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

[Deep Lurker]

I was able to go to two Man-Up Mondays in Annapolis during the last legislative session. I got to see in person the level of contempt that our "representatives" have for us. Many others here are way more involved than I am and have been disrespected, lied to, and kicked out of hearings for years. They've more than earned the right to offer up a bag or two of dicks.

Thank you Brute, and to everyone who made it to Annapolis last session, keeping the political pressure on the MGA both inside and outside the Statehouse, and livestreaming our anti-SB1 and pro-2A messages to the far corners of Maryland and the nation:

 

[Deep Lurker]

The benefit of being so visible in public is that our messages and the Patriots holding signs also headline and illustrate some news articles, exactly what we intend.

From today’s news: a comprehensive article about the preliminary injunction with interviews with MGA legislators, including a key Democrat, who voted against SB-1.

Worth the read just for that. (The screen cap of the text below is just the opening section. The article also reveals WaldstreiKKKer the lawyer won’t answer legal questions about his own bill.)

(Oddly, this particular article refers only to the Kipke lawsuit, and makes no mention of MSI’s litigation; fortunately MSI is credited in many news accounts elsewhere and on YouTube.)

Judge blocks parts of new Maryland gun law

A federal court judge Friday blocked parts of a new Maryland law that limits areas where gun owners in Maryland are allowed to carry concealed or open-wear firearms just as it was set to go into effect.

cnsmaryland.org

 

[teratos]

The benefit of being so visible in public is that our messages and the Patriots holding signs also headline and illustrate some news articles, exactly what we intend.

From today’s news: a comprehensive article about the preliminary injunction with interviews with MGA legislators, including a key Democrat, who voted against SB-1.

Worth the read just for that.

(Oddly, this particular article refers only to the Kipke lawsuit, and makes no mention of MSI’s litigation; fortunately MSI is credited in many news accounts elsewhere and on YouTube.)

Judge blocks parts of new Maryland gun law

A federal court judge Friday blocked parts of a new Maryland law that limits areas where gun owners in Maryland are allowed to carry concealed or open-wear firearms just as it was set to go into effect.

cnsmaryland.org

View attachment 433428 View attachment 433429

The Capital News Service is a little disingenuous…I believe “no firearms” signs do now carry force of law. If such a sign is prominently posted, it’s a no go.

EDIT: It appears the house removed this provision, so ignore the above ranting.

 

[clandestine]

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.

Sounds like talk from someone who voted for the politicians who passed SB1

 

[Boondock Saint]

Obey all laws, ladies and gentlemen. They're the law.

"Mmm, yeah."

 

[esqappellate]

They left restriction in places of worship to stand?

You may be thinking about the Mont. Co. ordinance. SB1 does not purport to ban carry in or at places of worship

 

[INMY01TA]

The Capital News Service is a little disingenuous…I believe “no firearms” signs do now carry force of law. If such a sign is prominently posted, it’s a no go.

I thought the opposite was said here.

 

[teratos]

I thought the opposite was said here.

I stand corrected.

 

[Mark75H]

Wasn't there something about carrying in vehicles with a permit? Having to keep them locked up during transport? Is that still on the table?

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

No, not permit holders, it is new for nonPermit holders. Previous law for nonPermit holders was "enclosed holster" or case, nothing about "locked case"

 

[Muleskinner]

The anti 2A house of cards is falling…..

They will continue to pass "creative" legislation to circumvent the supreme Court until one of two things happen

The court slaps them down or

The political leanings of the court shifts. This is what they're counting on.

I predict the next time the political influence of the court shifts you're going to see the second amendment struck down as military and law enforcement only.

Then what?

 

[minux]

01OCT is here.... What is the current state?

 

[Mark75H]

01OCT is here.... What is the current state?

OMG

 

[AKbythebay]

I'm still struggling to understand the Oct 1 status of "No Guns Allowed" signs at public retail establishments. Would hypothetically violating a no gun sign subject one to criminal prosecution and/or loss of permit under SB1? Or would it simply be a situation where if you are asked to leave and do not, it's a trespassing complaint?

 

[teratos]

01OCT is here.... What is the current state?

You are a day early and short on something.

If you read the last 2 pages…you should be all caught up.

I'm still struggling to understand the Oct 1 status of "No Guns Allowed" signs at public retail establishments. Would hypothetically violating a no gun sign subject one to criminal prosecution and/or loss of permit under SB1? Or would it simply be a situation where if you are asked to leave and do not, it's a trespassing complaint?

No. Apparently the house took the criminal provision out. Business as usual.

 

[Blaster229]

01OCT is here.... What is the current state?

Seriously? LOL

 

[AKbythebay]

No. Apparently the house took the criminal provision out. Business as usual.

Thank you, good to hear.

The sign thing is sort of ridiculous anyway since you may simply have just not seen the sign. Also, to me, it's like public accommodation laws. Can businesses decide which parts of the constitution to abide by and which parts go ignore? With guns they can. Sure strikes me as similar to "No blacks" signs in the 50s and 60s.

 

[teratos]

Thank you, good to hear.

The sign thing is sort of ridiculous anyway since you may simply have just not seen the sign. Also, to me, it's like public accommodation laws. Can businesses decide which parts of the constitution to abide by and which parts go ignore? With guns they can. Sure strikes me as similar to "No blacks" signs in the 50s and 60s.

Exactly.

 

[Tarponbeach]

The little Senator from Montgomery County would do well to consult a few Constitutional Law Professors before he "Tinkers" with more proposed Gun Control Legislation.

 

[Allen65]

The little Senator from Montgomery County would do well to consult a few Constitutional Law Professors before he "Tinkers" with more proposed Gun Control Legislation.

That presumes there are consequences for getting legislation wrong. There aren't, so there's no nominal cost to his career to continue throwing anything and everything at the wall to see what sticks.

 

[swinokur]

Thank you, good to hear.

The sign thing is sort of ridiculous anyway since you may simply have just not seen the sign. Also, to me, it's like public accommodation laws. Can businesses decide which parts of the constitution to abide by and which parts go ignore? With guns they can. Sure strikes me as similar to "No blacks" signs in the 50s and 60s.

The 2A prevents Govt. Infringement. Private business can do as they please