From the Harford County Sheriff’s Office:
On January 18, at approximately 8:15 p.m., deputies responded to Bristol Forest Drive in Belcamp for the report of shots fired. Upon arrival, deputies discovered evidence of a shooting, but no victims or suspects. Less than an hour later, at approximately 9:02 p.m., deputies were dispatched to the 4900 block of Bristle Cone Circle in Aberdeen for a shots fired call. Upon arrival, deputies were informed an individual at that location was the intended victim in the previous shots fired call, and was uninjured.
Preliminary investigation indicates the victim was involved in a scheme earlier in the evening to steal from a known marijuana dealer, and later decided to return the stolen CDS to the drug dealer. During the second transaction, a second individual with the marijuana dealer allegedly opened fired at the victim and two additional individuals with her in the vehicle. No injuries were reported as a result of the shooting.
Through investigation, deputies identified Antone Green, 20, of Edgewood, as a suspect. Detectives with the Criminal Investigations Division arrested Green on January 19 and charged him with attempted first degree murder, first degree assault, and other related charges. As the investigation progressed, detectives identified the second suspect in the vehicle with Green as Charles Ashby, 21, of Towson. Detectives arrested Ashby on January 22 and he was charged accordingly.
Both are being held at the Harford County Detention Center without bond.
Thank you Dagger for getting the location right, the Bel Air patch seemed to think that address was in Edgewood. I’m sure it was on purpose though.
You have a criminal discharging a firearm in multiple areas of the county and gun rights people want more people armed?
When a pro gun person gets in a gun battle to “save the day” how will our law enforcement know who is who? I fear for the poor decision making of gun owners who could negligently shoot innocent people in this situation.
*If* a legal gun owner needs to draw to defend themselves or someone else, then it’s going to be because the police: are. not. there. at. all.
Very simple. You’ll get it eventually.
As I understand it from reading opinions from the Maryland gun hobbyist message board, very few people have unrestricted carry permits so the likelyhood of a “legal” gun owner
(Exception; if they are a Police Officer) unholstering a handgun in public is probably not going to happen.
We need to keep it that way, we shouldn’t have people out there with carry permits with their guns on their person unless they are Police Officers or Armed Security guards.
“history shows that the police acting on their own cannot be trusted” – McDonald v. United States, 335 U.S. 451 (1948)
What makes you think that Police Officers or Armed Security guards are the only ones whom should carry a gun? I do believe you have put way too much confidence in code enforcement officers and I would like to remind you that most armed security guards are forbidden from even drawing their weapons. If you don’t believe me, go ask the security guard at your local bank and see what he says…..
After this incident, I’m guessing Green and Ashby will lose their carry permits, so there will be even fewer out there.
Here is yet another ill informed person.
You Sir are a moron. Your logic could not be anymore flawed if you tried.
Why would you call me a moron?
Clearly hundreds of thousands of residents in Maryland and their state representatives have the same logic considering we have some of the best gun control in the nation.
I’m going to have to step in here and answer this question. Just because you and hundreds of thousands of residents in Maryland have the same logic, it doesn’t mean that you are correct or legal. There is only ONE law of this nation and that is the US Constitution. There is additional law in this State and that is the Maryland Constitution. The codified statutes are NOT law. They are the PRIMA FACIA evidence of law, but must face Constitutional scrutiny when jurisdiction is challenged and virtually every codified statute can be stricken down due to the rights it attempts to nullify. NO act of Legislature can abrogate or diminish the Constitutional protections of both Constitutions. When a Legislature passes an unconstitutional statute, that Legislature has tested or warred against the covenants. This is treason under Article 3 Section 3. The malfeasance of law enforcement and the Judicial system NOT enforcing Constitutional law and tricking the public into accepting unconstitutional statutes is the real problem and is treason. The right of the people shall NOT be denied. ALL members of government are public servants and shall bend to the will of the people whom are protected in right and liberty. If the government does NOT comply to the constraints of the Constitution, that same government is treasonous and should be abolished. The actual gun law is the 2nd Amendment and is very clear. The right of the people shall NOT be denied. ALL arguments of gun control can be answered by one question. What is the purpose of the 2nd