The rulings in Maryland and Oregon come amid a shifting legal landscape in the wake of a Supreme Court decision that has imposed new limits on gun regulation.

In the wake of a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision last year that significantly limits what the government can do to restrict guns, states led by Democrats have scrambled to circumvent or test the limits of the ruling. A few have approved new gun restrictions. Oregon even passed a ballot initiative to ban high-capacity ammunition magazines.

But this week, supporters of the new gun measures suffered a pair of setbacks, underscoring the rippling effect of the court’s decision.

On Tuesday, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, Va., ruled that a 10-year-old Maryland law related to licensing requirements for handguns was unconstitutional.

  • PugJesus@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    Under the Maryland law, an applicant for a handgun license must meet four requirements. They must be at least 21 years old, a resident of the state, complete a gun safety course and undergo a background check to ensure they are not barred under federal or state law from owning a firearm.

    An applicant must then fill out an application, pay a processing fee, and wait up to 30 days for a state official to issue a license.

    The appeals court ruled that requiring applicants to wait up to 30 days for a handgun permit violated the constitutional rights of citizens, and “the law’s waiting period could well be the critical time in which the applicant expects to face danger.”

    I fucking hate these cretins in our judiciary.

    • Whoresradish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I am more offended by them saying you have to be 21 years old. If you are old enough to be drafted for the military then you should be old enough to have a firearm. Same with the right to vote.

      • RGB3x3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        You should have to be older to be drafted (or get rid of the draft entirely, which is my opinion).

        Having the right to vote I don’t think should confer you automatic rights to own a firearm. Voting is a much more powerful right in the first place.

        Now, if you pay taxes on wages at all, you should be given the right to vote, such as working 16 year olds.

    • interceder270@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      “Sorry bro, you’re going to have to wait for the first amendment to kick in.”

      “Yeah, we’re gonna have to quarter soldiers here. Sorry, you don’t get 3rd amendment protections for another month.”

    • HessiaNerd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Depleted Uranium ammo was not a thing until the 40’s. Not long enough to have a historical basis for banning civilians from owning them.

    • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Me too. They just gloss over three fourths of the amendment.

      Well regulated.

      Milita.

      To protect the security of the state.

      These words mean nothing to conservatives, they read them right out of the Constitution and then claim they are adhering to strictly to the text.

    • Reddit_Is_Trash@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why do you think law abiding citizens should be subjected to waiting periods to exercise their constitutional rights?

      • idiomaddict@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because it makes the world safer. Same reason you need a fence around a pool, even though the pursuit of happiness is protected by the constitution (for me, happiness is unbridled access to a pool).

      • PugJesus@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        The constitutional right to acquire arms immediately and without precondition, I see. Just like the constitutional right to say anything, at any time, without any consequences.

        • stevestevesteve@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          This doesn’t remove all background checks, so “immediately and without precondition” is facetious.

          I agree with not selling weapons to known maniacs, but I also believe that if the govt knows someone’s dangerous enough that they shouldn’t own a gun for self defense, they already should have been removed from the general population and arrested/imprisoned etc, as they are still very dangerous to the general population without said firearm.

      • Fades@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You can wait, bud. In OR it’s already a ~2 week wait to pick one up from an FFL, it didn’t affect me in the slightest. It’s clear we need more in-depth preprocessing before granting weapon ownership. It’s a deadly item, just like a car is. You gotta register and have a license and all this shit before you can hit the road. Whats the diff?

        Also, you actually have to wait to exercise lots of constitutional rights. What you gonna advocate for voting whenever the fuck you want? It’s our constitutional right after all!

        The issue you should have with any of this is with licensing it likely puts a financial barrier to that same constitutional right.

        • karakoram@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The car argument is not good. Anyone can buy and operate a car immediately on private property without any interference from government in the US.

      • Annoyed_🦀 @monyet.cc
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Same way as law abiding citizens need to wait 21 years, goes through firearm training, and gone through background check to exercise their constitutional rights. If 30 days is such a long time to wait and considered unconstitutional, why not lower the age requirement to 12 years old? Why need firearm training? Why need background check?

      • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        This a stupid argument. The right isn’t to just have guns.

        It’s to have guns whilst being a member of a militia that trains regularly and only for the purpose of protecting state security.

        That’s literally what the text says.

        All that extra shit you are adding to the right is stuff made up by charlatans. And I guess it worked, because they sure fooled you.

        • Reddit_Is_Trash@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Have you read the constitution? It literally does not say it’s only for the purpose of protecting the state

          The problem with the world today is that we have illiterates like you voting.

          • I’m an attorney so I think you’re basically illiterate in comparison. Why don’t you go read it again, you absolute donkey. Tell us all why a militia is even necessary in the eyes of the framers. The text on this could not be more clear.

            Second Amendment True Purpose Revealed: True Secret the Framers Don't Want You to Know

            “the security of a free state”

    • guacupado@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      and “the law’s waiting period could well be the critical time in which the applicant expects to face danger.”

      Sometimes that danger is them getting caught by police before they’re able to execute.