I was unaware that private homes were excluded in this injunction. Can anyone else chime in?
But did they edit the wear and carry law or just pass a new law? Wouldn't they conflict?
The current (previous/old) W&C framework is silent on the phrase "open carry."
Or be a whore
Is that nooky green?
Oh okay. I thought the reason why we call it a wear and carry instead of a concealed carry was because it was for both as written in the law. I get it now. It doesn't specify either so it's for both. Well was
In Maryland, it is a “Handgun Permit”. (Refer to top of permit card.)
OK, now I see where folks are finding that term. I was looking in the law and on the permit, itself. ThanksMSP, the issuer, calls it a "Wear and Carry Permit" so it is not "informal terminology".
If you like that paper you should also like Mark Smith's YouTube channel The Four Boxes Dinner, it will make you the smartest person in the room:These are great news, but not great enough. I have a huge concern with how the courts are trending in their interpretation of Bruen with respect to the historical analysis. Both the MoCo judge that denied the Preliminary injunction and the judge on Friday are treating 1868 (14th ammendment ratification) as valid historical precedent... which is completely absurd. Their justification is also such bs, clearly politically motivated. That is really bad news for us. The reason the judge granted the injunction on the private property portion of SB1 was because of the racial discrimination intent of the historical laws provided as an example by the State. In the end, they are not using the intent of the 2A and the history of gun restrictions at ratification like they do for the rest of the bill of rights, but instead they are using a much more restrictive time period.
Although I'm happy the judge saw some "reason" unlike the judge in the MoCo case... it is a very concerned patter and a slap back at Bruen from the lower courts and liberal judges.
I found this interesting paper discussing similar concerns:
'Not All History Is Created Equal': In the Post-Bruen World, the Critical Period for Historical Analogues Is when the Second Amendment Was Ratified in 1791, and not 1868
In June of 2022, the Supreme Court decided New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, which was a major victory for the constitutional rightpapers.ssrn.com
Funny you say that. I went to the grocery store late afternoon and I felt all covert and secret-squirrel doing so. I totally forgot until I left the store to check the front door. Nothing banning it posted, at least not yet.Was it just me or didn't it feel pretty damn good to conceal carry today? Same sensation I had when my w&c permit arrived in the mail
Only betterWas it just me or didn't it feel pretty damn good to conceal carry today? Same sensation I had when my w&c permit arrived in the mail
