SAF sues MD over CCW good and sufficient rule

Status
Not open for further replies.

chexmix

New member
While I agree with the lawsuit from the brief read i did, the post needs commentary, other wise cut and paste and will probably be closed.

I find I hard to believe that when people need guns the most to defend them selfs, or possibly hunt for food if the emergency last a a week or two, they can't acquire them. This just seems like backward logic to me.
 

ScottRiqui

New member
I don't think that particular case has anything to do with acquiring guns - it's dealing with carry permits, basically claiming that "may-issue" is unconstitutional because people shouldn't have to demonstrate a "need" to exercise a fundamental right.
 

swinokur

New member
If you mean here I hope it does generate discussion. If you mean cut and paste from the SAF web site, providing a link is sufficient in my opinion. It's a waste of bandwidth and disk space to cut and paste.The whole press release is there.

I hope I understood what you were saying.
 

swinokur

New member
I don't think that particular case has anything to do with acquiring guns - it's dealing with carry permits, basically claiming that "may-issue" is unconstitutional because people shouldn't have to demonstrate a "need" to exercise a fundamental right.

Bingo we have a winner.
 

Al Norris

Moderator Emeritus
I assume you read the link to what a cut-paste post is? Yet you invite me to close the thread, instead of you doing a little work, by editing your opening post....

So be it.

Closed as a cut-n-paste post.

Shame really, as this is a good 2A topic - Someone else want to show the newguy how it's done?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top