Amendment? The true purpose is to prevent tyranny. If government actors are armed with specific types of weapons, meant to harm and control the people it is supposed to serve, then it makes sense that WE THE PEOPLE should be allowed to own the same. How can you prevent tyranny when the treasonous government is better armed? How can WE THE PEOPLE not become subjects of the government? WE THE PEOPLE are NOT meant to be subjects. WE THE PEOPLE are the United States. not them the government or you the Democratic party. Just because you don’t like something doesn’t mean that everyone must give up their God given rights to appease you and your MOB. This is the bottom line and is a perfect example of why ALL gun control is illegal. I know a lot of you don’t like this argument, but it is the truth. You all say if you don’t like our law then leave. I say you have violated the REAL law and you should be executed under Article 3 Section 3. Which of us is correct? I will leave you with this, for every law you make you manufacture crime because before you made a law it was NOT against the law. The government is NOT supposed to manufacture crime and our government has been infiltrated by foreign nations and religions to make us all believe we are criminals. This is the Catholic way and you are ALL being swayed to believe this on behalf of the HOLY SEE. Remember, the HOLY SEE wants you all to think you are sinners and must repent. However, that same HOLY SEE has allowed rape, child molestation and forgiveness of MASS MURDERERS. Maryland is a Catholic State and it’s original charter was of Catholic fortification. We fought a revolution to bring WE THE PEOPLE freedom of religion and that means we are NOT subject to sumptuary law even when the MOB says we should be.
By the way, GUN CONTROL is sumptuary law when you realize why Protestant Christians were granted the right to bear arms in the first place. Look it up for yourself under “origin of the right to bear arms”. It was so Protestant Christians could protect themselves from CATHOLICS. This is no joke.
Best Gun control in country? If that’s the case how do you explain the City of Baltimore? You like to choose convenient facts that simply are not true. You and your Delegates have done nothing, but infringe on the law abiding citizens right to bear arms. Yes you are a moron.
If you want to talk about flawed logic, maybe you should start with your own fellow gun enthusiast.
Remind me how many gun bans have been overturned and ruled unconstitutional?
Flawed logic, heh. You folks cant even come up with one good reason why the AR15 should not be banned.
DC vs. Heller
McDonald vs. City of Chicago
Guy Montag Doe v. San Francisco Housing Authority.
Nordyke v. King
State of Washington v. Sieyes
Ezell v. Chicago
Moore v. Madigan
Here are a few infringements regarding gun bans and related efforts to disarm and erode the Bill of Rights. In the end the Constitution won, sorry for that news. Perhaps you can get a second bite at the apple and destroy the document later.
It should not be banned any sooner than the fully automatic steak knives I saw for sale in the store the other day. And the semiautomatic baseball bats in the other. And funny, in a morbid sort of way… after the Boston bombing I saw no calls to limit or infringe on the purchase of pressure cookers?!? Why not? Why not the nails inside it? Why should these weapons not be banned along side the AR15… I am curious… do you consider the AR15 a ‘military grade’ firearm?
Now, I provided a few cases as you asked… and provided a logical reason not to ban the AR15. Now, please provide me the evidence based argument that disarming people makes a jurisdiction safer. You ignored this request twice in the other article in two different parts of the discussion. Please do not run from it now. Please provide it. Begin with how much safer Chicago, Baltimore and a city of your choosing is safer than a surrounding location lacking the strict controls you so earnestly desire. I’ll still be waiting.
I don’t personally believe the AR-15 is “military grade.”
It is one long arm that state legislatures around the country decided that should not be in the possession of firearm hobbyist.
I believe a large interest in banning that specific weapon along with many more long arms that fit the criteria of state defined “assault weapons” is because a lot of recent mass shootings these long arms were acquired lawfully by person’s who were not prohibited of firearm ownership prior to their heinous crimes.
Why do you keep going on and on about Baltimore City?
Thee AR-15 is probably the least recovered firearm in crimes where weapons are found by Police.
Again, nothing in Maryland as far Gun Control has been overturned.
I look forward to seeing more gun control legislation..
What?
NHD,
You wrote: “I believe a large interest in banning that specific weapon along with many more long arms that fit the criteria of state defined “assault weapons” is because a lot of recent mass shootings these long arms were acquired lawfully by person’s who were not prohibited of firearm ownership prior to their heinous crimes.”
