Hogan orders suspension of “good and substantial reason” for gun permits

[Anonymous]

Good thing everyone in this thread is so much better at conlaw than AG Frosh!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is he doing this? We are complying with the constitution? I thought SCOTUS wanted states to decide these issues. How can Hogan do this unilaterally? I am already so scared about gun violence in this area.

https://wjla.com/news/local/maryland-gun-laws-md-state-police-governor-larry-hogan-permit-wear-carry-weapon-supreme-court-ruling-new-york-law-provisions-standards-handgun

I don’t know who “we” is, but the State of Maryland was not complying with the Constitution. Hogan merely saved the State the costs of civil rights actions that were already being drafted.

“Gun violence” is a fake buzzword. Guns are inanimate. They have no will of their own. They are not self-locomoting. We don’t hear about “baseball bat” or “kitchen scissors” or “deliberate motor vehicle crash” or “toilet tank cover” violence.

Call it what it is: criminal violence and punish the criminals instead of decent people.

Let’s call this what it is: an argument that is made purely in bad faith and ignores reality completely. There’s no point in debating with you when you are so far gone, and I hope no one engages with this for the 30 millionth time.

We’re past this now. People are getting mowed down in churches, malls, schools, Fourth of July parades. Rich, poor, this is everybody’s problem and we don’t have time to engage with nonsense like the above. Enough, let’s move on.

Yes. Let’s move on. Your fear of inanimate objects lost. Buh bye.

HA! As if! This is like saying “let’s move on, your side lost” after the Dred Scott decision. Not that I expect you to even know what that means.

The Supreme Court doesn’t determine right and wrong, and it’s interpretation of the second amendment is obviously stupid. That you are on the side of lethal stupidity does not make you some sort of winner. History will see you and this SCOTUS for what it is, and you will lose in the end anyway.

What part of “shall not be infringed” don’t you understand? This case is in the league of Brown v Board of Education, not Dredd Scott. (And I’ll match my knowledge of Con Law with yours any time.)

As for the Supreme Court not determining right and wrong, that sure wasn’t the position of a lot of people who were saying precisely the opposite until just a few days ago.

Should Hogan have stood in a doorway shouting “good and substantial yesterday, good and substantial today, good and substantial forever” a la George Wallace?

“Lethal stupidity” is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Like blaming inanimate objects for the consummate evil of murderers and depriving victims of the right to self defense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is he doing this? We are complying with the constitution? I thought SCOTUS wanted states to decide these issues. How can Hogan do this unilaterally? I am already so scared about gun violence in this area.

https://wjla.com/news/local/maryland-gun-laws-md-state-police-governor-larry-hogan-permit-wear-carry-weapon-supreme-court-ruling-new-york-law-provisions-standards-handgun

I don’t know who “we” is, but the State of Maryland was not complying with the Constitution. Hogan merely saved the State the costs of civil rights actions that were already being drafted.

“Gun violence” is a fake buzzword. Guns are inanimate. They have no will of their own. They are not self-locomoting. We don’t hear about “baseball bat” or “kitchen scissors” or “deliberate motor vehicle crash” or “toilet tank cover” violence.

Call it what it is: criminal violence and punish the criminals instead of decent people.

Let’s call this what it is: an argument that is made purely in bad faith and ignores reality completely. There’s no point in debating with you when you are so far gone, and I hope no one engages with this for the 30 millionth time.

We’re past this now. People are getting mowed down in churches, malls, schools, Fourth of July parades. Rich, poor, this is everybody’s problem and we don’t have time to engage with nonsense like the above. Enough, let’s move on.

Yes. Let’s move on. Your fear of inanimate objects lost. Buh bye.

HA! As if! This is like saying “let’s move on, your side lost” after the Dred Scott decision. Not that I expect you to even know what that means.

