .. someone convicted of a felony in the 50's, '60's, or '70's, having served the required time and or paid fines, restitution (whatever), could, after being an exemplary citizen .. could petition the court to have keep and bear re-instated?
Finally, some good news.
“A citizen may not be required to offer a good and substantial reason why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.”
Bump
I can’t believe this is happening. It’s too good to be true. They’ll find a way to prevent us, somehow.
Awesome News. Now, when does the State act to address the unconstitutional gub laws. I want my rights.
It may be appealed by the State. It will be very interesting to see if it is.
That, truly, says everything that needs to be said.
That looks like "gub", it doesn't look like "gun".
Maryland Shall Issue says that this is only the beginning. The analysis and ramifications will be coming.
Can anyone say California?
We need this Judge here in IL.
Time to resubmit for a concealed carry !!!
The only thing is...as has been the case in (neighboring) DC, the law (or really its enforcement) won’t be changed, and every gun owner asserting his rights—if caught—will face a daunting legal battle to assert rights already established by the courts.
There are a heck of a lot of Liberals in Maryland.
California was my first thought as well. This is the trick that they use there.
Hopefully this ruling can eventually be applied to change the rules in CA.
Much depends on whether the State of Maryland appeals the ruling or not. Then what happens with the appeal matters, and if it is appealed to the Supreme Court.
This is very good because it is a clear and easily understood ruling.
A citizen may not be required to offer a “good and substantial reason” why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right’s existence is all the reason he
needs.
That pretty much sums it up...
Ping to a good post.
The anti-gunners won't let this go without appeal. They cannot afford this being cited in similar lawsuits against NYC, New Jersey, and elsewhere.
Follow the money.
Chicago just wrote a check for about $400k to the Second Amendment Foundation to cover their legal expenses for the McDonald case.
If the courts do their job of upholding the Constitution, then litigation against infringing states or localities becomes an opportunity for free money.
Since this is only the first decision in a case which may be appealed, it may be too early for the average person to cash in. Sacramento County in Kalifornia decided to cave on this issue and now "self-defense" is sufficient good cause for issuing a permit there. It's my guess that they may simply have seen the writing on the wall. Like Chicago, there will be holdouts but they will end up paying for people to sue them.
The feeding frenzy hasn't started quite yet, but it will be very entertaining when the legal sharks are on our side.
If the court frames it as a constitutional right, and we get a President and Attorney General who are pro-2nd Amendment (ie, not Romney, not Obama), then politicians who choose to ignore it would do so at their peril:
18 USC 241If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
WOOOOOHOOOOO!!!
Maryland “Freak State” PING!
Oh Yea!
Heard this morning that Franchot is appealing it.
Last night, I heard on the news that the Douglas Gansler, the State Attorney General, would appeal. I know from first hand hand in regard to my wrongful arrest lawsuit that I’ve talked about here before, that the Maryland State Attorney General’s office has absolutely no guilt about distorting information and even resorting to lies to make their case ...
Sauropod? Great name. I collect fossils here in Maryland and the surrounding states
Last night, I heard on the news that the Douglas Gansler, the State Attorney General, would appeal. I know from first hand hand in regard to my wrongful arrest lawsuit that I’ve talked about here before, that the Maryland State Attorney General’s office has absolutely no guilt about distorting information and even resorting to lies to make their case ...
Sauropod? Great name. I collect fossils here in Maryland and the surrounding states
so how did it end up being posted twice? Maybe too much coffee - or maybe not enough! :)
I just read, where in regard to the original incident, it took Baltimore County Police 2 1/2 hours to respond to the initial 911 call.
“On Christmas Eve, 2002, Woollard was at home with his wife, children, and grandchildren when an intruder shattered a window and broke into the house. The intruder was Kris Lee Abbott, Woollard’s son-in-law. Abbott, who was high on drugs and intent on driving into Baltimore city to buy more, was looking for his wife’s car keys. Woollard grabbed a shotgun and trained it on Abbott, but Abbott wrested the shotgun away. Woollard’s son restored order by pointing a second gun at Abbott. Woollard’s wife called the police, who took two-anda-half hours to arrive.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.