A New York appellate court cited Bruen today to reverse a NYC carry permit denial bc proper cause...

[Aim1]

Great news!

The 1st time someone has a criminal incident could be their last if they are murdered.



https://twitter.com/gunpolicy/status/1564680228525547521?t=yKbqkMcJpRVyOeLI-HCqVg&s=19

 

[Ramray]

Left wing NY Dems fighting this. The ruling has led to huge increase in carry applications, but NYS is fighting it: Creating all kinds of blocks to getting a carry permit. Also creating gun free zones everywhere so even if you get a carry, you can’t carry your CCW anywhere! No public buildings, libraries, sports venues, auditoriums, now Times Square is a Gun Free Zone! Get caught with a gun in one of these Gun Free Zones is a felony even with a carry permit. New Jersey is not far behind, making it difficult to get a permit.

 

[Aim1]

 

[Shawn Dodson]

All the new NY "sensitive" places weren't "sensitive" before Bruen.

Prior to Bruen there were no signs alerting criminals that carrying a gun into these alleged "sensitive" places was prohibited.

Prior to Bruen you'd think that a criminal being caught with a gun in a "sensitive" place would face an increased penalty compared to a non-sensitive place. But that wasn't the case.

Criminals always have and always will violate the law, "sensitive" place or not. So the best way to target criminals, and not law abiding citizens, is to target the actual criminal misuse of a gun in a "sensitive" place, as opposed to just carrying a gun in a "sensitive" place. Something like 5, 10, or 20 years hard time for criminal misuse in a "sensitive" place, automatically added to any other sentence, to be served consecutively instead of concurrently, penalizes and deters criminals and not law abiding citizens.

 

[Wolfshead]

All the new NY "sensitive" places weren't "sensitive" before Bruen.

Prior to Bruen there were no signs alerting criminals that carrying a gun into these alleged "sensitive" places was prohibited.

Prior to Bruen you'd think that a criminal being caught with a gun in a "sensitive" place would face an increased penalty compared to a non-sensitive place. But that wasn't the case.

Criminals always have and always will violate the law, "sensitive" place or not. So the best way to target criminals, and not law abiding citizens, is to target the actual criminal misuse of a gun in a "sensitive" place, as opposed to just carrying a gun in a "sensitive" place. Something like 5, 10, or 20 years hard time for criminal misuse in a "sensitive" place, automatically added to any other sentence, to be served consecutively instead of concurrently, penalizes and deters criminals and not law abiding citizens.

yes you are spot on except if you did that you could be “violating the criminals rights”….

 

[GEM]

All the folks who now can get permits are getting ones that have very little utility. It might be the case that folks in the bad counties may have an easier time (as far as absolute denials as before) in getting a gun - after all the new checks and training. If they pass this hurdle, then so what.

NYSPRA is getting flack and their response is:

1. Well, we will or someone else will fill new suits. The time scale for that may be years, given appeals and if the 2nd Circuit trashes them, years at Scotus.
However, We cannot trust Scotus to clearly take out the most onerous provisions of sensitive locales and opt in business rules. They blather again and leave these in place. Will they get into the weeds of the killer car storage provisions. Frankly, I don't think they understand every day pragmatics.
2, Celebrate that Scotus remanded 4 other cases, only one has to do with carry. Is the loss of state wide carry worth the mag ban case. Scotus could have handled that on its own and quickly. Sending it back is just more legal weeds and them again not living in the pragmatic real world. Do we care about a mag ban if carry is wiped out for years?

So it's rather a weak defense of not seeing what was coming. Oh, goodie - now we can sue from more - really?

 

[Bfh_auto]

All the folks who now can get permits are getting ones that have very little utility. It might be the case that folks in the bad counties may have an easier time (as far as absolute denials as before) in getting a gun - after all the new checks and training. If they pass this hurdle, then so what.

NYSPRA is getting flack and their response is:

1. Well, we will or someone else will fill new suits. The time scale for that may be years, given appeals and if the 2nd Circuit trashes them, years at Scotus.
However, We cannot trust Scotus to clearly take out the most onerous provisions of sensitive locales and opt in business rules. They blather again and leave these in place. Will they get into the weeds of the killer car storage provisions. Frankly, I don't think they understand every day pragmatics.
2, Celebrate that Scotus remanded 4 other cases, only one has to do with carry. Is the loss of state wide carry worth the mag ban case. Scotus could have handled that on its own and quickly. Sending it back is just more legal weeds and them again not living in the pragmatic real world. Do we care about a mag ban if carry is wiped out for years?

So it's rather a weak defense of not seeing what was coming. Oh, goodie - now we can sue from more - really?

Isn't this the way of lawyers and court systems?
From what I've seen and experienced. It seems to be more fencing vs Viking sword fighting. One takes forever. The other one is decisive.
One way makes lawyers a lot of money. The other doesn't.