New ruling in MD

[muleman88]

This is interesting. I would like to see MD allow ccdw.
  http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2012/03/05/md-gun-law-found-unconstitutional/

[Hawkeye]

This is definitely a step in the right direction however, as we have seen in Chicago and DC even when the courts rule against the government it is no match for a bureaucracy set against gun rights. 

[ezliving]

Take a poll:

Handgun permit ruling

A federal judge ruled that Maryland¿s law requiring applicants for permits to carry a handgun to demonstrate "good and substantial reason" violates the Second Amendment. Do you agree?

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/bal-ed-poll0305,0,3940322,post.poll

[kimmie]

Took the poll, lots of anti-gun enthusiasts taking it but not so much that the YEAHS are overtaken!  YEAH!

MD is known by many folks as the Kommie State.  Surprisingly DE hasn't followed suit with their liberal politicians! 

[formerly known as frank]

I can see the bias of The Baltimore Sun , in the way the question is worded. Once again the liberal press is telling a half truth, anyone not knowing the issue, would assume  that "good and substantial reason" was reasonable and vote no. The Sun obviously expects a no majority vote. In a largely rural state, it is a shame that Baltimore seems to run Maryland.

[Hawkeye]

How far do you think the “good and substantial reason” standard will go if it were applied to other “rights?”

For example; would you need to show a “good and substantial reason” to exercise your freedom of speech?

How about needing a “good and substantial reason” to exercise your right to not commit self-incrimination or from unreasonable search and seizure?  Quartering Troops?  Due process? Trial by jury?

None of these “rights” has a clause where the citizen must show “good and substantial reason” before they are eligible.  THAT IS WHY THEY ARE CALLED RIGHTS.  It is not a RIGHT if it can be selectively applied or disqualified by the government.