Keeping rifle in car in md. Legal?

[Fishguy]

This question has come up so many times over the years it's amazing that I am still not sure exactly what is legal. It seems the community sentiment changes from time to time. Lol.

So cut to the chase, is this legal behind the seat of a truck in MD? Go.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[iH8DemLibz]

Just my opinion.

You'd be better off disguising it a bit.

 

[swinokur]

unloaded?

yes

 

[bkuether]

Tunnels are the only things that concern me regarding terrorism. Bridges are a close second. I think about it every time I cross the Susquehanna on 95 North.

Two cars and some basic math could wreak havoc on tunnels and bridges. Especially if the terrorists have no desire to live through it.

I avoid tunnels entirely. Bridges are impossible to avoid. A .30-30 has always been my choice for a truck/trunk gun.

I thought I was the only one who thought about those things.....

Heck you don't even need a tunnel or a bridge. Explosive in a car by the side of the road (no one ever pays attention anyway). That stops traffic and then up the column they go.....

Really scary stuff...... And surprised we haven't seen it yet.....

 

[traveller]

This question has come up so many times over the years it's amazing that I am still not sure exactly what is legal. It seems the community sentiment changes from time to time. Lol.

So cut to the chase, is this legal behind the seat of a truck in MD? Go.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

100% legal

About 80% likely to get you laid out on the asphalt with a Beretta pointed at your back.

 

[outrider58]

Nice rig Fishguy!

My biggest deterrent is:

I'm driving home from the farm. It's kinda late since I shot my deer with my bow just at last light (I always give deer an hour if it was a good shot, but didn't see the deer go down), so now it is 10 PM and I'm driving down the road with a dead deer crammed in the bed of my truck between the tailgate and my 4wheeler. DNR falls in behind me and says,"Hmm. Dead deer, it's after ten, sunset was hours ago. Maybe I should have a talk with this feller..." Now I have an AR 15 in my truck, loaded mags, and on closer inspection it has been fired recently(because mine get shot all the time and I don't believe in an un-fouled bore), and it is bow season...

 

[Threeband]

I think it's legal, but that won't keep you from being the lead story on the evening news is a LEO sees it.

 

[Andras]

As counterpoint to the aforementioned State Trooper, I asked a DNR trooper at Myrtle Grove one day (weekend prior to 3/11/2008), and he stated that loaded mags not in the rifle are legal under 10-410.


eta- the reply from the AGs office on loaded mags was not restricted to the question under 4-203. The reply was broader in scope in that it stated: "I can find no prohibition in Maryland law against transporting a loaded magazine."

 

[fabsroman]

I guess the sticky wicket is the "magazine or chamber" portion. Does that mean integral magazine or detached magazine? The statute is a bit foggy there.

a loaded handgun or shotgun, or a rifle with ammunition in the magazine or chamber.

So, what the heck is the difference there? Is a handgun or shotgun only loaded when it has one in the chamber, hence the differentiation between handgun/shotgun and a rifle? I have been wondering about this for a while, but I have not had the chance to test it out in court. So, a handgun/shotgun must not be loaded if it only has ammo in the mag. Otherwise, the legislature would have used loaded for all three weapons, and not just two of the three.

Very perplexing.

Then, we have the AG opinion letter on loaded magazines, which I've attached to this post.

 

[fabsroman]

Nice rig Fishguy!

My biggest deterrent is:

I'm driving home from the farm. It's kinda late since I shot my deer with my bow just at last light (I always give deer an hour if it was a good shot, but didn't see the deer go down), so now it is 10 PM and I'm driving down the road with a dead deer crammed in the bed of my truck between the tailgate and my 4wheeler. DNR falls in behind me and says,"Hmm. Dead deer, it's after ten, sunset was hours ago. Maybe I should have a talk with this feller..." Now I have an AR 15 in my truck, loaded mags, and on closer inspection it has been fired recently(because mine get shot all the time and I don't believe in an un-fouled bore), and it is bow season...

DNR can cite you for it, but the officer still needs to prove that you used the rifle to shoot the deer. Seems like an easy case to win, albeit a possibly expensive one and a lost day of work on top of it.

What happens if I go out to a farm and shoot some groundhogs with my shotgun or 10/22 before going deer hunting with a bow? Now, if the officer finds me on top of a tree stand with slugs in the gun and/or on me, that is a much easier case for the officer to make.

All FYI

 

[CharlieFoxtrot]

As has been pointed out in this thread and others on this topic (including by some in the legal community), there is no police officer exception for the 'no loaded rifle in the car' DNR reg.

As I've said several times before when this issue comes up either:
a. This statute only applies to hunting; or
b. Every law enforcement officer in the state is breaking the law.

There are no cases to say which view is right.

 

[fidelity]

As I've said several times before when this issue comes up either:
a. This statute only applies to hunting; or
b. Every law enforcement officer in the state is breaking the law.

There are no cases to say which view is right.

And I was indeed referring to you, my friend.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

 

[Blaster229]

As counterpoint to the aforementioned State Trooper, I asked a DNR trooper

Just a pet peeve FYI..... DNR police officers are not Troopers, they are police officers. Maryland State Police are Troopers. They are the only "Trooper" in the state.

 

[mvee]

In Maryland you can carry a long gun in your vehicle all you want so long as no ammunition is present inside of the firearm (and a a magazine is not a firearm). There are a few exceptions, like you can't transport a firearm through a state park unless it is for hunting purposes and then the weapon must be cased or action open.

That doesn't mean someone isn't going to try to charge you with it, but it would take a stretch for the plain English of the statute to make such a charge stick having a loaded magazine not in the rifle. Of course I wouldn't want to be that test case, but on the other hand if I was carrying a rifle for SD, is absolutely have a loaded magazine (or 3). If I was going hunting especially, or target shooting, no, I'd leave mags empty.

Remember there are some laws that were on the books before 1985 or whenever that still are in effect. Baltimore city and Leonardtown (I think) require long arms to be racked or cased. My memory is a little spotty on this.

 

[LONGSHOT]

the police already carry a loaded handgun with ammo in xtra mags,why wouldn,t the same apply to sg or ar in trunk,they are exemptlaw does not apply to gov't,they enforce it.

 

[redeemed.man]

the police already carry a loaded handgun with ammo in xtra mags,why wouldn,t the same apply to sg or ar in trunk,they are exemptlaw does not apply to gov't,they enforce it.

Not correct. Handgun exemptions for law enforcement are spelled out clearly in the law. If the exemptions applied to loaded long guns on/in a vehicle it would say so.

 

[Docster]

Lately it seems like every new guy joining asks about the legality of carrying a gun in some unlicensed manner. Hopefully it is just a coincidence. I suggest you search long gun open carry in Maryland on Google and search the opinions of the Maryland Attorney General's office for your answer. You will find the answers you seek by conducting those searches.

Welcome to the forum.

^^This. Too many here don't bother with searches and many here are enablers for doing all the work for those that don't want to

 

[Ellis Gordon]

Montgomery County, Maryland Department of Police Weapons Law Summary
Montgomery County Maryland

Keeping Guns on Persons or in Vehicles

It is unlawful for any person to have either concealed or exposed, or to have in a motor vehicle where it can be readily used, any gun which uses explosive ammunition unless a person is engaged in a lawful mission where it is necessary to use a gun; or is employed as a special guard, special police officer, or special detective and has been deputized by the sheriff, or has been appointed a constable, or has been licensed by the laws of the state to carry a gun and is in the immediate vicinity of the premises of any employer whose occupation requires someone to carry a gun.
A person is allowed to carry a gun if he is a member of the military service or authorized as a peace officer; or is engaged in lawful hunting, drill training, or target practice, or is on property which the person owns or leases or with prior permission of the owner or lessee; or is going to or from lawful hunting, drill training, or target practice, or is engaged in any lawful transfer of possession such as carrying a gun from a gunsmith or repairman, provided that the gun is not loaded and the person is traveling on a public highway, or on property which he owns or leases, or on property with prior permission from the owner or lessee.

 

[lazarus]

Montgomery County, Maryland Department of Police Weapons Law Summary
Montgomery County Maryland

Keeping Guns on Persons or in Vehicles

It is unlawful for any person to have either concealed or exposed, or to have in a motor vehicle where it can be readily used, any gun which uses explosive ammunition unless a person is engaged in a lawful mission where it is necessary to use a gun; or is employed as a special guard, special police officer, or special detective and has been deputized by the sheriff, or has been appointed a constable, or has been licensed by the laws of the state to carry a gun and is in the immediate vicinity of the premises of any employer whose occupation requires someone to carry a gun.
A person is allowed to carry a gun if he is a member of the military service or authorized as a peace officer; or is engaged in lawful hunting, drill training, or target practice, or is on property which the person owns or leases or with prior permission of the owner or lessee; or is going to or from lawful hunting, drill training, or target practice, or is engaged in any lawful transfer of possession such as carrying a gun from a gunsmith or repairman, provided that the gun is not loaded and the person is traveling on a public highway, or on property which he owns or leases, or on property with prior permission from the owner or lessee.

I was unaware that Montgomery county further restricted open carry (as I am pretty sure they do not). The language there reads as almost a direct copy of the Maryland bill on HANDGUN carry. Long guns for open carry are okay in most of the state so long as it isn't at a protest.

 

[Ellis Gordon]

Montgomery County, Maryland Department of Police Weapons Law Summary

Please see brochure (Weapons Law Summary) #7970, Department of Police Firearm Safety Committee 100 Edison Park Drive • Gaithersburg, Maryland 20878 Updated 09/14. This is the source of the "Keeping Guns on Persons or in Vehicles" language.

Remember, Montgomery County tried to pull a fast one by restricting the sale of ammunition in 1983. This ban ended up in court and Montgomery County lost (state preemption). Is there another state preemption issue in Montgomery County involving the transportation of firearms?


MONTGOMERY COUNTY v. ATLANTIC GUNS, INC.

Email | Print | Comments (0)


No. 157, September Term, 1983.


View Case
Cited Cases
Citing Case



302 Md. 540 (1985)

489 A.2d 1114


MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND ET AL. v. ATLANTIC GUNS, INC. ET AL.


Court of Appeals of Maryland.

April 3, 1985.






Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Roger W. Titus, Rockville, for appellants.

Richard S. McKernon, Frederick, McKernon & Rand, Rockville, for appellees.

Argued before MURPHY, C.J., SMITH, ELDRIDGE, COLE, DAVIDSON, RODOWSKY and COUCH, JJ.



ELDRIDGE, Judge.

The issue in this case is whether a Montgomery County ordinance, which prohibits the sale of ammunition unless certain requirements are met, is invalid on the ground that the area has been preempted by State law.

On June 7, 1983, the County Council for Montgomery County enacted Bill No. 17-82, codified as Montgomery County Code § 57-12, providing, inter alia, that ammunition may not be sold to anyone unless (1) the sale is made in person, (2) the purchaser exhibits, at the time of sale, a valid registration certificate for the firearm in which the ammunition is to be used, or, if a non-resident, proof that the firearm is lawfully possessed, and (3) the ammunition is of the same calibre as the firearm that is registered or lawfully possessed.1 The law became effective on September 20, 1983. On that date, Atlantic Guns, Inc., Stephen G. Schneider, Constantine P. Chaconas, and William H. Randolph filed a bill of complaint in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County, seeking a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief. Named as defendants were Montgomery County, the Montgomery County Council, and Charles W. Gilchrist, County Executive.2 The plaintiffs challenged the validity of Bill No. 17-82 on three separate grounds: (1) the County Council did not have the power to enact the bill; (2) State law preempted the subject matter of the bill; and (3) the bill was in conflict with State law.

Both sides filed motions for summary judgment, and, after argument, the trial court granted the plaintiffs' motion. The court issued an order declaring Bill No. 17-82 invalid and enjoining its enforcement, holding that the subject matter of the bill was expressly preempted by State law. The trial court did not reach the other issues raised in the bill of complaint. The defendants appealed to the Court of Special Appeals, and, before any proceedings in the intermediate appellate court, they filed a petition for a writ of certiorari in this Court. We granted the petition and shall affirm on the same ground as the trial court.

In 1972, the General Assembly of Maryland enacted extensive and comprehensive provisions governing all aspects of the wearing, carrying, and transporting of handguns, Ch. 13 of the Acts of 1972. The dominant purpose of the Act was "to stop the alarming rise in the use of handguns in the commission of crimes of violence," Dillon v. State, 277 Md. 571, 584, 357 A.2d 360 (1976) (quoting from Wright v. State, 24 Md.App. 309, 317, 330 A.2d 482, cert. denied, 274 Md. 733 (1975)). The Act's provisions include criminal penalties for various violations, along with seizure and forfeiture procedures. In addition to the criminal provisions, the Act sanctioned the use of handguns for such things as target shooting, home and business protection, and law enforcement purposes. The statute also provided detailed requirements for the issuance of permits to carry handguns. The Act created a new subheading in the criminal code, entitled "Handguns," and most of the Act's provisions are codified in this subheading, Code (1957, 1982 Repl. Vol., 1984 ***. Supp.), Art. 27, §§ 36B-36F. But the preemption provision involved in this case, § 6 of Ch. 13, is not codified. That section expressly preempts all local law restrictions on the wearing, carrying, or transporting of handguns in the following language:

SEC. 6. Be it further enacted, That all restrictions imposed by the law, ordinances, or regulations of the political subdivisions on the wearing, carrying, or transporting of handguns are superseded by this Act, and the State of Maryland hereby preempts the right of the political subdivisions to regulate said matters.

The County here argues that the preemptive language of the statute applies only to handguns without ammunition and "does not apply, by its terms, to the wearing, carrying, [or] transporting... of ammunition of any nature whatsoever." (Petitioners' Brief, p. 8.) In our view, the provisions of the Act, beginning with the declaration of policy, demonstrate the lack of merit in the County's interpretation of the scope of the express preemption clause.

The General Assembly's declaration of policy, codified in § 36B(a), is as follows:

The General Assembly of Maryland hereby finds and declares that:

(i) There has, in recent years, been an alarming increase in the number of violent crimes perpetrated in Maryland, and a high percentage of those crimes involve the use of handguns;

(ii) The result has been a substantial increase in the number of persons killed or injured which is traceable, in large part, to the carrying of handguns on the streets and public ways by persons inclined to use them in criminal activity;

(iii) The laws currently in force have not been effective in curbing the more frequent use of handguns in perpetrating crime; and

(iv) Further regulations on the wearing, carrying, and transporting of handguns are necessary to preserve the peace and tranquility of the State and to protect the rights and liberties of its citizens.

Handguns used to perpetrate violent crimes are generally loaded. An increase in the number of people killed or injured cannot be traceable to the use of unloaded handguns. Further regulations to preserve the peace and tranquility of the State were necessary because of the increasing criminal use of loaded handguns, not the wearing, carrying, or transporting of unloaded ones. In light of these findings and declarations, it makes little sense to suggest that the General Assembly was not concerned with regulating guns loaded with ammunition.

Section 36B(c)(1) recognizes certain exceptions to the prohibition against wearing, carrying, or transporting a handgun. These exceptions include law enforcement personnel, members of the armed forces while on duty or travelling to or from duty, jailers, prison guards, wardens, and sheriffs and sheriffs' deputies who may wear, carry, or transport handguns when on active assignment engaged in law enforcement. Permission to wear, carry, or transport only unloaded handguns would be of little use to such persons.

Section 36B(c)(3) recognizes further exceptions:

(3) Nothing in this section shall prevent any person from carrying a handgun on his person or in any vehicle while transporting the same to or from the place of legal purchase or sale, or between bona fide residences of the individual, or between his bona fide residence and his place of business, if the business is operated and substantially owned by the individual, or to or from any bona fide repair shop. Nothing in this section shall prevent any person from wearing, carrying, or transporting a handgun used in connection with a target shoot, formal or informal target practice, sport shooting event, hunting, trapping, dog obedience training class or show or any organized military activity while engaged in, on the way to, or returning from any such activity. Nothing in this section shall prevent any bona fide gun collector from moving any part or all of his gun collection from place to place for public or private exhibition. However, while travelling to or from any such place or event referred to in this paragraph, a handgun shall be unloaded and carried in an enclosed case or enclosed holster. (Emphasis added.)

Obviously, the last sentence adds a requirement that, in the circumstances covered by this subsection, the handgun must be unloaded. It is an unavoidable conclusion that, in other circumstances involving an exception to the prohibition against wearing, carrying or transporting a handgun, the gun may be loaded.

Section 36B(c)(4) recognizes, inter alia, that a person may wear, carry, or transport a handgun "within the confines of real estate owned or leased by him or upon which he resides or within the confines of a business establishment owned or leased by him." The purpose of this section is to permit those, who believe that a handgun is necessary to defend their lives or property at home or in their place of business, to carry one on such premises. Such authorization obviously contemplates a handgun with ammunition.

Subsections (i) and (ii) of § 36C(a) list as subject to seizure and forfeiture "[a]ny handgun being worn, carried, or transported in violation" of the Act and "[a]ll ammunition or other parts of or appurtenances to any such handgun...." The italicized language requires the conclusion that ammunition is to be considered either a part of or an appurtenance to a handgun and is regulated. Cf. Howell v. State, 278 Md. 389, 394, 364 A.2d 797 (1976).

Section 36D(a) provides that a law enforcement officer may make a limited search of a person when he has a reasonable belief that, among other things, such "person may be wearing, carrying, or transporting a handgun in violation of § 36B" and "by virtue of his possession of a handgun, such person is or may be presently dangerous to the officer or to others." The reference to danger confirms that the Legislature was referring to both the gun and its ammunition.

Section 36E governs, in detail the issuance of permits to carry handguns. Subsection (a)(6) of this section provides that, before a permit shall be issued to an applicant, the applicant must have

good and substantial reason to wear, carry, or transport a handgun, provided however, that the phrase `good and substantial reason' as used herein shall be deemed to include a finding that such permit is necessary as a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger.

Were the permit to allow the carrying of an unloaded handgun only, it is difficult to understand how carrying such a weapon would represent "a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger."

Section 36E(i) recognized certain initial exceptions to the permit requirement as follows:

Notwithstanding any other provision of this subheading, the following persons may, to the extent authorized prior to March 27, 1972, and subject to the conditions specified in this subsection and subsection (j) hereof continue to wear, carry, or transport a handgun without a permit:

(1) Holders of special police commissions issued under §§ 60 to 70 of Article 41 of the Annotated Code of Maryland, while actually on duty on the property for which the commission was issued or while travelling to or from such duty;

(2) Uniformed security guards, special railway police, and watchmen who have been cleared for such employment by the Maryland State Police, while in the course of their employment or while travelling to or from the place of employment;

(3) Guards in the employ of a bank, savings and loan association, building and loan association, or express or armored car agency, while in the course of their employment or while travelling to or from the place of employment;

(4) Private detectives and employees of private detectives previously licensed under former § 90A of Article 56 of the Annotated Code of Maryland, while in the course of their employment, or while travelling to or from the place of employment.

According to the defendants' interpretation of the statute, what this section authorized was the wearing, carrying, or transporting only of unloaded handguns by security guards, railway police, bank guards, private detectives, etc., and that in Montgomery County such persons would have to comply with county regulations in order to obtain ammunition for the handguns which they are authorized by State law to carry. Such an interpretation of the preemption provision is wholly unreasonable.

Finally, § 36F makes abundantly apparent the relationship between handguns and ammunition. Subsection (a)(1) of that section defines "antique firearm," in part, in terms of the ammunition it uses. If the firearm uses rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition still manufactured in the United States or readily available in ordinary commerce, the firearm is regulated. Otherwise, it is not. Similarly, the terms "rifle" and "shotgun" are defined in subsections (a)(2) and (a)(5), respectively, in part by the ammunition they use.3

The above-cited provisions of the Act provide overwhelming evidence that it regulates ammunition as well as handguns. Additionally, in Howell v. State, supra, 278 Md. at 396, 364 A.2d 797, we discussed whether a tear gas pistol was a handgun within the meaning of § 36F of the Act, and we concluded that to be such a handgun, the pistol

must be a firearm or it must be readily or easily convertible into a firearm. We further conclude that to be a firearm it must propel a missile by gunpowder or some such similar explosive and that the gas here involved is not a missile within the natural and ordinary signification of the term. When to these conclusions is added the testimony of the expert witness that this device could not `be readily or easily converted into ... a gun which would be explosive of projectiles,' the conclusion is inevitable that this device is not a handgun within the meaning of the statute.

Thus, our case law has also recognized the inseparability of handguns and ammunition.

In 67 Op.Att'y.Gen. 316 (1982), the Attorney General of Maryland, discussing the proposed Montgomery County ordinance and another similar ordinance, reached the same conclusion which we do here. Although the Attorney General's opinion interpreting legislation is not binding on this Court, it is entitled to careful consideration. Auto Trade Ass'n v. Harold Folk Enter., 301 Md. 642, 662, 484 A.2d 612 (1984); Bd. of Examiners in Optometry v. Spitz, 300 Md. 466, 476, 479 A.2d 363 (1984). In that opinion, the Attorney General stated (id. at 319-320):

t is obvious that the local legislative proposals in question would be preempted if they directly restricted possession or sale of handguns. In our view, State law mandates the same result with respect to restrictions on handgun ammunition.

Ammunition is an integral element of a handgun. Indeed, the ability to detonate and propel projectile ammunition is the very factor — the sine qua non — that distinguishes firearms from other devices. Howell v. State, 278 Md. 389, 364 A.2d 797 (1976); 61 Opinions of the Attorney General 647 (1976). See also Article 27, § 441(g) (defining `antique pistol or revolver').

The State handgun laws recognize this reality. For example, the law specifies that when one travels between places where one may lawfully carry a handgun even without a permit — e.g., one's home or business — `[the] handgun shall be unloaded and carried in an enclosed case or enclosed holder'. Article 27, § 36B(c)(3) (emphasis added). This requirement strongly suggests that the General Assembly intended the converse as well: persons who are at a place where they may lawfully carry handguns without a permit, like their homes or businesses, may also load them with ammunition — the very element that renders the handguns operable as such.

The provisions of State law that preempt local regulation of handguns can only be effectuated if they are understood to preempt local regulation of handgun ammunition as well.4

The State Act regulates both loaded and unloaded handguns, and expressly preempts all local laws regulating the same subject. Bill No. 17-82 restricts the wearing, carrying, or transporting of loaded handguns. It is therefore invalid.

JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY AFFIRMED. PETITIONERS TO PAY COSTS.