Item number 68 on the docket. The supplemental response brief by the MD AG is in: http://www.archive.org/download/gov....80772.68.0.pdf
Interesting phrase from the supplemental brief by MD on their Motion To Stay:
The equities to be balanced, therefore, are the plaintiffs’ desire to wear and carry, in public, a particular type of firearm—which happens to be the type of firearm most frequently used in criminal activity.
One problem that MD may find out, is that the above completely gives lie to the idea that "assault weapons" are a danger to the public, since they are very rarely used by the criminal element.
The second (and most telling) problem is that it completely ignores what the Supreme Court determined, in Heller
As the quotations earlier in this opinion demonstrate, the inherent right of self-defense has been central to the Second Amendment right. The handgun ban amounts to a prohibition of an entire class of “arms” that is overwhelm*ingly chosen by American society for that lawful purpose.
Regardless of what criminal use handguns are put to, it is the firearm chosen by American society for self defense.
Here's an interesting tidbit. In section III, the MD AG uses a bunch of really cherry picked stats in how permit holders are not so law-abiding. But he starts it off with:
The vast majority of these killings were committed by individuals who obtained a concealed carry permit in a “shall issue” state, including the recent killing of Trayvon Martin by Florida concealed permit holder George Zimmerman.
So AG Gansler uses name recognition to imply permit holders are murderers.
I call this wholly unprofessional, if not unethical. Gansler can have no information as to the guilt or innocence of anyone whose trial has yet to be started.
The entire "supplemental brief" is nothing more than a rehash of the merits arguments that Judge Legg has already dismissed. Alan Gura will have fun with this, in his opposition in reply, May 9th.