Senators also ultimately gave preliminary approval to Senate Bill 1, which seeks to restrict adults from wearing, carrying or transporting firearms in public or “sensitive” places.�Judicial Proceedings Committee Vice Chair Jeff Waldstreicher, a Montgomery County Democrat, drafted the bill also in response to the Supreme Court decision, which affected Maryland’s requirement that people show a good reason to get a license to wear a firearm out of sight.�During its initial hearing, the bill proved to be divisive among committee members — as well as controversial among some members of the public — for its restrictions.�As drafted, it would have prohibited people from wearing, carrying or transporting guns at places of public accommodation, restaurants, hotels, theaters, buses and other forms of transportation, recreation centers, government facilities, gas stations, stores, sidewalks, parking lots, offices, museums and amusement parks, among other locations.�The bill was amended in committee to narrow the places where a firearm may not be carried to certain “sensitive” places. Those include schools, camps or health care facilities, government and critical infrastructure facilities, public universities, polling places, any business that sells cannabis or alcohol for on-site consumption, stadiums, museums, performance venues and carnivals.�If passed and signed by the governor, the law wouldn’t apply to law enforcement officers, members of the armed forces who are on duty or traveling to and from duty, ROTC members participating in their programs, correctional officers, sheriffs or deputies. Off-duty police and retired law enforcement officials could carry guns if they have a valid wear and carry license. It wouldn’t apply on private property where an owner has authorized security guards to wear or carry guns.�The legislation received several amendments Waldsteicher classified as “friendly” on the floor. They include measures that mean someone wouldn’t be penalized for accidentally displaying concealed firearms if the wind shifted their clothing or their body moved, as long as the guns weren’t shown in a threatening manner. Another would make it clear that concealed firearms were allowed at polling places outside voting hours.�Republicans lobbed nine amendments at the bill that were rejected. One sought to clarify that an armed civilian responding to a clear and imminent threat, for purposes of protecting another person, would not violate the bill’s provisions.�Republican Sen. Johnny Mautz sponsored that amendment. He said that in his hometown of St. Michaels, in Talbot County, people may need to come to each other’s aid.�“If something goes down in our town and an officer can respond in five minutes, that’s greased lightening,” Mautz said. On the other hand, if something happens and an officer can’t get there, “it’s over,” he said.�Waldstreicher asked senators to reject the amendment because it “will accidentally, but seriously, threaten public safety.” He also said “a person has a right to go to the defense of another person” under Maryland’s current law.�The amendment failed 19-27, and the bill ultimately received preliminary approval.�The Senate took up an another measure Thursday poised to address another 2022 Supreme Court decision, one that overturned 50 years of
Responses