Let us look closer at this statement.
Part 1: You said: “because a lot of recent mass shootings these long arms”
You are free to look at Mother Jones for verification… The AR 15 was in 13 mass shootings from 1982 to 2018. I would argue 1 would be too many. However, the 13 are taken from a sample of 155 incidents (1984-2018). Statistically, it ranks among the lowest used firearms in such crimes. This is a fact.
Part 2: You said: “were acquired lawfully by person’s who were not prohibited of firearm ownership prior to their heinous crimes”
I feel confident that drunk drivers – on their first offense – had largely purchased their vehicle and alcohol legally. When they used these items illegally, despite knowing better, education, licensing, etc., still did their heinous crime.
And statistically speaking…
Mass Shootings
2017: 112 killed, 531 wounded; according to the definition used by Time magazine citing Mother Jones as the source.
Drunk Driving
2017: 10,874 deaths, NHTSA
Again, all this loss of life is heinous. Yet, if YOU buy alcohol and own a vehicle… you are far more likely to claim a life drunk driving than commit a mass shooting.
Listen, the facts just cannot support anything you claim.
Your ridiculous assertion that bans on firearms have not been overturned in Maryland courts says absolutely nothing about their infringement. Nothing. The absence on one thing does not prove the existence of another – that is idiotic logic.
I keep going on about Baltimore City because you made the claim that disarming law-abiding individuals makes us safer. I simply asked you to support that statement with evidence, and to begin with a jurisdiction close to home. If that fails to produce the evidence to support your claim, then move onto Chicago or some other location with strict gun bans and how that correlates to public safety. It is really easy. I’m not sure why you are running from the request??? If what you say is accurate or true, it should fairly simple to provide the evidence. I’ll wait.
If you choose to disbelieve regulating firearms doesn’t help public safety that’s your opinion. I’m not going to Google and provide URLs, feel free to look up information on websites like “Mom’s Demand Action”, “The Brady Campaign” “Coalition to Stop Gun Violence.” and dozens more that provide statistics.
You still cant provide a legitimate reason why states cannot regulate firearms, hence why it’s constitutional that states can regulate weapons.
Clever…. avoid the request and try to turn it on me like that… very nice try.
A well regulated militia is in the Constitution, and reasonable restrictions on my power to avoid tyranny by a government can be reached. Never denied that. Not sure how you thought I did?!? Maybe it is just part of re-inventing the conversation to avoid backing up your claim. Please copy and paste and reference my post where I ever said such a thing. Good luck with that.
By the way, those sites you noted desire policy driven by emotion. Moms’ Demand Action were in Annapolis advocating changes that were actually violating federal laws… good luck with that. And, those sites do not say that we’re safer with less rights. You did. Now back up your claim. If you choose not to, I can just safely guess you made that up. Sort of like your idea the Constitution could never be amended… empty thoughts.
You don’t need stats to prove that firearm regulation is better for public safety, if it was such a constitutional right issue, take a look at how few gun owners show up in Annapolis each year to contest “anti gun” bills at hearings. Not many people want their second amendment rights otherwise thousands of gun owners would be down there giving opinion at hearings.
You still have the “second amendment” even when the AR15 is banned, believe me, it’s passed all the constitutionality.
“Shall not be infringed” Good luck with that and good day to you.
How about the police in Florida, when faced with an active shooter. The police stood outside the school building and did not engage the shooter. You assume that the police can be everywhere at all times and protect you regardless. You sir, are an idiot. Criminals by their very definition are criminals and do not abide by the laws that the rest of society conforms with. How many more schools, churches and places of employment need to become killing fields and memorials because morons like you won’t allow the citizens the right to open carry. I would prefer a society of trained citizens who are willing to defend those who choose not to defend themselves. You brand these people as “gun nuts and rambos” and I brand them as silent heroes willing to risk their lives for yours.
“You assume that the police can be everywhere at all times”
I never typed that anywhee. Your words, not mine.
Gun owners want open carry of a handgun or concealed carry? Which one is it and remind me which one is a constitutional right?
This is an easy one. OPEN CARRY of a handgun should be considered a Constitutional right, but we must ask ourselves if the open carry is necessary and proper. States and Municipalities have implemented gun control because they see it as necessary and proper to protect its citizens and the Corporation. However, the regulation should be “reasonable”. There is no doubt that open carry in Baltimore City is NOT necessary and proper so the regulation of firearms can be considered “reasonable”. However, a man living in Western Maryland that carries his sidearm around his property for protection while maintaining that property is also “reasonable”. If that man goes to the store while wearing that same sidearm to get lunch, well, there is nothing “unreasonable” about that man doing just that. It really depends on the situation. In urban situations, open carry can be considered “unreasonable”. In rural situations, that same open carry may be considered “reasonable”. Maryland is not a large State. Most of Maryland is inhabited and many areas that are considered rural are really not. Law Enforcement should consider if the enforcement of a statute is reasonable before they enforce it and should NOT allow the opinion of someone who has not been victimized to influence their decision. Remember, all crime must include a victim or else there is no crime. The State can NOT be the victim, only flesh and blood human beings can be the victim. If it is determined that a man practicing open carry has used this to negatively effect others then Law Enforcement should react accordingly. A citizen should not be carrying a weapon to do the job of code enforcement and should not believe they have the legal right to police the rest of us.
It is NOT reasonable to open carry your handgun in the Streets of Bel Air or in any situation just so you can feel above others. If you fear things so much that you think you are naked without a firearm then there is medication for that as well. No one should go thru life feeling intimidated, but no one should be going around intimidating others….
If it’s a constitutional right and “shall not be infringed'” then there’s that, there is no “reasonable” there. It’s either on or off, am I right, gun owners?
“Good and substantial reason” is already on the books in Maryland for carry permit law.
Thanks for agreeing with me.
I would say that fear of being mugged, raped, killed, beaten or carjacked is a “good and substantial reason” for me to be able to carry a gun. I would also add that since the police are not going to personally protect me at all times is another “good and substantial reason” to allow me the right to protect myself from those who which to infringe on my right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
The police don’t have to protect you. They protect the corporation. Yet, you pay their salaries. You are secondary unless you have been victimized. Then they can respond. Your fear is “good and substantial reason”, but does it have credibility? You are already being mugged and you should recognize this when you get your next paycheck. The government mugs you every time you get paid. So you have already consented to being mugged. The rest of those fears may be the same fears everyone else has, yet they may fear you are the one that may commit the crime. You can not exercise your Constitutional rights if they violate that of another. You pull your gun. You shoot and miss. You inadvertently killed a bystander. You were negligent. You just infringed on another’s right to life. Would it still be about your “pursuit of happiness”? States can regulate gun control in public places because that’s an awful lot of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” being crapped on if they don’t. However, in your home you should not be infringed, yet they will if they feel like it.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PsEJfBrpnA4
Complete with NRA hat.
And they want more people to carry guns in public? Good grief.
I’m surprised that Mike Callahan hasn’t posted some YouTube article protesting the displaying of the pictures of two people of color as the suspects. Watch out Dagger you will be labeled as Trump loving conservative Republican for printing the real facts. Get ready to be labeled a racist. Lol
I thought the one on the left was white with curly hair.
U.S. gun sales down 6.1% in 2018. That’s a good thing!
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-guns-sales/u-s-gun-sales-down-6-1-percent-in-2018-extending-trump-slump-idUSKCN1PN346?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews
We all loaded up BEFORE all the dumb ass new restrictions and requirements took effect.
Trust me we are just fine.
Trust me, I know you will be fine. I’m more worried about the rest of us. 🙂
Maybe you should sleep with you front door open and let me know how your philosophy of “if i dont harm anyone, no one will harm me either” works out for you.
It appears to be working well in rio, mexico and london quite well.
Our nations founding fathers were substantially more intelligent than you appear to be.
I think Baltimore City has the right idea. They are no longer going to prosecute possession of marijuana regardless of amount.
(link:http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/bs-md-mosby-marijuana-prosecution-policy-20190129-story.html )
Now if they would do the same for the sale of same, maybe progress would be made. If marijuana could openly be sold, then competition would drive the price down. The money would go out of the market. There would be no need for “turf wars” enforced by gunfire. It would reduce the tax burden of trying to enforce unenforceable laws, court costs, cost of prison space. Maybe then the government of the State of Maryland would realize that what is currently a tax liability could become a tax asset and start thinking with their heads instead of making unwise “knee jerk” decisions.
The issue of marijuana regarding legalization and or the prosecution there of is in my mind very complicated. As a career police officer I can see points on both sides of the discussion. During my career I responded to thousands of fights and disturbances. I don’t recall ever responding to a “weed fight”. As a rule I would be much more willing to confront a room full of people stoned to limit than two drunk males and at least one drunk female. In the great majority of the incidents the drunks posed a much greater threat to officer safety. Obviously there are other concerns regarding marijuana use such as driving or operating equipment while impaired to be considered. On the other side of the spectrum is the use of enforcement of marijuana laws as an excellent law enforcement tool. There have been literally millions of arrests for guns, stolen property, wanted people,and countless other serious crimes which were initiated based on the odor of marijuana as the probable cause. All of these factors should be discussed and considered before a final disposition should be made regarding marijuana legalization or prosecution.
I disagree. Marijuana doesn’t fit the statute, nor is any of the CDS act legal or Constitutional. The whole thing stinks. To use a false claim of marijuana odor to conduct a search is not right. You call it a tool, but it’s nothing but a lie. To use lies as law enforcement tools is an example of the law breaking the law to enforce the law. NONE of these issues should be discussed because these are issues of criminal behavior regarding those enforcing the law, not those breaking the law. Remember, you hold elected officials and government employees to higher standard, not the public. When you allow elected officials and government employees to hold the public to a standard they are incapable of keeping themselves you have perverted justice. I will give you the driving and operation of equipment issue in the name of public safety, but the rest of it is a non factor.
SC
I did not wish to revisit your history involving marijuana or the circumstances involving your arrest. Furthermore I and most readers are familiar with your interpretation of the constitution with regard to the enactment of statutory laws particularly involving drugs. As a police officer I played by the rules and utilized existing case law to get results. On many occasions I used the odor of marijuana as probable cause to make arrests and seizures. As the result I was able to take many guns off the street and in my help make the community that I served a little safer. For those readers that are not aware the odor of marijuana was a factor in SoulCrusher’s home being raided by police. This is the primary reason for his continued rants.
Well, let’s revisit your history as a traitor against the United States. You are aware that all enforcement of the CDS Act of 1970 is an act of fraud and treason. You are aware that you are admitting guilt under Article 3 Section 3 by what you just typed. I don’t know what drugs you or any other cop from your area were on, but when you knowingly take part in a declared war against your own people, you have committed the crime clearly stated in Article 3 Section 3. It seems to me that your career was based on fraud, racketeering and treason. Now you may think you played by the rules, but you broke the Supreme Law of the Land and you did it under the false borrowed jurisdiction of foreign nations and religions. You had no jurisdiction enforcing laws of the sea on men of the land. You did commit treason and you are a traitor. You deserve the full penalty of law under Article 3 Section 3.
No number of thumbs up changes the Supreme Law of the Land. The rule of a mob doesn’t mean a damn thing under Article 3 Section 3. Neither Congress, State Legislature or your precious Judicial Department can legislate away or make case law to abrogate or diminish the covenants that are the Constitutions. By making the Constitutions secondary you have invalidated taxation in your County, State and the entire Country. By making the Constitutions secondary you have turned the entire government into a treasonous mafia. By making the Constitutions secondary you have proven that the Constitutional Republic has been overthrown and that invalidates all power and authority of the government in whole. Sorry, but no matter how many thumbs up you and your friends can muster, it does not mean that you are NOT a traitor. The government does NOT own the people. The people owns the government. Once you get this thru your thick skull you will then realize I am correct and that you have been misled. At the very least, you should lose your pension as you did NOT serve the people, you served yourself in violation of your oath. Pat yourself on the back all you want, but you are nothing to me but a traitor. That’s the bottom line…
Get the help you need,there is plenty of free/low cost options if you just ask.
@ Nurse Nancy – I’m not in need of any help. Perhaps you can give Open Your Eyes some help and tie that noose for him.
Baltimore City’s decision not to prosecute for marijuana possession is a step in the right direction. Regarding the “sale of marijuana” it’s probably better to wait until it is legalized in our state. It shouldn’t be too long of a wait, as legalization in Maryland is likely to happen in the next 2-3 years.