Should I wait to apply for CCW in Maryland?

[mgkdrgn]

I was -in- Maryland for better than 25 years, and no matter what I did or thought or voted for, the situation never got better, only worse. And it got more crowded, and more expensive. Then the ADIZ came and pretty much gutted general aviation, so I sold my plane while I could still get something for it and got the hell out.

I use to travel a lot for work, and often not to the best of places. Wife told a friend of mine that worried her sometimes, and his response to her was that I wasn't the "victim type". Too young, too big, to fast, and to aware of what was going on around me. I'm still too big, and hopefully aware, but young and fast are gone now.

Maryland tells me "well, that's just too bad son, you'll just have to cower in your house, we can't have you protecting yourself from criminals, you might hurt them." Oh, and here is your (massive) tax bill ... have a nice day!

So, sold the 1500 sq' TH in Columbia MD with no parking (which paid for my 2,000 sq foot single family with garage and in-ground pool here twice over), and moved to a state that recognizes my 2nd amendment rights. THEY get my tax $'s now. And with no ADIZ, I don't have to ask anybody permission to go fly. I have my CCW, and am working on an FFL.

Let the Anti's have NY, MD and California. Once enough of them get mugged maybe they'll finally get the message ... but I don't have to wait for them to do so.

But it is running away. Maryland may not be a great place 2A wise, but we've got a hell of a lot of good people fighting to keep it from getting worse. Leaving doesn't help us, it hurts us. Which, in case you didn't realize, hurts all of us. What gets passed here, and in other states where gun rights are on the ropes, gets proposed nationally.

And how long do you think escaping to a more friendly state will be a "solution"? As I said, the anti's don't just want Maryland. They want the entire US to be rid of guns. You can't run forever. At some point, you're going to have to man up and fight back. Might as well do it sooner than later.

Think it not as running away from the problem as it is "voting with your feet" and running towards the solution.




Well, if we all had that sort of attitude ("why even bother trying, it'll never change!") you might be right. Fortunately, there are quite a few of us who actually believe that we can do something about the way things are, and take action to make it happen. Maybe one day you'll see fit to lend a hand too.

 

[The Foo]

I know people who've gotten a MD permit with ease. As said before, it takes knowing the right reason to ask for one.

 

[mgkdrgn]

In other words ... they lied. (or at least stretched the truth)

I know people who've gotten a MD permit with ease. As said before, it takes knowing the right reason to ask for one.

 

[CoRoMo]

Let's all just pick up and run with our tails between our legs to somewhere that...

...allows law abiding citizens to protect themselves and their families.

...doesn't pick and choose which law abiding citizens are eligible to exercise their 2nd Amendment right.

...views gun owners as responsible.


No state is going to tell me when, where, and how I am allowed to protect myself and my family, and then not expect me to move to another state that allows me that basic right. That is more important than a futile effort to change the hearts and minds of libs with no common sense.

 

[CoRoMo]

I was -in- Maryland for better than 25 years, and no matter what I did or thought or voted for, the situation never got better, only worse. ...so I... got the hell out.

That's good advice for all RKBA believers living in CA/NY/MD/IL/NJ/MA/etc.

 

[wrxguyusa]

My past research into MD permits seemed that they are really for protecting commerce not people. Carrying money and high value goods etc. are the only reasons I could find.

I moved to VA.

 

[natecade1]

hmm well if I say I frequently escort extremely high value (we're talking in the millions of $$$) items around the state then maybe they'd give it to me. lol

 

[toivo]

I personally would be somewhat reluctant to apply knowing that the odds would be stacked against me because I am (and would be) required to disclose CCW application denials on every forthcoming CCW renewal (in other states).

I've heard that before, but nobody's ever been able to prove that that is a necessity when applying for permits elsewhere. If you could provide cites of such, I'd appreciate it for my own knowledge.

New York State's pistol permit application form asks if you've ever had a permit denied or revoked anywhere. I'm pretty sure they'd hold it against you--otherwise, why would they ask?

 

[kingpin008]

I'm pretty sure they'd hold it against you--otherwise, why would they ask?

Because they'd love to have any reason to deny you a permit?

My point is that a denial for a legal prohibition due to a criminal record (which is almost certainly what they're looking for) is quite different from a denial due to failure to meet an arbitrary and state-specific stipulation (ie - "good and substantial reason, as the MD law states)

Since a denial based on "good and substantial reason" is done on a purely judgement basis, and not a legal basis (no law was broken) I can't see how it would matter. Put simply, you're either legal to carry, or not. A denial that isn't due to a violation of a law does not preclude one from being legally allowed from owning a firearm, and since the conditions required for one to CCW are virtually the same as being able to buy/own a gun in the first place, it should stand to reason that CCW is not affected by a denial based on non-legal events.

That said - if anyone is able to provide actual proof of an incident where an individual who was otherwise completely legally eligible for a permit in a particular state was denied due to a previous denial in another state based upon the arbitrary and undefined language of that state's law, I'll gladly admit to being wrong.

 

[toivo]

My point is that a denial for a legal prohibition due to a criminal record (which is almost certainly what they're looking for) is quite different from a denial due to failure to meet an arbitrary and state-specific stipulation (ie - "good and substantial reason, as the MD law states)

Agreed. But any criminal record should already have been disclosed in the specific questions about criminal history and should show in the background check that they're supposed to do. Basically, that question just gives a dishonest applicant one more opportunity to lie. You wonder why they include it. Maybe a "yes" answer triggers a deeper level of background check or something.