The NYS FAQ on the New Firearm laws

Discussion in 'Legal' started by GEM, Aug 28, 2022.

  1. GEM

    GEM Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    10,594
    Location:
    WNY
    https://www.criminaljustice.ny.gov/pio/New-Gun-Law-FAQ-8-27-22.pdf

    If you read this, there is an significant increment in training, media examination for a permit. This has folks all excited and has generated waves of new applications to beat the new law. The 'needs' restriction is gone across the state (the only good thing). Semi auto long guns need permits now.

    However, the sensitive locations provisions and the opt in (businesses must post signs allowing carry) destroys practical carry. You can put the gun unloaded in a lock box that would not allow easy access and it has to be unloaded. However, since parking lots seem to be banned, that is a moot point.

    Thus to evaluate the SCOTUS decision and case and being blunt.
    1. The plaintiffs wanted to get carry permits easily in the counties that used 'reasons' to deny permits. SD wasn't enough. NYC was impossible
    2. Many counties were less strict and carry permits took some time but were usually issued.
    3. That restriction was eased.
    4. The state obviously planned a response and the plaintiffs either did not consider the response or did not care - they wanted their victory on this issue.
    5. In most critical incidents (like war for example), you have to consider what will be the consequences of a seeming victory. This wasn't done or was misjudged.
    6. The new law abolishes useful carry for the entire state. All those rushing to get permits might as well not. If their goal was to carry as compared to just having a hunting/competition permit, that failed in actual utility.
    7. More guns that cannot be carried may be in the homes in NYC. Is that worth eliminating carry?
    8. The plaintiffs may have thought that the new laws will be quickly overturned in an appeal. That is an unknown. A judge has the case. Lower courts up to the circuit level are not gun friendly.
    9. There was a hope that the Scotus decision would preclude devastating new restrictions. Clarence spoke to that. It is claimed that he was clear but he wasn't. Folks quote him saying that draconian restrictions are not permissible but his statement was not precise and weak. Alito and Kavanaugh babbled some possible restrictions, yet again. Dave Kopel pointed this out.
    10. Some claim a great victory because other states have lifted some restrictions. However, some like CA are putting in NY like restrictions. So is the situation better? The returned cases might lead to more gun laws being repealed. However, that still does nothing for destroying carry in NYS.
    11. Other anti states will do the same. Permitting semis will spread
    12. Getting this undone will take years if ever. A net loss for most of NYS.

    There was a failure of planning and thought by the plantiffs and a failure in the actual decision by Clarence (or his clerks). You cannot be vague.

    If I am wrong and the lower court that has the case, void the CCIA act and related laws - I will be elated and surprised. I will eat crow over my view. Of course, that would be appealed and the CCIA might stay in force for years until it gets to Scotus - whose views will be unknown esp. on the sensitive locales and private property specific positions.,
     
    AlexanderA and heyjoe like this.
  2. JN01

    JN01 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2006
    Messages:
    998
    Location:
    E Tennessee
    I don't think it matters how the decision is worded. Even if they can't find any loopholes, the weasels who hate the Second Amendment will invent reasons to ignore SCOTUS. Dragging it out in court for years is a win for them, even if they ultimately lose. Maybe they are hoping that the make-up of SCOTUS will change and their restrictions will survive.

    Should a portion of the people suck it up and accept that they will never be allowed to exercise their rights rather than rock the boat and risk spoiling it for everyone?
     
  3. General Geoff

    General Geoff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2006
    Messages:
    5,495
    Location:
    Allentown, Pennsylvania
    Progress often involves setbacks
     
    DoubleMag and Roverguy like this.
  4. CapnMac

    CapnMac Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2009
    Messages:
    14,457
    Location:
    DFW (formerly Brazos County), Texas
    Thomas was painstakingly clear (some of the contributing Opinions less so).
    Thomas even went to the trouble of spelling out that NYS could not make the entire State a "sensitive place." Yet, that's exactly what the CCIA did. Along with any number with new onerous restrictions and violations of several other Amendments. Along with a clear 4th Amendment "taking" issue with the change.

    There are also a number of issues with the "way" CCIA was enacted, which may violate NYS law. The Political "victory" was seen as more important than being legal. The issues that raises are well beyond THR scope.
     
    jobu07 and steves2 like this.
  5. heyjoe

    heyjoe Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    405
    Location:
    New York
    this hasnt been a setback this has been a disaster. there was no progress.
     
    troy fairweather likes this.
  6. General Geoff

    General Geoff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2006
    Messages:
    5,495
    Location:
    Allentown, Pennsylvania
    Ok, you're right. Bruen was a complete fail, 2A is in the shredder, woe is us.

    What now?
     
  7. old lady new shooter

    old lady new shooter Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2015
    Messages:
    25,252
    I read that the new NY law has substituted "good moral character" for "need" and they are demanding social media etc.

    I hope there is a legal mechanism for getting this obvious obstruction before SCOTUS sooner rather than later.
     
    DoubleMag and troy fairweather like this.
  8. MedWheeler

    MedWheeler Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2008
    Messages:
    8,225
    Location:
    SouthEastern FL
    This is why I don't support the Federal government getting involved in nationwide reciprocity. Imagine if New York's standard became acceptable to DC.
     
    DoubleMag likes this.
  9. Madcap_Magician

    Madcap_Magician Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Messages:
    2,685
    Location:
    MN
    I think you're right, but you're also wrong. You're right because everything you said is true, but I think you're wrong, because NYS was never going to improve its carry laws unless they were forced to do so by the 2nd district Court of Appeals or by SCOTUS. They were never simply going to roll over and enact a normal shall-issue permit regime, they were always going to drag out the process, make it as onerous as possible, and sabotage the execution as much as they were able to. And given SCOTUS's incrementalism and general lack of stomach to take up 2A cases, I think we were always bound to have this situation where things get worse before they get better.
     
  10. herrwalther

    herrwalther Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2013
    Messages:
    7,580
    NYS is doing exactly what I expected them to do. Sidestep the Buren decision. Yes, SCOTUS struck down the "justifiable need" clause of the carry permits. But NY just added more and just as difficult stipulations to reduce the number of carry permits they have to approve. And no one knows how long it will be before SCOTUS takes another gun control case to the mat.
     
    DoubleMag and troy fairweather like this.
  11. old lady new shooter

    old lady new shooter Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2015
    Messages:
    25,252
    Reciprocity doesn't mean state x uses the rules of state y, it means if citizen of state y has a valid state y carry permit, state x has to recognize him or her as a legal concealed carrier, and vice versa.
     
    danmc and Frank Ettin like this.
  12. Insignificant bill

    Insignificant bill Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2019
    Messages:
    1,016
    It won't stand. The party at fault is the Governor of NYS for signing this unconstitutional law and should be removed from office.
     
    DoubleMag and desmobob like this.
  13. GEM

    GEM Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    10,594
    Location:
    WNY
    A great number of responses show exactly the naivete that led to not thinking through this case at the plantiff's and Scotus level. I stand by my analysis. Clarence and his Manhattan statement is a prime example of how he was hoodwinked. There was not a total geographic ban but a clever twist on private property. So sad, folks don't get this and don't realize that the people who start the fight have the responsibility to consider the outcome. Can't blame the enemy if you set yourself up. Standard military thought for those who served.
     
    Jeff22, steves2 and heyjoe like this.
  14. MedWheeler

    MedWheeler Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2008
    Messages:
    8,225
    Location:
    SouthEastern FL
    old lady new shooter writes:

    In our dream world, it would. I know the meaning of the word. However, if the Federal government was to apply it, you can bet they would set the standards. Don't assume they would pick the standards of the "friendliest" state to apply to all.

    I didn't say I was opposed to reciprocity. I said I was opposed to the Feds mandating it, something many gun owners have suggested (including some members here.)
     
  15. bdickens

    bdickens Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,399
    Location:
    Hockley , TX
    Sounds like a case of "be careful what you wish for because you just might get it."
     
  16. CapnMac

    CapnMac Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2009
    Messages:
    14,457
    Location:
    DFW (formerly Brazos County), Texas
    If Bruen is so weak and ill thought out, why is HI issuing its first CHL, ever, breaking a 30-440 year drought?

    Just because NYS is brazenly defying SCOTUS doe not mean that SCOTUS failed, only that NYS no longer accepts that any Higher Authority exists beyond it's self (but keep those fed dollars rolling in). They are like a teenager seceding, to the basement. "You're Not the Boss of Me!" But, keep paying for utilities and cable and bringing food . . .

    NJ tried to grandstand a bit, then walked most of the bluster back; Maryland apparently realized that DC is almost within eyesight, and made noises, but no real changes.

    NYS's brazen disobedience is just that. The cases are already being advanced in District Court to have CCIA enjoined.
     
  17. GEM

    GEM Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    10,594
    Location:
    WNY
    CA and NY have eliminated useful concealed carry as a counter to Bruen. One permit in HI, so what. If states forced to issue then put in locale restrictions that Clarence could not actual foresee in detail, that's a loss and a failure on his part. It is similar to Heller, all hail Scalia who left the loophole blather that supported local AWBs for years.

    Clarence said don't ban Manhattan and folks taught that was great. So they didn't. Get this through your heads, they banned businesses using property rights. Skipped right by Clarence. I've said repeatedly that SD rights trump property rights of business locales that are open to the public. Folks don't accept that even though businesses accept all kinds of restrictions on protected classes, health and fire, zoning etc. without yelling about property rights. Locale bans should be based ONLY on technical issues like the gun in the MRI example. Get this through your heads. I'm am convinced the property rights business folks truly want to be able to discriminate again and that's why they push it.

    We will differ on the theoretical vs. actual impact in NY or CA, if the lower court quickly blocks the CCIA, I'm wrong. If it takes years to undo the locale restrictions (the only real problem - training, so what, TX had similar training at first) or they never are undone, I don't give a rat's behind if states issue useless permits.
     
    bdickens and heyjoe like this.
  18. heyjoe

    heyjoe Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    405
    Location:
    New York
    What is the use of a permit to carry if there is absolutely no place you can carry it?
     
  19. GEM

    GEM Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    10,594
    Location:
    WNY
    BTW, if you read the NY oriented forums, you see a great many local folks agree with my viewpoint. They see the counter strike as devastating and predictable. They predicted it before the decision and argued against pushing Bruen as they knew it was coming. That we sacrificed our rights for a permit in HI or MD - who gives a reproductive act.

    Oregon is set to have an incredibly restrictive new law set soon. Such things will continue to occur IF
    a. Scotus can finally make a clear and decisive set of decisions - sorry not to worship the brilliant prose of Clarence and Anthony.
    b. A GOP legislative win for new Federal protective laws - fat chance of that.

    Still waiting for a happy suprise from the judge!
     
  20. usaral63

    usaral63 Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2021
    Messages:
    143
    I am perplexed by the attitude of many of the NY folks on the decision and subsequent state action. Perplexed, it almost seems as tho you folks are saying it was OK to beat me as long as you didn't hit too hard or use too big a whip!

    Folks, the ONLY way you are gonna get your rights back is to fight....bring legal action...and don't let up. I grew up in a state that had draconian gun laws, mostly as an outgrowth of union mine wars...literal wars, at that! The ONLY way one could carry was under license after posting a several thousand dollar bond, advertising and most importantly, knowing someone in power! All that changed begining in the 70's & 80's and now due the loud mouthed never quit activists that state is constitutional carry..............all in the space of 30 plus years, and after well more than fifty years of oppression. Fight, raise hell and spend money on the right candidates and you will win......sit back and crybaby and it'l be welcome to another Sullivan century.
     
  21. GEM

    GEM Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    10,594
    Location:
    WNY
    The only way to get gun rights is to fight competently. As far as candidates, the party demographics of the state suggest that a direct strategy to elect a governor and legislature that is pro firearms is neigh on impossible. County maps show a clear number of red counties but the population numbers of the cities preclude legislative and gubernatorial control

    Thus, fighting in court is the way to go but:
    1. One has to predict the outcome of the case and a legislative counter strike.
    2. One has to hope that Scotus actually understands the pragmatics of carry and the legislative counter strike.

    Has that happened? No.

    As far as the politics of the right candidate - that is confounded with other political/social issues and not for this forum.
     
  22. Madcap_Magician

    Madcap_Magician Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Messages:
    2,685
    Location:
    MN
    What exactly was the alternative choice, though? The legislative response was, as you say, entirely forseeable, but I am just not seeing how it was avoidable. SCOTUS was the only way to force NYS into shall-issue. They were never going to cooperate, and if someone attempted to force them to go to shall issue via SCOTUS, they were always going to try to sabotage the permit process in every way they could. What exactly could the plaintiffs' counsel have done to change that fact, short of deciding not to bring suit at all?
     
  23. desmobob

    desmobob Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2019
    Messages:
    382
    Location:
    upstate NY - Lake George region
    I'm still not understanding how they could enact new laws that seem to blatantly defy the Bruen ruling... making ALL private businesses (and most of the rest of the state) sensitive places and still having very subjective criteria for approving permit applications, etc. What good is a Supreme Court ruling if the states can ignore it?
     
    DoubleMag likes this.
  24. Insignificant bill

    Insignificant bill Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2019
    Messages:
    1,016
    They know it's Unconstitutional. They are counting on being able to stall
     
    heyjoe and DoubleMag like this.
  25. BryanDavis
    • Contributing Member

    BryanDavis Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2010
    Messages:
    85
    Screenshot_20221006-123248.png

    https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1578058421542465537?t=dygRDhA9Dxxg8hcY8qP1SQ&s=19

    Huge victory. We're not quite out of the woods yet though. The judge gave them 3 days to appeal before this ruling goes into effect.

    Also, I am still not a lawyer.

    -Bryan
     
    Spats McGee, wcwhitey and desmobob like this.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice