Maryland: Lawyers Say Gun Ruling Likely to Withstand Appeal

Published on March 9, 2012
Duration: 8:16

Professor Michael Krauss explains a federal court ruling in Maryland that struck down the 'good and substantial reason' requirement for obtaining a permit to carry a firearm. The ruling, stemming from a case where a permit was not renewed for the same reason it was initially granted, asserts that a constitutional right, like the Second Amendment right to bear arms for self-defense, does not require a 'good and substantial reason' beyond the right itself. The state's appeal is expected to argue that the Second Amendment right only applies within the home, a claim Krauss refutes with a logical syllogism based on the right to self-defense.

Quick Summary

A federal court in Maryland ruled that the state's 'good and substantial reason' requirement for carrying a firearm outside the home is unconstitutional. The court asserted that the right to exercise a constitutional right, such as the Second Amendment right to bear arms for self-defense, is sufficient justification.

Chapters

  1. 00:00Introduction and Maryland Gun Case
  2. 00:20The Federal Court Decision
  3. 00:37Maryland's Restrictive Gun Laws
  4. 00:57The 'Good and Substantial Reason' Criterion
  5. 01:23Plaintiff's Standing to Sue
  6. 01:45US District Court's Ruling
  7. 02:19Summary Judgment and Pure Question of Law
  8. 02:38Likely Arguments for State Appeal
  9. 02:52Heller and McDonald Interpretations
  10. 03:13State's Claim: Right Only Inside Home
  11. 03:42Analyzing the State's Claim
  12. 03:47The Second Amendment Text
  13. 04:03Heller: Right Based on Self-Defense
  14. 04:36Self-Defense Applies Inside and Outside Home
  15. 04:59Logical Syllogism for Second Amendment Application
  16. 05:23Hope for Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals
  17. 05:29Current Law in Maryland
  18. 05:35Permit Applications Post-Ward Case
  19. 05:53Heller on 'Shall Issue' vs. 'May Issue'
  20. 06:22'May Issue' Not Per Se Unconstitutional
  21. 06:30The Unconstitutionality of 'Good and Substantial Grounds'
  22. 06:44Discretionary Application to Officials vs. Citizens
  23. 07:26Law Not Applied Equally
  24. 07:30Appeal and District Court Decision Impact
  25. 07:37Current State of the Law Opinion
  26. 07:51Ignoring the 'Good and Substantial Reasons' Question
  27. 08:03Conclusion and Appreciation

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the main ruling in the Maryland gun case discussed?

A federal court ruled that Maryland's requirement for a 'good and substantial reason' to carry a firearm outside the home is unconstitutional. The court stated that the right to exercise a constitutional right, like the Second Amendment right to bear arms, is sufficient justification.

What is the state of Maryland expected to argue in their appeal?

Maryland is expected to argue that the Second Amendment right to bear arms, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Heller and McDonald, only applies within the home, not outside.

Why is the 'good and substantial reason' requirement considered unconstitutional?

The 'good and substantial reason' requirement is considered unconstitutional because it vests excessive and unchecked discretion in law enforcement officials, leading to arbitrary and unequal application of the law.

Does the Second Amendment right to carry a firearm apply inside and outside the home?

Based on the right to self-defense, which is the foundation of the Second Amendment, the right to self-defense applies both inside and outside the home. Therefore, the Second Amendment right to bear arms for self-defense logically extends to both locations.

Related News

All News →

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from NRA

View all →