| Fugitive Recovery Network (FRN) http://fugitiverecovery.com/forum/ | |
| Marylanders Its ok to lend your handgun to someone Now http://fugitiverecovery.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=1956 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | chris1760 [ Mon 07 Aug 2006 20:46 ] |
| Post subject: | Marylanders Its ok to lend your handgun to someone Now |
ANNAPOLIS, Md. -- Marylanders can lend a gun to a friend without going through the seven-day waiting period and background check required by state law before guns can be transferred or sold to a new owner, the Court of Appeals ruled Thursday. The state's highest court, in a 4-3 decision, said lending a gun to another person does not constitute "transfer" of a weapon and therefore is not covered by the gun control law dealing with the waiting period and police background checks of potential buyers. Do You Agree? The ruling came in an appeal filed by Todd Lin Chow, a District of Columbia police officer, who had lent a 9 mm, semiautomatic handgun to a friend. The friend's guns had been confiscated by police because he had a Glock pistol in his car but did not have a permit to carry it. Chow was convicted Dec. 1, 2003 of illegally transferring a regulated firearm and was fined $200. The Court of Special Appeals had upheld the conviction, but the majority of the state's highest court disagreed and overturned the conviction. "We find that the temporary gratuitous exchange or loan of a regulated handgun between two adult individuals, who are otherwise permitted to own and obtain a regulated handgun, does not constitute an illegal 'transfer' of a firearm" in violation of state law, the majority opinion said. The word "transfer" in the law "can only refer to a permanent exchange of title or possession and does not include gratuitous temporary exchanges or loans," the ruling by Judge Dale Cathell said. The minority ruling by Judge Alan Wilner said loan of a weapon should constitute transfer when "possession and control of the firearm is relinquished for anything more than a momentary period." Wilner noted that the 1996 law was intended to close a loophole that allowed private gun sales to escape the seven-day waiting period and background check required when weapons are sold by licensed dealers. By its ruling, the majority of the court seemed to say that dealers and non-dealers could evade the waiting period by transferring possession of a weapon "through the fiction of a loan," Wilner wrote. "If so, the court will have absolutely eviscerated the law, at least with respect to the secondary transfers ... ," the minority opinion said. Christopher Meyerson Attorney Services Of Maryland 11620 Reisterstown Road #420 Reisterstown Maryland 21136 Office 443-522-9398 Fax 443-522-9244 |
|
| Author: | thebishopp [ Tue 08 Aug 2006 00:21 ] |
| Post subject: | |
Personally I think there are too damn many gun laws to begin with... Especially since the main people who get screwed are not the criminals to begin with. With current US Supreme Court rulings that the police do NOT have a constitutional duty to protect, I think there needs to be a revamping of the current gun laws. In fact I think it should be on a federal level since the 2nd amendment of the US Constitution guarantees our rights and supercedes all state laws. Now I do believe that convicted criminals lose some of their rights under the constitution (that's called punishment for not respecting the constitutional rights of others). Preventing certain convicted criminals from owning and bearing firearms is a good thing. No such restrictions should be on law abiding citizens (there is a big difference between owning a firearm -ie; it's in the house- and bearing a firearm - ie; ccw). Being a former cop I have to say what they charged that DC officer with was chickenshit though we don't know the entire details on why he lent him a firearm. As far as that last line of the article: "By its ruling, the majority of the court seemed to say that dealers and non-dealers could evade the waiting period by transferring possession of a weapon "through the fiction of a loan," Wilner wrote. " That is ludicris (not the rapper). A simple addendum to the the current MD law that says something like: any attempts to circumvent this statute by and through the ficttion of a loan shall constitute an actual violation and be punishable as such. simple. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ | |