Supreme Court likely decision to overturn Chicago's gun ban could impact New York

[Deanimator]

Dream on.

And Ohio will never have shall issue concealed carry.
And the "assault weapons" ban will never sunset.
And there will never been carry in national parks.

Those who plan for failure usually achieve it.

 

[Bubba613]

I dont recall anything about Ohio.
Sunset was written into the '94 law to begin with.
I also don't recall any discussion about national parks.

In any case none of those depended on the Supreme Court, which has already staked out a position and mode of operation here. That position is that anything short of an outright ban could be considered reasonable and that mode is to avoid making too radical a decision. Both of those suggest nothing more out of McDonald than an extension of the holding in Holder to the states as well.

 

[Deanimator]

I dont recall anything about Ohio.
Sunset was written into the '94 law to begin with.
I also don't recall any discussion about national parks.

In any case none of those depended on the Supreme Court, which has already staked out a position and mode of operation here.

Defeatism is its own reward.

 

[Bubba613]

Every stink that fights the ventilator thinks it's Don Quixote.

 

[Cosmoline]

They would not take a position on individual restrictions imposed by states.

That's because that question was not before them. One step at a time. The Sullivan Act is going to have to be considered another day.

That position is that anything short of an outright ban could be considered reasonable and that mode is to avoid making too radical a decision.

There is no such holding in Heller. You need to understand how courts work. The Supreme Court is still just a court. It hears the case before it based on actual matters in controversy in that case. The Heller court sparked life into the Second and held it to be an individual right, overturning 75 years of contrary jurisprudence. It struck down the DC ban. McDonald will hopefully incorporate the Second into the 14th. The next step is to start challenging the substance of laws such as New York City's. But we're not there yet.

Yes, the anti-gun local and state governments will fight every step of the way. DC has already thrown more new roadblocks in the path of applicants. The Supreme Court has not approved such measures, and it will take many years to flesh out how far states and cities will be permitted to infringe the right to keep and bear arms.

 

[Deanimator]

Yes, the anti-gun local and state governments will fight every step of the way. DC has already thrown more new roadblocks in the path of applicants. The Supreme Court has not approved such measures, and it will take many years to flesh out how far states and cities will be permitted to infringe the right to keep and bear arms.

The Jim Crow South tried exactly the same maneuvers. I'm betting that if I move to Alabama, I won't have that much trouble voting, nevermind eating next to a White guy at a lunch counter.

 

[Bubba613]

There is no such holding in Heller.

'Fraid not:

2.
Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited.It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed
weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms
in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical traditionof prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp. 54–56.
3.
The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied toself-defense) violate the Second Amendment

 

[GHF]

What to Look For

1. Heller created the Individual Right to Keep
2. McDonald gets it incorporated under the 14th Amendment.
3. If McDonald indicates Strict Scrutiny - which it should - that leads to suits against the Bloomberg Herd regarding Keep.
4. Palmer gets to the Bear side of the issue, forcing an evaluation of each restriction in the light of national standards (look at Opencarry.com's maps on sub-issues.
5. The evaluations of restrictions of both Keep and Bear will involve First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment similar situations which will be a second part of the mix regarding bear (as well as some things under Keep). The ACLU, as anti as they are, have provided the weapons that will be used.

Banners are stuck in their self-built nightmare. The Public supports Keep and Bear at a level far above what existed for Civil Rights after Brown v Board in 1954. Complex restrictions can easily be compared to the hoops Blacks had to jump through prior the the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

There will be work to do, but it is doable if we keep at it. We need to finish them, just like the Public Accommodations effort that started at Woolworth's Lunch Counter.