Maryland Bill Would Require Gun Owners to Have $300K Liability Insurance to Carry in Public

Jordan Landis, a gun collector, looks at guns in EJB's Gun Shop in Capitol Heights, Md., on March 14, 2023. Andrew Caballlero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

Democrats in the Maryland state legislature have proposed new legislation that would bar gun owners from carrying their firearms in public without also having at least $300,000 in liability coverage for property damage, injury, or death claims arising from their firearm.

The bill, introduced by Maryland state Del. Terri Hill, states: “A person may not wear or carry a firearm unless the person has obtained and is covered by liability insurance issued by an insurer authorized to do business in the state under the Insurance Article. This insurance is designed to cover claims for property damage, bodily injury, or death arising from an accident resulting from the person’s use or storage of a firearm. The coverage limit for damages arising from the same incident is up to $300,000, in addition to interest and costs.”

Speaking with Fox 45 Baltimore this week, Ms. Hill said the idea for the new liability insurance requirement for firearm carry came from a conversation she had with a constituent, who said gun owners should “bear some liability in cases where there is damage because of guns being used in ways that cause harm.”

“[This bill] is another effort at common sense gun legislation,” Ms. Hill added.

While gun owners could already be criminally charged or held liable in civil court in cases when their firearm wrongfully causes property damages, injuries, or deaths, the proposed bill would allow law enforcement officers to issue citations for those carrying firearms in public without proof of insurance, even if they or their firearm haven’t been connected to an actual case of property damage, injury, or death.

The legislation could serve to curb the number of people carrying firearms in public in the state less than two years after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen.

In that June 2022 decision, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that states and local governments must practice “shall issue” permitting with objective standards for allowing people to carry firearms in public, as opposed to subjective “may issue” standards in which local officials would decide whether a carry applicant had a sufficient need or interest in carrying their firearm in public.

Maryland had been one such “may issue” state prior to the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision.

Maryland’s Post-Bruen Gun Laws

Since the June 2022 Supreme Court ruling, Maryland has seen a significant rise in approvals for firearm carry applicants. According to a 2023 legislative analysis, the Maryland Department of State Police (DSP) approved 10,172 firearm carry permit applications in the state in 2021 but approved 83,479 in 2022, marking an 821 percent increase from one year to the next.

The same legislative analysis found that the total number of active firearm carry permits in the state had risen to 114,089 marking a 791 percent increase from the number of active permits in the state in 2020.

Since the Bruen decision, the Democrat-controlled Maryland state legislature has considered new ways to control the number of firearms being carried in public. In 2023, the Maryland state legislature passed new provisions increasing the costs for carry permit applications and renewals.

Maryland’s state legislature was also one of several around the country that passed bills that sought to bar people from carrying their firearms in a range of so-called “sensitive” public settings. Maryland’s efforts to restrict where in public firearms could be carried was challenged by gun rights groups like Maryland Shall Issue and the Firearms Policy Coalition.

In September, U.S. District Judge George L. Russell, III issued a preliminary injunction, allowing firearm carry permit holders to continue to carry their firearms in a number of public areas banned under the Maryland law, such as locations selling alcohol, private buildings or property without the owner’s consent, and within 1,000 feet of a public demonstration.

From NTD News