The Supreme Court doesn’t determine right and wrong, and it’s interpretation of the second amendment is obviously stupid. That you are on the side of lethal stupidity does not make you some sort of winner. History will see you and this SCOTUS for what it is, and you will lose in the end anyway.

What part of “shall not be infringed” don’t you understand? This case is in the league of Brown v Board of Education, not Dredd Scott. (And I’ll match my knowledge of Con Law with yours any time.)

As for the Supreme Court not determining right and wrong, that sure wasn’t the position of a lot of people who were saying precisely the opposite until just a few days ago.

Should Hogan have stood in a doorway shouting “good and substantial yesterday, good and substantial today, good and substantial forever” a la George Wallace?

“Lethal stupidity” is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Like blaming inanimate objects for the consummate evil of murderers and depriving victims of the right to self defense.

The bolded is when I learn that debate with this person is a huge and stupid waste of time, because they left the realm of reality long, long ago. See the other 30,000,000 threads about guns if you want to preview this entire discussion, including numerous discussions of “con law.” I’m not interested in blatant and particularly American stupidity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Democrats have been given the chance of a lifetime to engage centrists who want reasonable, not murderous, abortion laws, and who want reasonable, not murderous, gun laws.

PLEASE USE IT. We need to keep the house and senate!!!

The governor of the state has asked the state to comply with the SCOTUS ruling.

What would you have him do??

Take a stand and sue as a state.

Or comply and in a press conference, excoriate the ruling and say he's opposed to it and only doing it under duress.

+1000

He really was not compelled to do this. It's all posturing for his preferred replacement. That's ok...she's not getting in.

Let me explain this for you as simply as possible. The highest tribunal in the country decided that the Second Amendhebt means what it said. Bearing arms outside the home is a Constitutionally protected civil right. Denial of that right would be among other things cause for an action under the Civil Rights Act, with all the problems that poses for contumaceous officials. Hogan took an Ostia to uphold the law. Like it or not, the law is determined, and he had no choice but to do what he did.

Let me explain this to you, dear, instead. SCOTUS decision came from a packed court from the previous administration's legislative Republucan lock and the denial of Garland in the one before that- all from the same people. So there's a big issue right there. And it should be dealt with in the federal legislature. There are no term limits, no ethics guidelines, no reason to have only 9 members on that court. All this has to change.

Secondly- dear, the SCOTUS doesn't legislate. It was about the reversal of a precedent. Look up the word. Not the same as law.

Md wasn't EVER obligated to also join. No state is obligated. This was NY, not Md. Let's let the cumbersome paperwork that people may want to file do the job of a looong delay until it fails. Let a better governor handle this.

Third, your idea of 2nd amendment rights has NOTHING to do with walking around with guns. Nothing. Or automatic weapons, or most of the issues arising EACH WEEK because of guns. This lives erroneously in your pin sized brain. You don't understand the 2nd amendment at all, and probably have not ever read the Constitution. It is clear here that you are clueless.

The NRA seems to be in charge here, not our govt. This has nothing to do with the Constitution.

Oh, my. What a pitiful effort.

Could you tell us what “precedent” the Court reversed in ruling that the Constitution protects the right to be armed outside the home?

And yes, Maryland could have kept claiming that its facially unconstitutional law was somehow still enforceable despite it being specifically called out in the Court’s opinion. And if he kept at it long enough, he might have gone to jail.

The Court made no ruling governing automatic weapons, which are legal under federal law and the law of Maryland.

As for “the issues arising EACH WEEK involving guns, it’s pretty obvious that your idea of what the Constitution means has been completely ineffective. Time to ho back to what the Framers intended.

Oh, and I’ll bet money that my “pin sized brain” knew more about Second Amendment jurisprudence when I was 12 than you ever will.

