My issue with the Maryland Court of Appeals holdings is they overlooked a lot of dicta that strongly supports a right to lawfully use a firearm for self defense outside the home. The reasoning was just bad. You could have easily reached the same result without ignoring larges swaths of Heller and McDonald; but the Court of Appeals seems to have made a conscious decision to set the bar as low as possible.
Not that I am complaining, ultimately restrictive overreaching supported by poor logic helps us more than it hurts us; but I am still surprised when I see it.
Quote:
|
Bartholomew, please refresh our memories: What do you see as the best candidate among the various pending cases, that might extend the Heller and MacDonald holdings beyond home possession?
|
I think Palmer vs. DC and the various California cases are probably going to be the cases clarifying the right beyond home possession, though it seems that Alan Gura and SAF are challenging the Maryland "good cause" requirement for CCW in Woolard v. Sheridan.
I don't think you'll see a single case that does it as much as a series of small victories in many different cases that builds up a solid foundation over all.