kev74
20×102mm Vulcan
I bet Ginsberg died 6 months ago and they had her stuffed and work her like a puppet. 
SCOTUS just fucked us!
- Thread starter VietnamEraVet
- Start date
I'd much rather see her step down. I don't wish death on anyone, except Hitler.
Having RBG step down and live to see her legacy crumble would actually be very satisfying. Almost like the liberal/progressive heads exploding on November 8, 2016.
Really ?
How about Kim Jong-un ?
The common folk have been indoctrinated that Hitler was the worst person who ever lived.
I'm certainly not sticking up for him, but I do fear in vilifying him as a unique case we tend to pass on other monsters.
Stalin murdered more than Hitler, and Mao more than Hitler and Stalin combined.
There are perhaps millions of would-be Hitlers living right now. Many will never have the opportunity to exact their evil; others are doing their very best and they just don't make the news.
Personally I believe Obama would murder millions of his "enemies" if he could.
This man is as evil and as selfish as they come.
spat
.950 JDJ
It almost worked for Hillary.....I bet Ginsberg died 6 months ago and they had her stuffed and work her like a puppet.
Blimey
.450/400 Nitro Ex
It is interesting the liberal judges didn't want this case. Can they really feel so healthy? Odds of one of them being replaced are extremely high within trump's first term. Maybe they should have done this case while they were all there.
RDN
.357 mag
If / when Kennedy retires and Ruth "badger" Ginsburg stops coming to work - maybe we NYers will get our 2nd Amend. " Rights Back"
Snappo
6.5 Creedmoor
I probably need to worry a LOT more about Karma. SCOTUS needs a retirement age. I'm thinking 70. Get them in at 50, out at 70. We also need term limits for the legislative branch, since Americans are too stupid to stop voting for cronies.
spat
.950 JDJ
Bandaids.
You cannot fix a broken electorate. If the people refuse to do their job there is no rule or procedure you can put in place to fix a republic that is failing because of it. The only thing that will fix that is the inevitable hardship that comes from the failure, and the hard won lessons people *hopefully* learn from it.
ArmedCorgi
.475 A&M Magnum
So bleak...
Magnus
6.5 Creedmoor
Spot on accurate though....
RBean
.40 S&W
The Supreme Court is always a wild card. You never know. But republicans have control of the Presidency and Congress. HR 38 was filed Jan. 3, 2017. It needs to be passed NOW. If not now, when? And yes, it would allow New Yorkers to carry in NY on out of state licenses.
(a) In General.—Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 926C the following:
Ҥ 926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms
“(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof (except as provided in subsection (b)) and subject only to the requirements of this section, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, who is carrying a valid identification document containing a photograph of the person, and who is carrying a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm or is entitled to carry a concealed firearm in the State in which the person resides, may possess or carry a concealed handgun (other than a machinegun or destructive device) that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, in any State. . .
It say issued pursuant to the law of a State. It does not say the state of your resident. That only applies if you state of residence does not require a permit to carry, aka Vermont etc. The bill needs to be amended so it applies to D.C. also. So we do not have to depend on the Court. Congress and the President can do this IF THEY WILL. We will never have a better chance to make this happen. Every one needs to be writing their congress critters to get this done.
(a) In General.—Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 926C the following:
Ҥ 926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms
“(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof (except as provided in subsection (b)) and subject only to the requirements of this section, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm, who is carrying a valid identification document containing a photograph of the person, and who is carrying a valid license or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm or is entitled to carry a concealed firearm in the State in which the person resides, may possess or carry a concealed handgun (other than a machinegun or destructive device) that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, in any State. . .
It say issued pursuant to the law of a State. It does not say the state of your resident. That only applies if you state of residence does not require a permit to carry, aka Vermont etc. The bill needs to be amended so it applies to D.C. also. So we do not have to depend on the Court. Congress and the President can do this IF THEY WILL. We will never have a better chance to make this happen. Every one needs to be writing their congress critters to get this done.
Last edited:
RBean
.40 S&W
Also the bill has provisions to sue state officials who disregard the law and arrest people any way.
ArmedCorgi
.475 A&M Magnum
I'm still confused when it comes to restrictions. If your judge restricts your permit and doesn't want you carrying, but you get a non-resident permit so that you can carry, what's to stop your judge from revoking your nys permit?
RBean
.40 S&W
He could revoke your permit. In NY the licensing officer can do anything he wants. That is why I think PL 400 is unconstitutional. It would be in violation of you constitutional rights under Heller (although the never stopped a NY official). It would be arbitrary and capricious even under NY law. You could sue and still carry under your out of state license. All this is just speculation until the ACT is passed.
2WheelGnnr
6.5 Creedmoor
I was thinking. maybe scotus does not hear any cases on 2a as they feel they already covered it once. why rehash it. we did 2a with dc v hellar......DONE.
maybe Im giving them too much but im trying to look at the bright side.
maybe I spoke too soon just read the link above about thomas chastizing other members of S.C.
maybe Im giving them too much but im trying to look at the bright side.
maybe I spoke too soon just read the link above about thomas chastizing other members of S.C.
Last edited:
Go ahead and revoke it. Then, use your out of state Florida permit to carry in the 50 states, entirely, including NYC...
Then again, one other thing comes to mind. Under FUAC's NYSAFE, if your CCW permit is revoked, they take away your right to own ANY firearms in NY state, including all of your long guns. Not sure how that would sort itself out, or if lawsuits would be needed to fix it. I mean, how could NY State take away your long guns, and yet, you would still be able to carry a handgun around the state using an out of state permit?
Just saw @RBean comment above. I think he is right, that if NY pulled your CCW, when you had done nothing illegal, that would seem to be arbitrary and capricious. But you would still need to sue to get it back (hopefully)...
ArmedCorgi
.475 A&M Magnum
Pl400 is unconstitutional for many reasons. If these national carry bills require you to have a permit in your home state, then having your NYS permit revoked would render your out of state permit void. After all, you can't even possess a handgun in NY with out a NYS permit.
So let's say you go for your unrestricted permit here in NY, but your judge declines. So you then get an out of state permit and carry on that. Let's say you get stopped or what not, something happens where your judge finds out you were carrying outside of your NYS restrictions on an out of state permit. What happens? I know probably depends on the judge, but you were legally carrying as per Federal law, but would this be used as a basis for judges to pull permits?
ArmedCorgi
.475 A&M Magnum
I don't think that's accurate. You NEED a permit in your home state right? In NY, you NEED a permit to even possess a handgun. If you lose the NYS permit, you cannot legally possess in NY. I'm not so sure having a Utah or Florida non-resident permit is gonna be any good if you are a NY resident with restrictions on your NYS pistol permit.
You could be right, who knows for sure until something is actually passed and signed, and even then, perhaps not until after the courts have screwed with it.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
If you read Hudson's bill from the House of Representatives and not the one floating around the Senate, it says that if you are carrying under it's protections and you are arrested or detained, you can sue the state.
You do not need to have a NY permit for possession if you have an out of state permit. That is false.
You will not be able to buy a handgun out of state due to federal law, but if you already had one or built one from an 80 percent, you can carry it with an out of state permit.
They're is a lot of misinformation here being speculated in this thread. Read the actual bill below.
Text - H.R.38 - 115th Congress (2017-2018): Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017
You do not need to have a NY permit for possession if you have an out of state permit. That is false.
You will not be able to buy a handgun out of state due to federal law, but if you already had one or built one from an 80 percent, you can carry it with an out of state permit.
They're is a lot of misinformation here being speculated in this thread. Read the actual bill below.
Text - H.R.38 - 115th Congress (2017-2018): Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017
ArmedCorgi
.475 A&M Magnum
I know you tried to clarify this for me before @Willjr75 , I'm sorry but after reading this it still leaves me with questions. Maybe I'm not understanding it right. It seems this law nullifies mag limits as well as any features banned by states. Or at least makes you immune from prosecution for having items that are legal in your home state but not in a state you currently are in. What I didn't see in the text (and correct me if I'm wrong or missed it) is how this affects you in your home state. It makes sense to me that someone from Utah could carry here in NY without fear of prosecution for carrying or for having a gun with a standard capacity mag or other such features banned to NYS residents, What I don't think the Bill clarifies, is whether or not one would be immune from prosecution by your home state for being a resident of said state and carrying outside of the laws that govern YOU as a resident of said state. Even with an out of state, non-resident permit, you are still a resident of NYS and are subject to its laws. So, if this thinking is wrong, and this bill really would make state laws, at least concerning features and mag capacity, null and void. How will that be reconciled with each state? How would this bill affect things like restrictions on your home permit when carrying in your home state? I'm just not seeing it. I don't see how as a resident of NY you could be immune from NYS law by having an out of state, non-resident permit. I just don't see restricted states as allowing their laws to be nullified.
Snappo
6.5 Creedmoor
I highly suspect that GOP and DNC are just two faces of the same animal and that they collude to do the same basic thing no matter who wins (stagnate, refuse to do anything bipartisan, refuse to lower the budget, etc). I'm not at all surprised that they are in cahoots together to screw the people and keep them dependent lemmings.
Snappo
6.5 Creedmoor
I guess this comes down to the argument from 250 years ago with the Federalists vs the Anti-Federalists. Which takes precedent - a Federal law, or a State law? I get the feeling State Law always trumps the Federal Law; which is why Ovomit and Drumpf cannot go into Colorado or Washington State and bust those weed dispensaries.
@thewheels
.308 Win
The average life expectancy at the end of the 18th century was 35. There's no way the founding fathers could know that future generations would more than double that. They assumed quicker turnover at SCOTUS. Ben Franklin was ancient by their standards and living as long as he did was rare.
It's hard to believe they would accept anyone serving as long as some of our current justices. Especially a justice approaching 85.
Snappo
6.5 Creedmoor
Did they really die that young? I had no idea. I figured maybe they died in their 60s instead of their 80s. No wonder Mohammad was marrying 8 year old girls - he probably figured he'd be dead by 20. LOL
@thewheels
.308 Win
Some of the founding fathers did in fact live well past the average but many were young/ish when SHTF.
RBean
.40 S&W
There are a lot of questions and unknowns here. If passed, NY State Officials will fight it any way they can. I get that. There will probably be revocations, Federal lawsuits etc for years. Do you think it would be any difference if the Supreme Court took and decided the case in our favor. The State ignores Heller and McDonald and would do the same with any right-to-carry case. Being a NY state resident and carrying on an out of state license does present additional complications and would probably involve litigation. In fact the NRA Carry Insurance needs to provide coverage for the type of litigation that would probably result in NY on these questions.
I still think revoking your permit just because you were carrying in compliance with Federal Law would be itself a violation of Federal Law and your civil rights. Remember, if you carry out side of your "limitations" that is a regulatory violation, not a criminal act. You have a "right" and not a "privilege" to possess hand gun at least in your home. That is what we are litigating in Weinstein and Cusumano right now.
With regard to nullifying NYS laws, they are not nullified. Just adjusted to address violations of constitutional rights. Does not the president and congress have the power and duty to prevent violations of citizens' constitutional rights? Even if the Courts refuse to act? I think so.
Also, Federal law pre-empts State law. If you can carry under Federal law, and the state revokes your state license, that revocation would be contrary to Federal law. At least that is what I would argue. I see lots and lots of litigation here.
Maybe the ACT needs to have a retaliation clause in it like the civil rights act. If they revoke your license because you are carrying under a out of state license, that would be retaliation for exercising a civil right and the state subject to suit and damages. And on and on its goes.
I still think revoking your permit just because you were carrying in compliance with Federal Law would be itself a violation of Federal Law and your civil rights. Remember, if you carry out side of your "limitations" that is a regulatory violation, not a criminal act. You have a "right" and not a "privilege" to possess hand gun at least in your home. That is what we are litigating in Weinstein and Cusumano right now.
With regard to nullifying NYS laws, they are not nullified. Just adjusted to address violations of constitutional rights. Does not the president and congress have the power and duty to prevent violations of citizens' constitutional rights? Even if the Courts refuse to act? I think so.
Also, Federal law pre-empts State law. If you can carry under Federal law, and the state revokes your state license, that revocation would be contrary to Federal law. At least that is what I would argue. I see lots and lots of litigation here.
Maybe the ACT needs to have a retaliation clause in it like the civil rights act. If they revoke your license because you are carrying under a out of state license, that would be retaliation for exercising a civil right and the state subject to suit and damages. And on and on its goes.
RBean
.40 S&W
Oh, but officer, I'm not carrying under my NY permit with limitations, but my Florida permit without limitations. If you arrest me or have my NY permit revoked, I'll sue you, your chief, the mayor, the governor my licensing officer under this new Federal Law which give me the power to do so. So decide what you are going to do. (he will "follow orders").
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
That bill only gives you exemption for the gun your carrying. It doesn't give you exemptions for rifles, 30 round magazines for that rifle, ect. So as written if you are carrying a Glock with a 17 round magazine, you are covered along with the pistol.
“(2) The term ‘handgun’ includes any magazine for use in a handgun and any ammunition loaded into the handgun or its magazine.
As far as restrictions on your permit go, they can revoke it but they can't take away your pistols or the ability to carry them. What would result is that you wouldn't be able to buy anymore pistols as a resident of this state.
Last edited: