Maryland SB1 - any one caught violating?

[JohnnyE]

injunction junction what's your function?

Hooking up words and phrases and clauses...

 

[jokie]

I’m sure there’s plenty of gun owners who aren’t even aware of SB1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is true.

 

[mac1_131]

I’m sure there’s plenty of gun owners who aren’t even aware of SB1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Absolutely true. I personally know of several. Not really "gun" people like us, but got their carry permits nevertheless and carry and have no idea.

 

[Biggfoot44]

Absolutely true. I personally know of several. Not really "gun" people like us, but got their carry permits nevertheless and carry and have no idea.

Still plenty of gun owners who don't yet realize the * Can * get a W&C , much less the subsequent rolling back

 

[Biggfoot44]

Right, so carrying in public and going to stores should be ok.

3 Injunctions and one is subtle . The two main ones , oversimplified :

1. You Can again carry in a restaurant with a beer license .

2. Affirmative Vampire Signs are Not required.

 

[Bob A]

I keep waiting to hear of someone that had to defend themselves from a deadly assault in an exclusion zone to see how it'll be handled.

That's probably the only way you will ever hear of someone "caught" carrying in a no-no zone.

I’m sure there’s plenty of gun owners who aren’t even aware of SB1

I’d bet there are plenty of cops who aren’t aware either

The whole point of the exercise has nothing to do with punishing criminals.

It has everything to do with criminalising law-abiding gun owners.

It will only be used to punish those who are forced to defend their lives with their legally owned firearms, while exercising their "right" to bear arms. That's why the police are generally unaware, and why there has been no effort to alert the public to the danger the General Assembly has put them in.

It's for the Show Trials, to further the Legislature-induced BGOS, to persuade legitimate gun owners to consider leaving Maryland, and to pander to those who see no evil, despite being robbed, carjacked and assaulted. Because otherwise, they'd be Racist Right-Wing Extremists.


Edit:
I'm beginning to wonder whether I should just stop posting this sort of thing? I'm pretty sure most here understand the position, and beating a dead horse gets boring.

God knows I don't want to start a poll, nor do I want to be reduced to being seen as a noisy old crank muttering in a corner. Also, tilting at the same old windmill is rough on my joints, and I think my horse is dead.

 

[Biggfoot44]

But you beat the dead horse so skillfully , it's a sight to behold !

 

[babalou]

Hooking up words and phrases and clauses...

And there you go brother. i knew you would get it.

 

[rseymorejr]

I’m sure there’s plenty of gun owners who aren’t even aware of SB1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm sure of that. There are plenty of gun owners unaware of the HQL, designated collector letter, mag restrictions, etc.

 

[My Toy]

3 Injunctions and one is subtle . The two main ones , oversimplified :

1. You Can again carry in a restaurant with a beer license .

2. Affirmative Vampire Signs are Not required.

With respect to item #1: I thought the injunction allowed concealed carry only in liquor stores (ie. liquor retailers and not places serving alcohol) but to clarify is it now legal to carry in a bar or restaurant that serves alcohol as long as I am not consuming alcohol ?

 

[John from MD]

Conceal means conceal I haven't changed any fking habit/ritual of mine.

This.

 

[dblas]

With respect to item #1: I thought the injunction allowed concealed carry only in liquor stores (ie. liquor retailers and not places serving alcohol)

The specific law challenged was not restricted to only liquor stores, but any business that serves alcohol.

but to clarify is it now legal to carry in a bar or restaurant that serves alcohol as long as I am not consuming alcohol ?

Yes, it applies to all of these.

There is NO prohibition in State Statute on consuming alcohol while carrying. Only to not carry while under the influence.

 

[swinokur]

And by design, no legal definition of under the influence as far as carry goes

 

[Harrys]

The whole point of the exercise has nothing to do with punishing criminals.

It has everything to do with criminalising law-abiding gun owners.

It will only be used to punish those who are forced to defend their lives with their legally owned firearms, while exercising their "right" to bear arms. That's why the police are generally unaware, and why there has been no effort to alert the public to the danger the General Assembly has put them in.

It's for the Show Trials, to further the Legislature-induced BGOS, to persuade legitimate gun owners to consider leaving Maryland, and to pander to those who see no evil, despite being robbed, carjacked and assaulted. Because otherwise, they'd be Racist Right-Wing Extremists.


Edit:
I'm beginning to wonder whether I should just stop posting this sort of thing? I'm pretty sure most here understand the position, and beating a dead horse gets boring.

God knows I don't want to start a poll, nor do I want to be reduced to being seen as a noisy old crank muttering in a corner. Also, tilting at the same old windmill is rough on my joints, and I think my horse is dead.

Look out Luke we are heading to the rhubarb.

 

[PapiBarcelona]

I'm sure of that. There are plenty of gun owners unaware of the HQL, designated collector letter, mag restrictions, etc.

Pretty much, I’ve touched base on this a few times; I know like 2 dozen-ish peeps with some type of firearm hobby and maybe only 1-3 people of that group actually consistently practice with firearms and are aware of things.

Everyone else is “oh, is that what the law is on that now?”

And these are all intelligent well respect folks of the community who I guess just aren’t interested in being consumed with paranoia falling down rabbit holes of stuff they don’t really about LOL

 

[JohnnyE]

And there you go brother. i knew you would get it.

Yeah, you know, I'm old...

 

[RFBfromDE]

Next?

I'm just a Bill.

Yes, I'm only a Bill....

 

[Michael S]

Bob A is totally correct. We know a few parts of sb1 are still in play. Has anyone that got arrested with a firearm been charged with any part of sb1. Yes it was designed to go after permit holders. But anyone without a permit should be equally charged. The same thing goes for state and Federal charges. All these criminals that are nabbed with a gun. How come we see almost no Federal charges against them. Example the squeegee kid at the harbor.

 

[Blaster229]

So that’s also a reason why we are not hearing cases of people getting caught violating sb1. I’m just reacting to some posts above. There might be some people not aware about the injunction order.

Why would we hear about local SB1 violation arrests? We don't hear about most mundane, local, non news worthy crimes.

 

[jc1240]

Why would we hear about local SB1 violation arrests? We don't hear about most mundane, local, non news worthy crimes.

I could see the propagandists reporting on SB1 violations on behalf of their Annapolis overlords. "See? They break the laws all the time. They can't be trusted to carry guns in public."