MD Appeals Court rules in favor of Gun Owners

[EasternShore]

Anyone see any flying pigs yet, I know there is a snowball fight going on some where very hot!

http://wtop.com/?nid=25&sid=863004

ANNAPOLIS, Md. - Marylanders can lend a gun to a friend without going through the seven-day waiting period and background check required by state law before guns can be transferred or sold to a new owner, according to a ruling by the state's highest court.

The Court of Appeals, in a 4-3 decision, said lending a gun to another person does not constitute "transfer" of a weapon and therefore is not covered by the gun control law dealing with the waiting period and police background checks of potential buyers.

The ruling came in an appeal filed by a D.C. police officer who had lent a handgun to a friend. The friend's guns had been confiscated by police because he had a Glock pistol in his car but did not have a permit to carry it.

The officer was convicted in 2003 of illegally transferring a regulated firearm and was fined $200.

The Court of Special Appeals had upheld the conviction, but the majority of the state's highest court disagreed and overturned the conviction.

(Copyright 2006 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)


For those not in Maryland, as incredible as it seems, this is a victory for gun owners.

 

[Kharn]

I bet AG Curran is crying in his beer at this very moment.

Kharn

 

[Norton]

If it makes Curran sad, it makes me very happy.

Look for a bill next session to correct this "loophole". :banghead:

 

[MikeK]

Why is my a/c running full blast when hell has frozen over? Good news, but I think Norton called it.

 

[JasonMD85]

maybe I am just being niave or young and stupid, but am I the only one that sees this "loophole" as more of a help for criminals gaining access to a firearm in order to deal with a personal "problem" than giving law abiding citizens a CCW after background checks etc.?

Again, it might just be me, but I see this "loophole" bringing us more trouble than help...

 

[musher]

JasonMD85 it may come as a surprise, but in MOST of the country the question of whether you could lend (or even give) a bit of personal property to a friend would never arise, much less be a matter for a court of law.

 

[gc70]

Yes, JasonMD85, I think you are looking at this in the wrong light.

If someone "loans" a gun to a criminal, the "loan" should not be subject to legal sanctions, but any actual misdeeds by the criminal should be subject to penalties.

To turn the situation around, my son sometimes "borrows" one of my guns to take to the range. I do not transfer ownership of a gun to my son when he takes one to the range. Why should my son's short-term use of one of my guns be subject to government control and criminal penalties?

 

[Spot77]

There's been discussions and speculation that having a friend at the range and letting him or her try out your gun could be considered a "transfer"


This ruling will at least put my mind at ease that I wasn't breaking the law when attending THR shooting events and letting others try out my handguns.




dang it's cold in here.

 

[American By Blood]

JasonMD85-

Being an accomplice is being an accomplice. You're still culpable if you loan Leroy from aroun da way a gat ta cap sum foos wit. That hasn't changed.

What this ruling does is allow me to take my girlfriend's S&W to the range if I'm going without her. Or for me to store my buddy's shotgun in my safe while he's out of town.

It's a good ruling.

I must say, though, you've done an excellent job anticipating how the antis will frame this issue.

 

[K-Romulus]

GREAT news

Score one for the good guys . . . .

As an aside, the MD Ct of Appeals has been a fount of commen sense in the MD government, ruling against such rediculous "tough on crime" prosecutions such as:

1) peaceably carrying a folding pocket knife = "concealing an assault blade"
2) hiding your own shotgun in your own home is a violation of the MD "concealed weapons" law

I have read that whomever wins the MD Governor's election this fall gets to appoint up to THREE justices on the Md Ct of Appeals due to impending retirements.

 

[Autolycus]

Do any of you think that there is something more to the story? I suspect that it may only have been ruled that way since there was a police officer involved. I assume carrying a gun without a CCW is a big DONT in Maryland. I assume that it will not go well for the guy who got caught with the GLock in his car.

 

[Spot77]

I'd have to read the case again to be sure, but I don't think it had anything to do with him having the gun in the car( at least where this particular ruling is concerned.) The case dealt with the fact that somebody had somebody else's gun.

I assume carrying a gun without a CCW is a big DONT in Maryland.

I wouldn't do it, but the thugs in Baltimore certainly don't mind risking the 15 day jail time and $500 fine.

 

[monsternav]

This is news to me:

Marylanders can lend a gun to a friend without going through the seven-day waiting period and background check required by state law before guns can be transferred or sold to a new owner...

I assume they left out "regulated" somewhere?

 

[Norton]

The other thing to consider is that there was speculation prior to this ruling that even renting a firearm is considered a transfer. IOW, had this ruling gone the other way, the strictest interpretation of "transfer" would have pretty much put On Target and Continental out of the rental business.

You would have had to go in 1 week ahead of time, announce that you would want to rent a gun then submit to a NICS check (with the associated fee of course) and then come back after it had cleared.

For many of us that didn't know anyone with guns, these rentals were the only opportunity to try lots of different firearms when trying to decide on an initial purchase. How many potential new shooters could be eliminated by simply denying them access to being able to try someone else's guns?

But they're just trying to prevent the guns from getting into the hands of criminals, right? :banghead:

 

[ApexinM3]

I have read that whomever wins the MD Governor's election this fall gets to appoint up to THREE justices on the Md Ct of Appeals due to impending retirements.

If O'Malley wins, us Marylanders are up a creek without a paddle. He is the son-in-law of Joseph Curran, the Attorney General for MD. Any office held by O'Malley will be a puppet regime for Curran. Obligatory Gun Content: Both are decidedly ANTI gun it is pathetic.:banghead:

As for the seven day wait/NICS check to loan a weapon: someone mentioned before asking if this covers regulated firearms only or ALL firearms.

 

[RealGun]

The ruling came in an appeal filed by a D.C. police officer who had lent a handgun to a friend. The friend's guns had been confiscated by police because he had a Glock pistol in his car but did not have a permit to carry it.

This does not say he was in possession of a gun not registered in his name, so what is the actual offense being prosecuted? It seems to me that he is either now clear of only one charge, or that the story as stated is bogus.

 

[JerryM]

This is good news. I do not know if other states will consider it as precedent, but my daughter lives in another state. She and her husband have several guns. When I fly there is is easier, at least a little easier, to take a holster and use one of their guns that are like my own.
I have wondered if I did, and had to use it how it would be considered.

Jerry

 

[countertop]

This so called gun victory simply justifies once again all the reasons I have for only rarely venture across the Potomac into the land of the inept and corrupt.

Its a shame really, cause there are some nice parts of maryland. Ya'll just let Montgomery and Baltimore ruin the rest of a lovely state.

God I hate liberals