Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned New York’s restrictive gun laws in the New York State Rifle And Pistol Association v. Bruen case. The decision overturned the state’s “proper cause” requirement for issuing a gun license.
The ripple effect of this decision led to Maryland’s “good and substantial” requirement for a concealed carry permit to be struck down. “Maryland law currently provides that a permit to wear, carry, or transport a handgun shall be issued only to a person who ‘has good and substantial reason’ to do so, ‘such as a finding that the permit is necessary as a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger,’” Patrick B. Hughes Chief Counsel, Opinions & Advice with the Maryland Attorney General’s Office, wrote to the Maryland State Police.
Hughes wrote that in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling, Maryland’s “good and substantial reason” was “now clearly unconstitutional.” This is something that the Maryland Court of Special Appeals has reaffirmed.
“Thus, the Department is not required to continue enforcing—and, in fact, may not continue to enforce—the “good and substantial reason” requirement in processing public-carry permit applications,” Hughes wrote.
Following that decision, applications for concealed-carry permits in Maryland increased seven-fold. Applications jumped from 5,283 to 79,983 from June to December, according to Herald-Mail Media. The final total for 2022 was 85,266 applications compared to 12,189 applications received in 2021 and 11,512 received in 2020.
The Herald-Mail also noted, “Of the 85,266 applications, less than 2,000 were denied.”
Having seen spikes in violence and crime across the board, in large part, because of Democrat policies, Americans want to protect themselves more than ever. At the same time, they don’t want to broadcast that they are armed, which might make them targets or make other people around them feel unsafe.
The U.S. Constitution, the governing document of this country, specifically gives citizens the right to bear arms, not only to protect themselves, but, as our Founding Fathers knew, in order to have an armed citizenry, which is “necessary to the security of a free State.”
Hopefully, this is just the one of the first among many Democrat policies that will fall. As more citizens realize that these Democrat-sponsored laws with wonderful-sounding names do the opposite of what they promise, they will begin to look for new ways to achieve what the Democrats only pay lip service to… security, freedom, equality, and opportunity.
If Democrat politicians would only back up the titles of their laws with actions consistent with their declared desires, they would be successful. The titles of their policies show they know what people want, but their actions show they themselves want something different.
Even in the wake of this defeat, politicians continue to look for ways around the decision in order to achieve something citizens don’t want and the law forbids.
Because of that, we need to continue to challenge their policies.
