My contribution:
I sent this email to my (Maryland) state representatives: I found an interesting editorial about the Wakefield Massacre that occurred on the 26th of December in the Boston Herald, January 12th edition, i thought you should read it:
A Mr. David Bergquist writes: "Louis "Sandy" Javelle held both a Federal firearms license, and a permit to carry a handgun in New Hampshire. Ironically, the gun laws in Massachusetts prevented him from carrying a concealed handgun. But these same laws did not prevent Michael McDermott from obtaining illegal firearms. When the rampage started, Sandy told co-workers to lock the door behind him and barricade it. He then confronted McDermott and became the third victim. If Sandy had been permitted to carry a pistol, he could have stopped McDermott. That meant that five other people could have survived this tragedy, but Sandy did not have that option." (A Federal Firearms license is the permit needed to deal in firearms)
Concealed carry is currently done on a "Shall Issue" basis in over 30 states, but in Maryland, it is a rather strange situation. "Shall Issue" means that if the police cannot find anything to disqualify a person, they must be issued a permit within a set time period (90 days is the norm). "May Issue" is when the police can arbitrarily deny a person the concealed carry permit, commonly without even an explanation. Maryland has a combination of both, the law states:
"A permit to carry a handgun shall be issued within a reasonable time by the Superintendent of the Maryland State Police, upon application under oath therefore, to any person whom he finds:" (Article 27, Section 36E(a), Annotated Code of Maryland (Handgun Laws), available online at
http://www.inform.umd.edu/UMS+State/MD_Resources/MDSP/art27.txt )
One of the requirements to acquire a permit is as follows:
"6. Has, based on the results of investigation, good and substantial reason to wear, carry, or transport a handgun, provided however, that the phrase "good and substantial reason" as used herein shall be deemed to include a finding that such permit is necessary as a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger." (Article 27, Section 36E(a))
Also noted in the law:
"*Note: Phrase, "good and substantial reason", as used in subsection (a)(6) means something more than personal anxiety over having one's name connected publicly with anti-drug and anti-crime activities; it means something more than the concern the individual may have because he has been told by another that she heard some unidentified men threatening to harm the applicant. Snowden v. Handgun Permit Review Board, 45 Md. App. 464, 413 A.2d 295 (1980)."
This leaves the system open to abuse, where the police can use the system to reward their political allies, but ignore the rest of the population and denies them the ability to defend themselves. Maryland's permits are seen as almost impossible to get, the applicant usually has to carry large amounts of cash, being politically connected does not hurt, in order to get a permit and to be politically connected, if they even get one. The question I ask is: How much is a person's life worth? Is a child worth more then a business's profits for a week? A month? A year? Any parent that regularly transports a child should be able to get a concealed carry license. The people killed during the Wakefield massacre had no previous clues as to the coming danger; thus, under Maryland law they would have been denied a concealed weapons permit, when one person with a concealed weapon could have changed the course of the massacre.
Another section of the code reads:
"(d) Limitations in permit. --The Superintendent may, in any permit issued under this section, limit the geographic area, circumstances, or times during the day, week, month, or year in or during which the permit is effective. The Superintendent may reduce the cost of the permit accordingly, if the permit is granted for one day only and at one place only." (Article 27, Section 36E(d))
This section of the code is rather confusing. If a person is qualified to carry a handgun on their person, why should they be limited to certain circumstances? They should be allowed to carry it at any time they feel necessary. Criminals could research when a licensed person is able to carry a concealed weapon and then attack during one of the prohibited periods, negating the permit and guaranteeing that the licensed person does not have a weapon. Criminals do not obey the laws, they openly violate them, and while people that have concealed weapon permits are some of the most upstanding and law-abiding members of society. Thus, licensed persons should be able to carry a handgun at any time, baring extenuating circumstances such as in bars and courthouses (Both circumstances are already addressed in Maryland law).
It is unfortunate that our state remains an anti-self defense zone, where a person cannot defend him or herself, or his or her family with the most efficient implement available to them.
How high would crime rates be if every rapist were shown the muzzle of a .38 Special by his intended victim? In closing, I ask you to please work to strike Article 27, Section 36E(A) 6. and Article 27, Section 36E(d) from the Annotated Code of Maryland. These portions of the code hamper citizens from defending themselves against criminals and leave us at the mercy of the worst members of the human race.
Thank you,
My Name
(The bold is shown as i had it in the letter)
