Post 6/23/2022 MD Wear & Carry Permit Application

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • jbrown50

    Ultimate Member
    Sep 18, 2014
    3,474
    DC
    Private citizens have the same 2nd Amendment as military…..there is no difference

    Also there are some purple haired 300lb heffers in the military that can’t shoot a BB gun properly

    Hell my brother is an Army Colonel JAG, Parajump School at Benning, SF missions with Delta under JSOC….know how much time he’s put in with a pistol in the military “about two hours range time” ( his words) in 10 years

    Military and police shouldn’t be exempt for shit
    First, the 2nd Amendment does not apply to the standing army. The 2A is meant to protect our citizen's natural right to defend ourselves and have the means to defend ourselves in case that standing army is used against us. Training is great to have and 99% of 2A supporting citizens automatically seek training and knowledge of applicable laws but our 2A does not require proof of training in order to be able to exercise it. Training requirements are arbitrary and are quite regularly used and abused to restrict the right. At least 25 states already have no proof of training requirement restriction against the right.

    If you really cared about fairness you'd be attacking the proof of training requirement instead of the exemptions. Are you from Russia or living there? What's the 2A like there?
     

    JohnnyE

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 18, 2013
    9,694
    MoCo
    I don't see how entering ANY "reason" is necessary, or constitutional.
    Judge Benson Everett Legg said it best, “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.” Sadly, his 2012 ruling in Woollard v. Sheridan, at https://casetext.com/case/woollard-v-sheridan-2, was overturned.
     

    adit

    ReMember
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 20, 2013
    19,830
    DE
    It defines intent.

    If one puts something like BURGLARY or ROBBERY, that would get them looked at a little bit harder.
    I tend to disagree.

    You don't need a permit for Burglary or Robbery.

    Giving them a reason affords them the opportunity to determine if your reason is valid/acceptable. That would be the Good reason in "Good and Substantial".
     

    Magnumst

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 26, 2013
    1,253
    I submitted my renewal the day before the ruling came out. I listed as #1 personal protection and #2 as business owner for my reasons. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out? As of today it just says submitted.
    Update: just got an email of application excepted and waiting to be assigned to an investigator.
     

    Magnumst

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 26, 2013
    1,253
    I submitted my renewal the day before the ruling came out. I listed as #1 personal protection and #2 as business owner for my reasons. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out? As of today it just says submitted.
    Update: just got an email of application excepted and waiting to be assigned to an investigator.
     

    swinokur

    In a State of Bliss
    Patriot Picket
    Apr 15, 2009
    55,515
    Westminster USA

    Attachments

    • IMG_0307.jpg
      IMG_0307.jpg
      194.3 KB · Views: 141
    Last edited:

    Calpoke

    Member
    Dec 12, 2009
    18
    Harford County
    MY hypothesis is they aren't going to advertise going shall issue, but if they deny those of us who applied since Thursday for not having G&S, they would be in direct violation of a SCOTUS order. I doubt even Frosh wants to open that can of worms.
    Thank you so much SG for the information. Immediately applied and trust it will be approved.
     

    ras_oscar

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 23, 2014
    1,669
    I'd like to hear from a successful post Bruin applicant as to changes in the process from application acceptance until permit issuance. Specifically, I have concerns about the CA AG letter stating that jurisdictions could use enhanced background checks to establish "good moral character" Were there any further requirements in the permit application or the personal interview? I can think of things that *could* be investigated, particularly in social media, even the though the SCOTUS decision specifically requires objective criteria. I'd be interested to learn what MSP has been told are the guide rails.
     

    chilipeppermaniac

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    I'd like to hear from a successful post Bruin applicant as to changes in the process from application acceptance until permit issuance. Specifically, I have concerns about the CA AG letter stating that jurisdictions could use enhanced background checks to establish "good moral character" Were there any further requirements in the permit application or the personal interview? I can think of things that *could* be investigated, particularly in social media, even the though the SCOTUS decision specifically requires objective criteria. I'd be interested to learn what MSP has been told are the guide rails.
    Bruen. and Good questions. Never let a good crisis...
    Never trust a " Good Dem's" intentions, deeds, promises...
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,889
    Messages
    7,299,930
    Members
    33,534
    Latest member
    illlocs33

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom