Maryland De Facto Law Constitution Carry?

Hi guys,

I haven’t post in a long time and just want to throw back out there a solution to make Maryland a De Facto Constitution Carry. This will take an effort from Maryland Shall Issue (MSI) who does great work and any pro 2A supporter within Maryland.

We should have a downloadable template letter created and signed by as many 2A supporters as possible then send them to MSP, local law enforcement, State Reps, and AG Frosh that starting on a certain date until a Shall issue law is passed that we will not comply or convict anyone with a firearm charge. Particularly those 2A supporters who has not committed a felony. We should stress to them we will be using the courts Jury Nullification process or plainly not convict. They are already not convicting criminals or just given them a slap on the wrist anyway, why as 2A supporters we can’t take advantage of this process. MSI if possible can make the template and run it through their attorneys using a simple language such as:

“Starting the date of…. that all pro 2A supporters who will serve on as a juror from that point on will not convict a person who have a firearm charge using the jury nullification process.”

This legal notice along a petition should be sent to Frosh, MSP, local law enforcement, and to all of the State reps. When that occurs constitution carry laws are now the De Facto, which 2A supporters jurors will not convict each other or comply with the law. Once this occurs several times resulting in no convictions to show that we are serious, I believe the state will not waste resources in attempting to enforce carry laws if everyone will just get off using jury nullification. This will panic Frosh, MSP, and the State reps to make some adjustments to the permit scheme such as making Maryland a shall issue state to ensure background checks are being done. MSI can make public advertisements from billboards to television/radio all over the state of what we are doing to ensure 2A supporters know and not to convict during jury duty in their respected communities. Also, those advertisements will emphasize to the public that Maryland need a much safer approach by going Shall issue (our demand) that guaranteed background checks will occur again. The public will get nervous and force the state to address the shall issue bill. Sure there is a risk, but far less from a revolution and it only take one pro 2A person on the jury to use the jury nullification. I am sure many people on this forum already carry without a W&C permit and the faster we can get the word out, the better they are covered if they end up in court.

Haven’t seen or heard anything else working at this point, maybe we need to take a different approach to include everyone participation instead just having shall issue bills thrown in a draw each legislation period. This will now make them take action on shall issue. This is a next level up of OUR actions instead waiting on them to take action for us, which we all know they will never do. We should at least consider it and start spreading the word by the upcoming lobby day in Annapolis. Now you know, pass it on...

What do you guys think?

CCW Permits: AZ, CT, DC, FL, MD, ME, NH, PA, SC, TX, UT, and VA

I think that would give the state a list of people to exclude from serving on juries. It's been almost 30 years since I was called for jury duty, not sure how they select now??

rseymorejr said:

I think that would give the state a list of people to exclude from serving on juries. It's been almost 30 years since I was called for jury duty, not sure how they select now??

Click to expand...

right, this.

rseymorejr said:

I think that would give the state a list of people to exclude from serving on juries. It's been almost 30 years since I was called for jury duty, not sure how they select now??

Click to expand...

Start with any resident of Bloodymore...

rseymorejr said:

I think that would give the state a list of people to exclude from serving on juries. It's been almost 30 years since I was called for jury duty, not sure how they select now??

Click to expand...

Yepper... they would simply notify all ASAs prosecuting gun cases... to disqualify any and all potential jurors who were CCW holders or owned firearms.

And on top of that.
The prior history of the defendant is not introduced into the trial proceedings until AFTER the verdict is reached. Therefore, the notion that one would only nullify for folks without a prior history of felony or other violent crimes... is simply ignorant of the law and court proceedings.

The prior record of any person can not be used to determine guilt or innocence. It is only used, post verdict, in determining the severity of the sentence to be handed down to the guilty.

And... entering into any agreement which binds one to a preset verdict or action by jurors... prior to hearing the facts of the case... is not only a stab in the back to our American justice system... it could be considered a crime of conspiracy.

Regardless of the jury names, the op raises a good point. Until scotus once & for all rules in favor of 2A, we as gun owners are increasingly on our own. "We will not comply" should & will be more then a promise. We'll need to begin ignoring unconstitutional anti 2A laws, stop going into places that have metal detectors, installing locking hiding places in our vehicles, etc. The old saying "better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6" is truer today than ever before. Especially with jury nullification.

RoadDawg said:

And... entering into any agreement which binds one to a preset verdict or action by jurors... prior to hearing the facts of the case... is not only a stab in the back to our American justice system... it could be considered a crime of conspiracy.

Click to expand...

Dawg, I respectfully disagree. As much as we, as patriots, believe in the ultimate blindness of the judicial system, I believe we are becoming the only ones. Firearms owners are increasingly being vilified by politicians, media, Hollywood, and others, so we're gonna be on our own.

Best post I have read in a while.

Asking them nicely has not worked. You can't outvote them in MD. Forcing them seems to be the only way. I have said before, there are plenty of ways to force them without violence. I'd get behind ideas different than what we do that has proven to fail. Not 100% sure this is the one, but it's on the right path. 1. not been done before and 2. its a strong message.

I agree with RoadDawg on this one. Refusing to convict a person for carrying a gun to protect himself or his family is different from refusing to convict a drug dealer for carrying a gun to go buy some drugs to sell.

Also, wouldn't it be more effective to do it first? Like let's let them see a spike in aquitals or hung jurries and then come out of the shadows.

RoadDawg said:

. it could be considered a crime of conspiracy.

Click to expand...

One could argue that there is a conspiracy openly talked about to rid the citizens of their guns. To demolish and bastardize the constitution and to reinterpret the 2nd amendment for the sake of getting rid of the guns of the people.

They seem to do it pretty openly and I don't see any conspiracy charges brought against any politicians. It would be hypocritical to think they would charge others for doing the same thing, but on the other side.
There are rules for the people and rules for the government people:
https://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?p=5770656#post5770656
clearly 2 sets of rules.

Since current methods don't seem to work...
What change would you propose We The People put in place to be able to keep our rights(more like get back rights taken)?



**what would happen if you reported for jury duty and told them you are bias in regards to 2a issues?
Not sure, but I think you'd be told it's not a reason to not be there, sit down, shut up and follow our instruction on what to do. (<<<just my guess)

No matter what your feelings tell you...

There are times when it is of greatest importance to follow the established rule of law to prove to the detractors that it works.

RoadDawg said:

No matter what your feelings tell you...

There are times when it is of greatest importance to follow the established rule of law to prove to the detractors that it works.

Click to expand...

Following their law to prove the law works? I don't really understand. When the law is to limit your rights, I don't understand how following it is the best thing to do. Where does the WWNC part come in?

That is why we are in the position we are in. It only proves that no matter how many unlawful rules they make, the people will follow. Beto came right out and said it as have others. "the american people are law abiding and if its passed as law they will follow it" not an exact quote, but close. It was on the beta and Tucker Carlson interview. If he were the only one, I'd agree with you, but he is just the loudest. He's not even the only loud one now. They are circling the issues and going at it harder than ever before.

My question to you is this:

How do you tell the maryland lawmakers that they have overstepped with unjust laws?
Secondly,
How do you stop them?

I'm guessing I'll write more letters
Call more politicians
One of these days it's going to work

randomuser said:

Following their law to prove the law works? I don't really understand. When the law is to limit your rights, I don't understand how following it is the best thing to do. Where does the WWNC part come in?

That is why we are in the position we are in. It only proves that no matter how many unlawful rules they make, the people will follow. Beto came right out and said it as have others. "the american people are law abiding and if its passed as law they will follow it" not an exact quote, but close. It was on the beta and Tucker Carlson interview. If he were the only one, I'd agree with you, but he is just the loudest. He's not even the only loud one now. They are circling the issues and going at it harder than ever before.

My question to you is this:

How do you tell the maryland lawmakers that they have overstepped with unjust laws?
Secondly,
How do you stop them?

I'm guessing I'll write more letters
Call more politicians
One of these days it's going to work

Click to expand...

To answer your question...

One does not overturn a law against DWI/DUI by talking everyone else into driving drunk.

One changes the laws by changing the law makers. That is what the left has been doing for decades while the ambivalent right has sat on the sofa and neglected the voting booth.

Boots on the ground... grass roots... change from the bottom up.

The woodwork, they come out.

RoadDawg said:

One changes the laws by changing the law makers. That is what the left has been doing for decades while the ambivalent right has sat on the sofa and neglected the voting booth. Boots on the ground... grass roots... change from the bottom up.

Click to expand...

Brother, I hear you, but I'm discouraged. It ain't working.

Engine4 said:

Brother, I hear you, but I'm discouraged. It ain't working.

Click to expand...

Because of apathy and insufficient boots.

Not because it won’t work.

RoadDawg said:

To answer your question...

One does not overturn a law against DWI/DUI by talking everyone else into driving drunk.

Click to expand...

I was not speaking on lawful laws. Doing something that affects another person goes against the golden rule. The golden rule pretty much covers things and its the most "common sense" I have ever seen. I spoke in regards to unlawful (should have said illegal or unjust rules/laws)

Just because something is/was on the books doesn't make it right. Slavery as my example was legal, but immoral.

randomuser said:

no matter how many unlawful rules they make, the people will follow.

Click to expand...

Again, not speaking on a legit law, like No driving when you are unable to drive ie...dui

RoadDawg said:

One changes the laws by changing the law makers.

Boots on the ground... grass roots... change from the bottom up.

Click to expand...

^^^^
can changing the lawmakers happen in a place like Maryland where your vote seems to count less and less every year? At some point (if not now) your vote literally won't matter. Time to leave? How do you win when you only will ever have the minority of votes?

It’s hard to vote when there are no acceptable candidates.

rambling_one said:

It’s hard to vote when there are no acceptable candidates.

Click to expand...

Run for office.

rseymorejr said:

I think that would give the state a list of people to exclude from serving on juries. It's been almost 30 years since I was called for jury duty, not sure how they select now??

Click to expand...

True, but there are many many many Pro 2A people. There wouldn't be enough people to not select a person who isn't pro 2A; especially, in counties outside of Baltimore, PG, Mont, and Anne.