Name calling doesn’t make you right; it instead reveals interior rage, hostility and violence that you are terrified of and project onto inanimate objects.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is he doing this? We are complying with the constitution? I thought SCOTUS wanted states to decide these issues. How can Hogan do this unilaterally? I am already so scared about gun violence in this area.

https://wjla.com/news/local/maryland-gun-laws-md-state-police-governor-larry-hogan-permit-wear-carry-weapon-supreme-court-ruling-new-york-law-provisions-standards-handgun

I don’t know who “we” is, but the State of Maryland was not complying with the Constitution. Hogan merely saved the State the costs of civil rights actions that were already being drafted.

“Gun violence” is a fake buzzword. Guns are inanimate. They have no will of their own. They are not self-locomoting. We don’t hear about “baseball bat” or “kitchen scissors” or “deliberate motor vehicle crash” or “toilet tank cover” violence.

Call it what it is: criminal violence and punish the criminals instead of decent people.

Let’s call this what it is: an argument that is made purely in bad faith and ignores reality completely. There’s no point in debating with you when you are so far gone, and I hope no one engages with this for the 30 millionth time.

We’re past this now. People are getting mowed down in churches, malls, schools, Fourth of July parades. Rich, poor, this is everybody’s problem and we don’t have time to engage with nonsense like the above. Enough, let’s move on.

Yes. Let’s move on. Your fear of inanimate objects lost. Buh bye.

HA! As if! This is like saying “let’s move on, your side lost” after the Dred Scott decision. Not that I expect you to even know what that means.

The Supreme Court doesn’t determine right and wrong, and it’s interpretation of the second amendment is obviously stupid. That you are on the side of lethal stupidity does not make you some sort of winner. History will see you and this SCOTUS for what it is, and you will lose in the end anyway.

What part of “shall not be infringed” don’t you understand? This case is in the league of Brown v Board of Education, not Dredd Scott. (And I’ll match my knowledge of Con Law with yours any time.)

As for the Supreme Court not determining right and wrong, that sure wasn’t the position of a lot of people who were saying precisely the opposite until just a few days ago.

Should Hogan have stood in a doorway shouting “good and substantial yesterday, good and substantial today, good and substantial forever” a la George Wallace?

“Lethal stupidity” is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Like blaming inanimate objects for the consummate evil of murderers and depriving victims of the right to self defense.

The bolded is when I learn that debate with this person is a huge and stupid waste of time, because they left the realm of reality long, long ago. See the other 30,000,000 threads about guns if you want to preview this entire discussion, including numerous discussions of “con law.” I’m not interested in blatant and particularly American stupidity.

Don’t like America? No law holding you here.

It’s good that you recognize that it is a huge and stupid waste of time to argue against the truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is he doing this? We are complying with the constitution? I thought SCOTUS wanted states to decide these issues. How can Hogan do this unilaterally? I am already so scared about gun violence in this area.

https://wjla.com/news/local/maryland-gun-laws-md-state-police-governor-larry-hogan-permit-wear-carry-weapon-supreme-court-ruling-new-york-law-provisions-standards-handgun

I don’t know who “we” is, but the State of Maryland was not complying with the Constitution. Hogan merely saved the State the costs of civil rights actions that were already being drafted.

“Gun violence” is a fake buzzword. Guns are inanimate. They have no will of their own. They are not self-locomoting. We don’t hear about “baseball bat” or “kitchen scissors” or “deliberate motor vehicle crash” or “toilet tank cover” violence.

Call it what it is: criminal violence and punish the criminals instead of decent people.

Let’s call this what it is: an argument that is made purely in bad faith and ignores reality completely. There’s no point in debating with you when you are so far gone, and I hope no one engages with this for the 30 millionth time.

We’re past this now. People are getting mowed down in churches, malls, schools, Fourth of July parades. Rich, poor, this is everybody’s problem and we don’t have time to engage with nonsense like the above. Enough, let’s move on.

Yes. Let’s move on. Your fear of inanimate objects lost. Buh bye.

HA! As if! This is like saying “let’s move on, your side lost” after the Dred Scott decision. Not that I expect you to even know what that means.

The Supreme Court doesn’t determine right and wrong, and it’s interpretation of the second amendment is obviously stupid. That you are on the side of lethal stupidity does not make you some sort of winner. History will see you and this SCOTUS for what it is, and you will lose in the end anyway.

What part of “shall not be infringed” don’t you understand? This case is in the league of Brown v Board of Education, not Dredd Scott. (And I’ll match my knowledge of Con Law with yours any time.)

As for the Supreme Court not determining right and wrong, that sure wasn’t the position of a lot of people who were saying precisely the opposite until just a few days ago.

Should Hogan have stood in a doorway shouting “good and substantial yesterday, good and substantial today, good and substantial forever” a la George Wallace?

“Lethal stupidity” is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Like blaming inanimate objects for the consummate evil of murderers and depriving victims of the right to self defense.

The bolded is when I learn that debate with this person is a huge and stupid waste of time, because they left the realm of reality long, long ago. See the other 30,000,000 threads about guns if you want to preview this entire discussion, including numerous discussions of “con law.” I’m not interested in blatant and particularly American stupidity.

Don’t like America? No law holding you here.

It’s good that you recognize that it is a huge and stupid waste of time to argue against the truth.

LOL I guess telling people who disagree with you to just leave the country altogether is what America means to you? Sounds about right. That reflects your values, I guess, and what a “debate” with you about the issues would be like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is he doing this? We are complying with the constitution? I thought SCOTUS wanted states to decide these issues. How can Hogan do this unilaterally? I am already so scared about gun violence in this area.

https://wjla.com/news/local/maryland-gun-laws-md-state-police-governor-larry-hogan-permit-wear-carry-weapon-supreme-court-ruling-new-york-law-provisions-standards-handgun

I don’t know who “we” is, but the State of Maryland was not complying with the Constitution. Hogan merely saved the State the costs of civil rights actions that were already being drafted.

“Gun violence” is a fake buzzword. Guns are inanimate. They have no will of their own. They are not self-locomoting. We don’t hear about “baseball bat” or “kitchen scissors” or “deliberate motor vehicle crash” or “toilet tank cover” violence.

Call it what it is: criminal violence and punish the criminals instead of decent people.

There are too many people who lawfully own guns who are hurting others. The only point of a gun is to kill. Full stop. That's why it has to be regulated. All those other inanimate objects have other primary purposes.

[Anonymous]

So much stupidity on this thread. If you can’t be bothered to understand constitutional law, please stop having extreme opinions about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Democrats have been given the chance of a lifetime to engage centrists who want reasonable, not murderous, abortion laws, and who want reasonable, not murderous, gun laws.

PLEASE USE IT. We need to keep the house and senate!!!

The governor of the state has asked the state to comply with the SCOTUS ruling.

What would you have him do??

Take a stand and sue as a state.

Or comply and in a press conference, excoriate the ruling and say he's opposed to it and only doing it under duress.

+1000

He really was not compelled to do this. It's all posturing for his preferred replacement. That's ok...she's not getting in.

Let me explain this for you as simply as possible. The highest tribunal in the country decided that the Second Amendhebt means what it said. Bearing arms outside the home is a Constitutionally protected civil right. Denial of that right would be among other things cause for an action under the Civil Rights Act, with all the problems that poses for contumaceous officials. Hogan took an Ostia to uphold the law. Like it or not, the law is determined, and he had no choice but to do what he did.

Let me explain this to you, dear, instead. SCOTUS decision came from a packed court from the previous administration's legislative Republucan lock and the denial of Garland in the one before that- all from the same people. So there's a big issue right there. And it should be dealt with in the federal legislature. There are no term limits, no ethics guidelines, no reason to have only 9 members on that court. All this has to change.

Secondly- dear, the SCOTUS doesn't legislate. It was about the reversal of a precedent. Look up the word. Not the same as law.

Md wasn't EVER obligated to also join. No state is obligated. This was NY, not Md. Let's let the cumbersome paperwork that people may want to file do the job of a looong delay until it fails. Let a better governor handle this.

Third, your idea of 2nd amendment rights has NOTHING to do with walking around with guns. Nothing. Or automatic weapons, or most of the issues arising EACH WEEK because of guns. This lives erroneously in your pin sized brain. You don't understand the 2nd amendment at all, and probably have not ever read the Constitution. It is clear here that you are clueless.

The NRA seems to be in charge here, not our govt. This has nothing to do with the Constitution.

The huge plurality of SCOTUS rulings seem to be 9-0 or 8-1, and many rulings cut right across the typical lines you mentioned. Some interesting results this year. NYSRPA v Bruen should have been 9-0. The dissent was just a bunch of talking points. 30 years ago when Texas moved from 'may issue' to 'shall issue' they kept data on crimes committed by permit holders. Within a few years they stopped because there essentially were none, and it was a waste of resources to continually take peoples time to measure a number so close to zero. Permit holders commit crimes at a rate less than police officers, actually.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Democrats have been given the chance of a lifetime to engage centrists who want reasonable, not murderous, abortion laws, and who want reasonable, not murderous, gun laws.

PLEASE USE IT. We need to keep the house and senate!!!

The governor of the state has asked the state to comply with the SCOTUS ruling.

What would you have him do??

Take a stand and sue as a state.

Or comply and in a press conference, excoriate the ruling and say he's opposed to it and only doing it under duress.

+1000

He really was not compelled to do this. It's all posturing for his preferred replacement. That's ok...she's not getting in.

Let me explain this for you as simply as possible. The highest tribunal in the country decided that the Second Amendhebt means what it said. Bearing arms outside the home is a Constitutionally protected civil right. Denial of that right would be among other things cause for an action under the Civil Rights Act, with all the problems that poses for contumaceous officials. Hogan took an Ostia to uphold the law. Like it or not, the law is determined, and he had no choice but to do what he did.

They also ruled that arms outside of the home does is unfettered and Hogans lazy move to remove a law without putting other protective laws in place is what is expected from a GOP governor, which is why people don’t trust any GOP members even those that can pretend to be 1/2 descent for a beat.

He could easily have put protective measures in place 1st.

The 2nd amendment can’t infringe on other rights and currently it does, that is unconstitutional.

Also the current SCOTUS are originalists which means they believe this is what the writer of the constitution originally meant. Originalists also believe black peoples and women are not equal under the law, as the constitution was “originally” written. So sorry if I DGAF what they rule it’s still nit constitutional from
The aspect that the constitution must change with times.

[Anonymous]

Instead of making this an overall gun control debate, this is pretty simple.

The attorney general, a lifetime moco loberal- advised the MD state police that they had to comply with the scotus ruling. So did the governor. Thats pretty much it.

Anyone who wanted them to do something other than that, is living in a dream world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is he doing this? We are complying with the constitution? I thought SCOTUS wanted states to decide these issues. How can Hogan do this unilaterally? I am already so scared about gun violence in this area.

https://wjla.com/news/local/maryland-gun-laws-md-state-police-governor-larry-hogan-permit-wear-carry-weapon-supreme-court-ruling-new-york-law-provisions-standards-handgun

I don’t know who “we” is, but the State of Maryland was not complying with the Constitution. Hogan merely saved the State the costs of civil rights actions that were already being drafted.

“Gun violence” is a fake buzzword. Guns are inanimate. They have no will of their own. They are not self-locomoting. We don’t hear about “baseball bat” or “kitchen scissors” or “deliberate motor vehicle crash” or “toilet tank cover” violence.

Call it what it is: criminal violence and punish the criminals instead of decent people.

Let’s call this what it is: an argument that is made purely in bad faith and ignores reality completely. There’s no point in debating with you when you are so far gone, and I hope no one engages with this for the 30 millionth time.

We’re past this now. People are getting mowed down in churches, malls, schools, Fourth of July parades. Rich, poor, this is everybody’s problem and we don’t have time to engage with nonsense like the above. Enough, let’s move on.

Yes. Let’s move on. Your fear of inanimate objects lost. Buh bye.

HA! As if! This is like saying “let’s move on, your side lost” after the Dred Scott decision. Not that I expect you to even know what that means.

The Supreme Court doesn’t determine right and wrong, and it’s interpretation of the second amendment is obviously stupid. That you are on the side of lethal stupidity does not make you some sort of winner. History will see you and this SCOTUS for what it is, and you will lose in the end anyway.

What part of “shall not be infringed” don’t you understand? This case is in the league of Brown v Board of Education, not Dredd Scott. (And I’ll match my knowledge of Con Law with yours any time.)

As for the Supreme Court not determining right and wrong, that sure wasn’t the position of a lot of people who were saying precisely the opposite until just a few days ago.

Should Hogan have stood in a doorway shouting “good and substantial yesterday, good and substantial today, good and substantial forever” a la George Wallace?

“Lethal stupidity” is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Like blaming inanimate objects for the consummate evil of murderers and depriving victims of the right to self defense.

The bolded is when I learn that debate with this person is a huge and stupid waste of time, because they left the realm of reality long, long ago. See the other 30,000,000 threads about guns if you want to preview this entire discussion, including numerous discussions of “con law.” I’m not interested in blatant and particularly American stupidity.

Don’t like America? No law holding you here.

It’s good that you recognize that it is a huge and stupid waste of time to argue against the truth.

I like America and I’m not letting a theocracy/racists take over so I will fight them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Instead of making this an overall gun control debate, this is pretty simple.

The attorney general, a lifetime moco loberal- advised the MD state police that they had to comply with the scotus ruling. So did the governor. Thats pretty much it.

Anyone who wanted them to do something other than that, is living in a dream world.

A dream world of having gun control? Not a dream. We did before, and we will again. Absolutely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Instead of making this an overall gun control debate, this is pretty simple.

The attorney general, a lifetime moco loberal- advised the MD state police that they had to comply with the scotus ruling. So did the governor. Thats pretty much it.

Anyone who wanted them to do something other than that, is living in a dream world.

His actual statement vs your imagined statement

“Today’s decision means more deaths and more pain in a country already awash in gun violence. If the norm is that people can carry firearms, our neighborhoods, our streets and other public places will become more dangerous. It will make the lives of law enforcement more difficult and more perilous. The epidemic of gun violence sweeping our nation demonstrates daily the folly of introducing more guns into this boiling cauldron.

“Maryland, like many other states, has enacted common sense gun laws that place the lives and safety of our residents first. They have been proven to reduce gun violence.

“We will examine today’s ruling to determine its impact in our state, and we will continue to fight to protect the safety of Marylanders.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Instead of making this an overall gun control debate, this is pretty simple.

The attorney general, a lifetime moco loberal- advised the MD state police that they had to comply with the scotus ruling. So did the governor. Thats pretty much it.

Anyone who wanted them to do something other than that, is living in a dream world.

His actual statement vs your imagined statement

“Today’s decision means more deaths and more pain in a country already awash in gun violence. If the norm is that people can carry firearms, our neighborhoods, our streets and other public places will become more dangerous. It will make the lives of law enforcement more difficult and more perilous. The epidemic of gun violence sweeping our nation demonstrates daily the folly of introducing more guns into this boiling cauldron.

“Maryland, like many other states, has enacted common sense gun laws that place the lives and safety of our residents first. They have been proven to reduce gun violence.

“We will examine today’s ruling to determine its impact in our state, and we will continue to fight to protect the safety of Marylanders.”

And we will continue to fight. There are so many peoole ready to fight and have prevailed before.

Get involved with gun control groups like Moms Demand Action and others. We aren't done here.