Maryland’s new governor, Democrat Wes Moore, made combating gun violence a pillar of his campaign. Now, the Maryland legislature is tackling the issue of gun ownership on the first day of its session — joining a number of states in experimenting with gun laws following a Supreme Court decision that struck down many firearms regulations.

Under current Maryland law, citizens ages 21 and older may obtain a concealed carry permit if they complete a training course and a background check. That permit — known as “wear and carry” — allows the holder to carry a weapon anywhere except for school buildings, the state house, and child care facilities. 

A new measure, called the Gun Safety Act of 2023, would radically change that permit. The bill would bar permit-holders from carrying weapons within 100 feet of a “public accommodation,” which includes restaurants, movie theaters, public transportation, and other spaces.

The bill was the first filed by the Democratic leadership during this session, which speaks to its importance in the eyes of legislators and gun control advocates. 

A Republican state senator, Justin Ready, told Maryland Matters that the law is “blatantly unconstitutional,” and said his party would introduce a more meaningful reform in the coming days. Republicans in the legislature want to create stricter criminal penalties for repeat offenders of violent gun crimes, trafficking, and illegal possession. 

The president of the Crime Prevention Research Center, John Lott, testified in a hearing about the bill that the gun-free zones proposed in Maryland would be “magnets” for criminals. 

“The people who obey these laws are law-abiding citizens,” Mr. Lott said, adding that criminals have been known to explicitly pick those areas for attacks to take advantage of the idea that their victims won’t be carrying weapons.

“You can go through many diaries or manifestos from mass murderers,” Mr. Lott said. “For example, the Buffalo mass murderer last year wrote about areas where concealed carry is outlawed or prohibited that are good areas for attack.”

A separate bill would raise the age requirement for owning rifles and shotguns to 21 from 18. A Second Amendment advocate, Nicholas Andraka, told the Capital News Service that he is “not going to stand” for the bill.

“So you could serve two tours, one-year tours, in Afghanistan and come back and you’re not allowed to hunt without your mom and dad sitting with you? It’s idiotic,” Mr. Andraka said. 

As the state senate held a hearing on the issue, 300 Marylanders waved flags and held signs outside to protest the legislature’s consideration of the bills. At the hearing, the committee chairman, Senator Jeff Waldstreicher, asked: “What kind of state do we want to raise our children in? A state awash in guns, where every dispute of a routine nature can turn into violence?”

With complete control of Maryland’s state government, Democrats in Annapolis are also poised to allow citizens to sue gun manufacturers with Senate Bill 113, which would allow individuals to file lawsuits if they believe firearm manufacturers are “knowingly and recklessly” contributing to gun violence. 

This measure is a new goal of the gun control movement. New York, New Jersey, and Delaware passed such laws in 2021, with California following suit in 2022. The city of Buffalo became the first municipality to sue under the state law last year, arguing that manufacturers’ marketing and distribution practices contribute to the city’s increased gun violence. 

The executive director for Duke University’s Center for Firearms Law, Andrew Willinger, told the Sun that laws like Senate Bill 113 have faced challenges in federal court, to mixed results. 

These laws “try to fit within an exception in existing federal law known as the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act,” which exempts the firearms industry from most liability lawsuits. “There have been some challenges that argue that these state laws are preempted by the PLCA. A New York judge upheld their state law, but a judge in New Jersey struck down that statute, so there is some disagreement.”

This comes as both red and blue states are experimenting with new gun laws — Democrats cracking down on legal gun ownership and Republicans vastly expanding who can own a weapon and where it can be carried.  

Illinois, California, New York, and New Jersey have implemented new gun restrictions in the last year following the landmark Supreme Court decision in New York Pistol and Rifle Association v. Bruen. The decision held that states must issue permits to applicants who complete all necessary requirements, and planted the flag that courts must now evaluate these laws based on “the Nation’s historical tradition of firearms regulation.”

Governor Hochul signed a number of new restrictions just eight days after the decision was handed down, requiring permit applicants to demonstrate “good moral character,” among other things. In December, Governor Murphy signed similar legislation. Governor Pritzker signed a blanket ban on assault-style weapons in his state. All three laws are being challenged in federal courts.