Gooseman69
member
My thought is the court will side with the state
SCOTUS narrows question in the NY State Gun Rights Case
- Thread starter 1942bull
- Start date
- Status
TTv2
Member
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2016
- Messages
- 5,024
I think it's more like 8, but within those 8 states is almost a quarter of the country's population. That's a lot of people having their rights restricted because the state deems carrying a firearm inconvenient for the common man.
TTv2
Member
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2016
- Messages
- 5,024
What's to stop these overwhelmingly Democrat states from passing laws to go from may or shall issue to no issue? IIRC the question that SCOTUS is going to rule on is whether a state has the right to deny someone from carrying a weapon for no reason or because it deems that reason inconvenient, not whether or not a state can flat out ban all citizens from carrying weapons.
Let's not forget that for many decades multiple states had a no issue policy on their books, it's not out of the question for a state like NY to go back to that.
JN01
Member
In anticipation of losing their SCOTUS case, the State of NY has introduced bill A08684 which would restrict the carrying of firearms on any public transportation (airplanes, subways, buses, taxis, Uber), food and/or drink establishments, or at any gathering of 15 or more people. So you may be able to get a carry permit, you just won't be able to go anywhere with it.
Impact of A Ground Breaking Supreme Court Concealed Carry Ruling!!! - YouTube
Impact of A Ground Breaking Supreme Court Concealed Carry Ruling!!! - YouTube
During oral arguments the lawyer for the plaintiffs AGREED that the subway could be considered a sensitive area and you could ban guns there.
The subway is the dangerous place where you should especially be able to carry a gun.
Also, what is a citizen supposed to do, carry a gun from home to the subway and then somehow not have the gun on the subway and then get it back after traveling on the subway and going to wherever they are going?
Last edited:
OP
OP
1942bull
Member
It will be interesting to see whether the NY Bill makes any progress before SCOTUS rules on the current case. Hopefully the SCOTUS ruling will make the N Y Bill mute by setting a standard that would head off such legislation that furthers NT’s attempt to place obstacles in the path of EDC.
Metal God
Member
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2015
- Messages
- 445
There should be no middle ground in the constitution , it's a yes or no question .
No it effects all 50 states . It would not just simply be forcing 6 or 8 to change , it would also be stopping the other 42 from changing in the future as well .
I'll add I've been concerned about the narrowing since I heard of it . To only look at concealed care and are side arguing text and tradition scares the crap out of me . Text "maybe" but tradition is clear ( a gentlemen carry's openly ) is a thing . We have never had a tradition of concealed carry . In fact there have been many laws prohibiting conceal carry since the 1700's I believe . That's not a tradition onion I care to have the court peel . I've never understood why some think this is going to be our coming out party and there is going to be some ground breaking ruling redefining how all courts shall rule moving forward . It's more likely we get screwed then it starts raining candy kisses .
Last edited:
Yeah, I believe I read in the past people who openly carried their firearms had nothing to hide and someone concealing their firearm was up to no good.
It is a positive if the decision breaks the may issue / reason requirements. It might also, fingers crossed, deal with other extreme roadblocks towards a shall issue regime, such as hard to get references, insurance, extreme training (a one day class might offend some but that's nothing and it occurs in many places).
The bigger case, if they ever take it - will be weapons and mag bans. Don't hold your breath. Scotus can leap into action on the racial/sexual side of the social wars but the gun issues, slow crawl.
The bigger case, if they ever take it - will be weapons and mag bans. Don't hold your breath. Scotus can leap into action on the racial/sexual side of the social wars but the gun issues, slow crawl.
JN01
Member
Hawaii has joined NY in introducing preemptive laws in anticipation of a SCOTUS decision not to their liking.
SB 2800 would require renewal of a carry license every 6 months, 21 hours of training every time you renew, and require that you carry a taser in addition to your firearm.
SB 2800 would require renewal of a carry license every 6 months, 21 hours of training every time you renew, and require that you carry a taser in addition to your firearm.
Insignificant bill
Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2019
- Messages
- 1,223
That will never fly
Let's hope that the ivory tower justices realize the risks in any opinion, unlike Heller, and clearly prevent such requirements from being added. I don't have much hope for that. They will be narrow, new restrictions will be added and years will be taken to undo them if it all. It is similar to other social issues (that cannot be named) where a clear decision is then attacked with all kinds of restrictions that stand in the lower courts. Biden gets this appointment, Thomas or Alito are old enough to just drop dead like Scalia and you get 4 + Roberts, restrictions galore will be upheld.
That's why the current justices, who supposedly support gun rights, need to act with alacrity on the NYSPRA case and take a weapons ban case and find for the 2nd Amendment with clarity and no weasel words, leaving states to try to get around the mandate. Won't happen though. We will get some limited blather if at all. The antigun folks are all about gun control being wiped out - that won't happen.
That's why the current justices, who supposedly support gun rights, need to act with alacrity on the NYSPRA case and take a weapons ban case and find for the 2nd Amendment with clarity and no weasel words, leaving states to try to get around the mandate. Won't happen though. We will get some limited blather if at all. The antigun folks are all about gun control being wiped out - that won't happen.
I'm 74 and I see plenty of my cohort checking out. Scalia was 80.
Look at https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html
The 70's show an increase in death rate.
Look at https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html
The 70's show an increase in death rate.
- Status
