SB1 - Injunctive relief is provided for private property, locations that sell alcohol, and public demonstrations.

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!
  • eruby

    Confederate Jew
    MDS Supporter
    He can eat two bags.
    So let it be written

    So let it be done


    Screenshot_20230929-172710~2.png



    Screenshot_20230929-172710~2.png
     

    Sirex

    Powered by natural gas
    Oct 30, 2010
    10,489
    Westminster, MD


    Good afternoon,

    Back during the 2023 Legislative Session which ended in April, anti-2nd Amendment Democrats rammed through Senate Bill 1, which sought to ban the permitted carrying of a handgun in virtually all public spaces. This was in response to Maryland’s draconian, unconstitutional wear and carry law being struck down by actions in the U.S. Supreme Court. As passed, SB1 essentially prohibited someone from legally carrying their firearm on any private property unless they had the express permission of the property owner, making big buildings, large rural properties and other locations essentially banned for legal, law-abiding wear and carry owners as well as making it illegal for a wear and carry permit holder to carry at public events or in any restaurant that serves alcohol (even though it is, of course, already illegal to carry a firearm if intoxicated or consuming alcohol).

    Immediately after Governor Moore signed this bill into law, several organizations including Maryland Shall Issue which seeks to protect law-abiding gun owners’ rights in the state, filed challenges in court on behalf of Maryland citizens and their 2nd Amendment rights. SB1 was scheduled to go into effect on October 1st – this Sunday.

    However, I’m happy to report that today the court granted a “partial preliminary injunction”. This injunction stops SB 1’s restrictions on permitted carrying on private property, in restaurants, and while attending public events.

    The Republican Senate Caucus released the following statement regarding this decision:

    SBPOLX9Owj2MG0Pcl2ky7ncRIC_5tbETiAIEuBNRaHtiOEm4-J3ldyp94p7JCPux4cK10kdSvSZhBjTpYmAL4yI7WKUMn1UuTHPO4-Ar4sSRxN011X2-VDYmCj9jzqR258LKgZ7H0UAL6vlF3wV_4QDvj6b9aVH9Y1Vw8-xUxUAX9ZcuSVxBxH1w7g=s0-d-e1-ft


    We need to focus our state’s law enforcement and legislative efforts on stopping the violent criminals who use and traffic guns illegally. When they are caught, they should go to jail for a long, long time.

    The courts will have the final say on SB1 in the coming months, and I remain hopeful that this blatantly unconstitutional law will be thrown out. In a state where violent crime is at an all time high, the right to self defense in public should not be taken away.

    Feel free to reach out to my office if you have any questions or concerns. I will do my best to keep you updated as the fight over Constitutional freedoms continues.

    Sincerely,

    Senator Justin Ready
     

    mpollan1

    Foxtrot Juliet Bravo
    MDS Supporter
    Sep 26, 2012
    7,147
    Мэриленд
    Thats their modus operandi,but it is a huge embarrassment on them!
    Maybe so as was Bruen, but they already had legislation drafted in their never ending attack on the constitution. The only thing standing in the way is the makeup of the SCOTUS. That will not last forever.
     

    Allen65

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 29, 2013
    7,201
    Anne Arundel County
    They left restriction in places of worship to stand?
    Keep in mind this is only a preliminary injunction; it enjoins the things the plaintiff is almost certain to win on. This is not the final judgement of the District Court, which may strike down even more parts of the law before this is through.
     

    Bigsawer

    Ultimate Member
    Dec 22, 2017
    4,592
    Cecil
    Keep in mind this is only a preliminary injunction; it enjoins the things the plaintiff is almost certain to win on. This is not the final judgement of the District Court, which may strike down even more parts of the law before this is through.
    Understood, but these things take a long time. This particular point hits close to home for many.
     

    Alutacon

    Desert Storm
    May 22, 2013
    1,150
    Bowie
    Maybe instead of all the "eat a bag of dicks" pats on the back we are giving ourselves it would be more appropriate to take an opportunity to reach out to those who don't agree with us. Might be a chance to convert some to our cause instead of looking like a bunch of a??holes celebrating a small battle as if they won the war.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,972
    Messages
    7,302,881
    Members
    33,550
    Latest member
    loops12

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom