A federal appeals court has struck down a Maryland law requiring people to obtain a special license before purchasing a handgun. Judges on the 4th U.S.

A federal appeals court on Tuesday struck down Maryland’s handgun licensing law, finding that its requirements, which include submitting fingerprints for a background check and taking a four-hour firearms safety course, are unconstitutionally restrictive.

In a 2-1 ruling, judges on the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond said they considered the case in light of a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year that “effected a sea change in Second Amendment law.”

The underlying lawsuit was filed in 2016 as a challenge to a Maryland law requiring people to obtain a special license before purchasing a handgun. The law, which was passed in 2013 in the aftermath of the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, laid out a series of necessary steps for would-be gun purchasers: completing four hours of safety training that includes firing one live round, submitting fingerprints and passing a background check, being 21 and residing in Maryland.

Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, a Democrat, said he was disappointed in the circuit court’s ruling and will “continue to fight for this law.” He said his administration is reviewing the ruling and considering its options.

  • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
    1·
    1 年前

    Uh huh. Let us know when you’ve finished fixing all that and you can have your guns back.

    I already have my guns.

    Since you’re just going to “give them back” anyway, how about we go ahead and shift our focus over to the important issues? Issues affecting hundreds of times as many people, and thus hundreds of times more important.

    I think we need to take another crack at universal healthcare. I think we should put up a fight to lower the age of medicare from 65 to 60. Insurers aren’t going to fight so hard against it, because 60-65 is the most expensive cohort for them to insure. They stand to greatly improve their short-term profitability. And if it eventually kills the health insurance industry when we repeat it down to 55, 50, 45, so what? All the major players will have cashed out and moved on to the next big thing.

    • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
      1·
      1 年前

      Got it. We need to sweep domestic terrorism under the rug as “not important” and focus on “lets spend a decade giving healthcare to boomers”

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        1·
        1 年前

        Basically correct, except you’re off by one on the generations. Most boomers are already on medicare now; all of them will be in 10 years whether we lower the age or not.

        If we lower the age over that 10-year period, all millennials and most of Gen Z will be eligible for Medicare by the end, and the Alphas will be the last generation that didn’t have access to universal coverage by the time they reached adulthood. Better access to healthcare and lower poverty rates will have saved far more lives than any gun ban could have hoped for. Win/win/win for everyone except hoplophobes, Republicans, and medical insurance executives. But all three can go fuck themselves with rusty bayonets.

        • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
          1·
          1 年前

          Only of course its not win/win/win because even if that was the solution to gun violence, thousands of people will die before you accomplish it and thousands more will die as you say “damn that didn’t work after all, better move on to some other plan while staunchly opposing gun control”.

          It doesn’t matter what gun violence is a symptom of, we always control symptoms as we look for a cure.

          This is the country you have now and the problem you have now. I don’t give a fuck if it wasn’t a problem 50 years ago and you don’t think it will be a problem 50 years from now.