The state of Maryland isn’t quite up to the level of New York or California when it comes to gun control, but it ain’t for lack of trying.
Maryland has tons of gun control laws on the books, and none of them have made Baltimore any safer, but that won’t stop them from doing more.
Despite those failures, you see, they’re hoping to double down on the bad ideas.
The General Assembly is prioritizing gun control this year after the U.S. Supreme Court in June struck down gun permit restrictions similar to Maryland’s. The Gun Safety Act of 2023 is speeding through the legislative process with a second hearing scheduled for Feb. 7, and at least two other bills are pending.
The act, SB 0001, is expected to cause heated debate. Sen. Jeff Waldstreicher, D-Montgomery, and then Sen. Susan Lee, D-Montgomery, recently appointed Secretary of State, sponsored the bill.
The proposal would prohibit an individual from knowingly wearing, carrying, or transporting a firearm onto another person’s property without consent. According to the filed bill, it would also prohibit anyone from wearing, carrying, or transporting a firearm within 100 feet of certain places of public accommodation, specifically “sensitive” places, such as restaurants, lodging areas, stadiums, or retailers.
“The Bruen decision removes Maryland’s ‘good and substantial’ requirements to own and possess a handgun,” said Waldstreicher. “By eliminating that requirement, anyone can get a gun and bring it anywhere. That is unacceptable and creates a tremendous danger in our state…
You heard it, folks. Your rights are unacceptable to Maryland lawmakers.
The result here is that the proposal would render massive chunks of the state as “sensitive.” After all, 100 feet from a restaurant may include a good chunk of the parking lot. “Retailers” means literally any store. So if you can’t carry to restaurants, stadiums, “lodging areas” or retailers, there’s no point in carrying anywhere.
And that’s the point. That’s what they’re going for there, and that’s a big problem for anyone who values our rights.
You see, Bruen did say that guns could be barred for “sensitive places,” as Justice Clarence Thomas put it, but he also warned that New York couldn’t declare the entire island of Manhattan a sensitive place.
Well, that’s pretty much what Maryland is trying to do.
I don’t expect much from lawmakers in the state. This is one of those places where anti-gun Baltimore is home to a large chunk of the voters so you’re going to see this kind of foolishness. As a result, I fear that some version of this bill will get through the legislature and get signed into law.
Of course, if that happens, then lawsuits will follow. Based on what we’ve seen in New York and New Jersey, though, a stay will be issued and the law won’t be permitted to go into effect. Still, why risk it?
This shouldn’t happen. This idea that people should be forced to seek positive consent before carrying a gun anywhere is ridiculous. We don’t expect people to ask for permission to voice their own opinions, thus exercising their First Amendment rights, so why do so with our Second Amendment rights?
Then again, these are the people who view the Second Amendment as a second-class right but will deny it if you ask them.
Deeds matter more than words, and their deeds speak volumes.