BALTIMORE (AP) — 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.

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.

    • CommanderM2192@lemmy.world
      710·
      1 year ago

      We absolutely can stop this. Democrat leadership just doesn’t fucking want to, for the same reason Republican leadership doesn’t want to actually ban all abortion. It’s a wedge issue. Solving this issue means it’s harder for them to drum up voter support.

      I want to stop this, but anyone who thinks the solutions is laws like this doesn’t actually care. You WILL NOT stop gun violence with these kinds of laws. We need to tackle the reasons behind the violence and put in place some actual fucking security at places that are common targets. If someone can shoot up a school, they can also bomb it, gas it, whatever. But you don’t want to hear that, do you? You don’t actually give a fuck about innocent children dying. You just want to virtue signal on the internet so you can show your friends how you “totally OWNED this debate”.

      Grow up. Put some actual thought into how these issues can be solved instead of barfing out a thing you heard before.

      • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
        64·
        1 year ago

        we need to tackle the reasons behind the violence

        except for the reason being the prevelancy and availability of deadly firearms with no barriers to entry, that is a special reason that is forbidden to be discussed because everyone has a fantasy about being able to take on the US military in a one man coup.

        they can also bomb it or gas it

        and yet they don’t

        you don’t give a fuck about innocent children dying, do you?

        what the hell kind of statement is that? You should edit that comment out and apologize as it’s completely uncalled for.

        you just want to virtue signal on the internet

        yes, as the internet is a series of signals, both electromagnetic and orthographic all any of us can do is signal things on the internet. It’s not like I can physically do anything online, it being a virtual medium. How would you suggest I communicate without signaling anything, and how do you recommend behaving if not according to the virtues that I personally hold?

        you can show your friends

        I assure you I show none of my irl friends my comment history- do you?

        grow up… put some thought into these issues

        Says the guy who accused me of not caring about children dying?!?!