Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A federal appeals court on Friday upheld Maryland’s handgun licensing requirements, rejecting an argument from gun-rights activists that the law violated the Second Amendment by making it too ...
The law also placed a 10-round limit on gun magazines. The law was upheld by a majority of federal Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals judges on Aug. 6 . Gun rights groups petitioned for a Supreme ...
Oct. 1 will see new laws regulating guns, where to carry them and how to store them as Maryland continues to grapple with the U.S. Supreme Court decision that upended the state’s former rules.
The Maryland Attorney General's office appealed the ruling. [30] On March 21, 2013, a three judge panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals (U.S. Federal) unanimously overturned the District Court ruling, holding that the "good & substantial cause" requirements imposed by Maryland law are permissible without violating the 2nd Amendment. [31]
A law requiring background checks for all gun-show sales was favored by 92 percent of Americans and a law banning the sale and possession of high-capacity magazines (defined by the poll as those capable of holding more than 10 rounds) was supported by 62 percent of Americans. A record-high 74 percent opposed a ban on handguns and 51 percent ...
Maryland also continues to follow common law principles on the issue of when one may use deadly force in self-defense. In the case of State v.Faulkner, 301 Md. 482, 485, 483 A.2d 759, 761 (1984), the Court of Appeals of Maryland summarized those principles, and stated that a homicide, other than felony murder, is justified on the ground of self-defense if the following criteria are satisfied:
The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear a challenge to a gun law in Maryland that bans assault-style weapons such as the AR-15 semiautomatic rifle, which has been used in various high-profile ...
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Maryland condemned the shooting, releasing a statement saying that the police "decided that they needed to use deadly force to execute that warrant, and needed to expose themselves to the known risk of deadly force being used on them, knowing that a five year old child might be in the line of fire ...