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

[Batt816]

I surely would like to "see" that happen.

I’d be happier to see him choke on a bag of dicks.

 

[1time]

I'd be so against something like this. Private property rights are super important. I'd go so far as to roll back the civil rights act stuff as it applies to
Private property. You have the right to be a dick.

However, specifically making private businesses liable for your safety should they disarm you and something happens... rights balancing can be tricky, but I feel like there might be something here. Although, perhaps it is better to just destigmatize gun ownership. Somehow. Perhaps by being less polite and grayman and hiding like we're doing something wrong.

It’s fine the way it is now. You don’t want someone on your private property then tell them to leave. If they don’t, they are committing a crime subject to arrest. Signs on your property other than Keep Out should carry no weight of law.

 

[Muleskinner]

Even IF the Court slaps them.down, the Court will go hard left at some not too distant point, and then...

I suspect the Democrats feel that they've had enough congressional inaction and will turn to the court for relief and the court will grant it. Then it's just a matter of weeding out those who will comply. Only a fool would. Because those of us who won't will be gone hot as soon as the order is given to start kick in doors. And those of you have complied won't be safe anymore. Not from a Democrats and not from those of us who have to defend the cowards who turn them in. You'll be stuck in the middle. I'm not speaking directly to you I'm just generalizing. They're not going to leave us alone that's for damn sure. They can't. Those at the very top of the left-wing food chain aren't going to allow that. And I'm not talking about leftist in our own government

 

[Occam]

And I'm not talking about leftist in our own government

There are a lot more than just one leftist in our government.

 

[calicojack]

They won’t give up.

We won't either (well - unless you are Mitt Romney).

 

[Phoenix_1295]

Here is a link to the full judge’s opinion:

#31 in Kipke v. Moore (D. Maryland, 1:23-cv-01293) – CourtListener.com

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge George Levi Russell, III on 9/29/2023. (ols, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/29/2023)

www.courtlistener.com

 

[welder516]

We won't either (well - unless you are Mitt Romney).

I am no mittens, they would have to plant me six feet under.

 

[hotdog]

God Bless Maryland!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Deep Lurker]

They won’t give up.

We won't either (well - unless you are Mitt Romney).

I am no mittens, they would have to plant me six feet under.

No quit in you, Welder!

 

[Deep Lurker]

God Bless Maryland!!!

And may God bless Mark and MSI and everyone saving Maryland:

 

[Afrikeber]

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?

Form my own militia?

 

[Bob A]

And may God bless Mark and MSI and everyone saving Maryland:

View attachment 433519 View attachment 433520 View attachment 433528 View attachment 433522 View attachment 433523 View attachment 433521 View attachment 433524 View attachment 433526 View attachment 433525 View attachment 433527

Ah, the Rites of Spring!

[The Rights of Spring? The wellspring of Rights?]

 

[Deep Lurker]

WaldstreiKKKer, the Fresh Prince, their puppet-masters the Red Mommies and their out-of-state billionaire procurers, were all laughing in their sleeves when SB-1 passed.

They all believed we didn’t have a Constitutional leg to stand on.

We do.

Our Constitution has legs of titanium.

Like the sign says: “Be Strong Defend Liberty”

 

[swinokur]

The new Iphone ain’t got nothin on me

 

[RFBfromDE]

You guys are great.

 

[miles71]

Any idea why the lawsuit didn’t go after all of sb1? I know this injunction is a good thing but I don’t want the other side to make ANY progress in any locations.

TD

 

[308Scout]

Any idea why the lawsuit didn’t go after all of sb1? I know this injunction is a good thing but I don’t want the other side to make ANY progress in any locations.

TD

The lawsuit did and then some, like state parks and forestlands, which were prohibited prior to SB1. The PI was only a partial PI on some of the places challenged in the suit.

 

[brianrose80]

The lawsuit did and then some, like state parks and forestlands, which were prohibited prior to SB1. The PI was only a partial PI on some of the places challenged in the suit.

Where can we get non-legal verbiage on what just happened? I get that we can carry still in public places and restaurants..what didn’t get overturned? I see someone mention state parks.. can we carry there now?

 

[308Scout]

Where can we get non-legal verbiage on what just happened? I get that we can carry still in public places and restaurants..what didn’t get overturned? I see someone mention state parks.. can we carry there now?

You could always go to the PI itself. It lays thing out pretty clearly. And, no - State Parks are not part of the PI and are still no-go for carry.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mdd.536809/gov.uscourts.mdd.536809.31.0.pdf

 

[brianrose80]

You could always go to the PI itself. It lays thing out pretty clearly. And, no - State Parks are not part of the PI and are still no-go for carry.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mdd.536809/gov.uscourts.mdd.536809.31.0.pdf

Appreciate the response.. I am on my phone and wasn’t trying to read 40 pages.