Antonyuk v James is dead, denied Cert by libtard Robert's SCOTUS court.

Saltwater60 · Apr 7, 2025

This is bad and will embolden them more. They have no consistency in what they accept or how they rule. This clearly isn’t consistent with historical traditions on gun laws. Sad state of affairs.

tirwin1 · Apr 7, 2025

Given what we have learned about Roberts it seems clear he has been compromised. He is a weak man in over his head.

tirwin1 · Apr 7, 2025

At this point I am convinced that even if Congress were to pass a law allowing reciprocal CC and clarifying the second amendment (shall not be infringed) the supreme court would rule it unconstitutional.

Zerex · Apr 7, 2025

Just did not vote to hear the case.................let lower fed Ct ruling stand.

Modean · Apr 7, 2025

It only takes 4 votes to grant cert. Clearly there aren't 5 justices on the right side of this, which is disturbing.

Modean · Apr 7, 2025

VietnamEraVet said:
Just another worthless anti 2A decision by SCOTUS under that libtard Roberts. Worse than sad, but I am not surprised at the continued denial of our rights.

Supreme Court turns away challenge to New York state gun limits

The U.S. Supreme Court turned away on Monday a challenge to New York firearms restrictions adopted shortly after the justices in 2022 struck down the Democratic state's previous limits on carrying concealed handguns in a landmark ruling that expanded gun rights.

www.usatoday.com

If they won't enforce their own rulings, what good are they?

Depick · Apr 7, 2025

They just wrote every anti 2A state in the country a blank check. Nothing more than a display of pure fucking weakness.

Tisto · Apr 7, 2025

Don't get your panties in a knot. This case was in front of scotus on an interlocatory status. Scotus VERY RARELY grants cert to any case that is not in front of them as a final injunction. The Antonyuk case has to be fought through the lower courts and have a final decision proclaimed. At that time it will be appealed to scotus. In the meantime, scotus may hear and decide the SNOPES v BROWN and OCEAN STATE TACTICAL v RHODE ISLAND cases. Any decision on them will moot the Antonyuk case.

Vicarious · Apr 7, 2025

Why do I feel like I had more "Rights" before the big NYSRPA win?

IrishMick · Apr 7, 2025

What Tisto said. SCOTUS rarely takes cases in the interlocutory phase. While I would like to say to them is as these cases drag on the People are being deprived of their Rights. If they happen to take up Snope and declare AWBs are not Constitutional (which will be stretching into 13 years of rights deprivation under the SAFE Act). If we receive a favorable ruling states like NY and CA will leap to pass (probably already written) Anti 2A legislation, where the entire exercise in futility begins again. Any ruling that declares hardware bans and restrictions un-Constitutional must contain language that prevents this hamster wheel of passing of anti 2A laws and schemes. SCOTUS also needs to start taking these cases in the interlocutory phase and halting rights deprivation until the state can prove their burden that their new law is NOT an infringement of the enumerated right. By this standard, the big FU by NYS, would be put on hold until the state can prove their burden and cannot proceed until all judicial avenues have be exhausted. SCOTUS also needs to broaden their decisions (they kind of did with Bruen). Don't just rule on whether Left Handed Transgenders can keep and bear arms on Leap Years. Stop the sneaky concurring opinion dicta. Kavanaugh slid the "Some licensing schemes may be Constitutional" dicta into the Bruen decision and opened the door for the CCIA and likely decades more of state overreach. It was not part of the decision penned by Thomas and actually has no binding judgement as far as the ruling goes. They also decide that many other cases are not in line with the ruling and GVR them back to the lower courts to fix. The crappy courts like the 2nd and 9th then drag their feet and compete in mental gymnastics to uphold their ruling, where I believe that SCOTUS GVRs the case back to them mainly because they got the ruling WRONG not some minor litigative minutiae incorrect. They need to start ruling on these things en masse as far as the outcomes as the lower courts just spit in their face.....slowly and all the while We the People continue to suffer the abrogation of our rights. All that being said, there could be further litigation on more specific areas of the CCIA hopefully tearing it down piece by piece. Of course we here will be cold in the ground before we ever experience any true result.

thughes · Apr 7, 2025

Life's too short, so I just opted to move to where 90% of this stuff is perfectly legal.

FP1201 · Apr 7, 2025

Vicarious said:
Why do I feel like I had more "Rights" before the big NYSRPA win?

Subjectively, it would seem so, however this is a long game and we're only in the 7th Inning...
I do want to point out that NYSRPA had no hand in this lawsuit.

US RIFLE M1A · Apr 7, 2025

This is one of several reasons why plaintiffs should not seek preliminary injunctions. They should apply for a permanent injunction up front. Even though it is a more rigorous process, and will take longer, if this were involving a permanent injunction, SCOTUS may have granted cert.

Old Jalopy · Apr 7, 2025

Vicarious said:
Why do I feel like I had more "Rights" before the big NYSRPA win?

We did. But we got hit with a double wammy. Bruen ruling and that shooting in Buffalo back to back.

GOPerfect · Apr 7, 2025

I still wonder if and when the people of NY and places of like mind, will wake up and solve the issue on their own?

JRtraderny · Apr 7, 2025

GOPerfect said:
I still wonder if and when the people of NY and places of like mind, will wake up and solve the issue on their own?

I'm going out on a limb here and say probably never as long as the $$$ keep flowing to the liberal cities and agendas.

spat · Tuesday at 12:14 AM

GOPerfect said:
I still wonder if and when the people of NY and places of like mind, will wake up and solve the issue on their own?

Many of us did.

The most expedient solution was to GTFONY.

Grimscale · Tuesday at 7:06 AM

thughes said:
Life's too short, so I just opted to move to where 90% of this stuff is perfectly legal.

spat said:
The most expedient solution was to GTFONY.

Eventually you run out of places to move to. I don't believe, for a second, that those bastions won't also fall, and likely in our lifetime. I don't underestimate the power of liberalism to expand and infest, like cockroaches.
Even in Arizona, that liberal governor was allowed to retain power even though there was evidence of voting fraud.

GOPerfect said:
I still wonder if and when the people of NY and places of like mind, will wake up and solve the issue on their own?

That's the problem with being the group who are typically "law-abiding". It takes a LOT to finally get them to realize that being un-lawful, briefly, is required to eventually remain law-abiding.
It will most likely occur when enough people are harmed: either by criminals (and the law-abiding cannot, legally, defend themselves) or directly by this corrupt and illegal government.
But, once that ball gets rolling, anyone even remotely connected to the un-American, tyrant wanna-be, oppressors might want to seriously consider a long vacation elsewhere.
The minute you push someone law-abiding to acts that go against their nature you open a pandora's box of violence you will never recover from.

History has shown this again and again.

prambo · Tuesday at 8:37 AM

GOPerfect · Tuesday at 8:53 AM

Grimscale said:
Eventually you run out of places to move to. I don't believe, for a second, that those bastions won't also fall, and likely in our lifetime. I don't underestimate the power of liberalism to expand and infest, like cockroaches.
Even in Arizona, that liberal governor was allowed to retain power even though there was evidence of voting fraud.

That's the problem with being the group who are typically "law-abiding". It takes a LOT to finally get them to realize that being un-lawful, briefly, is required to eventually remain law-abiding.
It will most likely occur when enough people are harmed: either by criminals (and the law-abiding cannot, legally, defend themselves) or directly by this corrupt and illegal government.
But, once that ball gets rolling, anyone even remotely connected to the un-American, tyrant wanna-be, oppressors might want to seriously consider a long vacation elsewhere.
The minute you push someone law-abiding to acts that go against their nature you open a pandora's box of violence you will never recover from.

History has shown this again and again.

Agreed....

thughes · Tuesday at 9:08 AM

Grimscale said:
Eventually you run out of places to move to. I don't believe, for a second, that those bastions won't also fall, and likely in our lifetime.

They might, but not in my lifetime. So, I choose not to live oppressed but to instead enjoy freedom and liberty where I can find it, when I can find it, for as long as I can find it. YMMV.

spat · Tuesday at 9:22 AM

Grimscale said:
Eventually you run out of places to move to. I don't believe, for a second, that those bastions won't also fall, and likely in our lifetime. I don't underestimate the power of liberalism to expand and infest, like cockroaches.
Even in Arizona, that liberal governor was allowed to retain power even though there was evidence of voting fraud.

That's the problem with being the group who are typically "law-abiding". It takes a LOT to finally get them to realize that being un-lawful, briefly, is required to eventually remain law-abiding.
It will most likely occur when enough people are harmed: either by criminals (and the law-abiding cannot, legally, defend themselves) or directly by this corrupt and illegal government.
But, once that ball gets rolling, anyone even remotely connected to the un-American, tyrant wanna-be, oppressors might want to seriously consider a long vacation elsewhere.
The minute you push someone law-abiding to acts that go against their nature you open a pandora's box of violence you will never recover from.

History has shown this again and again.

You're not wrong, but if moving buys be a couple decades more freedom then it was easily worth it.

And whether NY is eventually forced kicking and screaming to drop their totalitarian shtick, or if they eventually "California my Arizona", either way I will probably get a decade or two of freedom the NYers don't.

Old Jalopy · Tuesday at 12:48 PM

Weren't Trump and Bondi supposed to start making all of this go away back in February? Even going by 30 "working days", that 30 time frame has long since elapsed. The fact is, until we get a top dog who is truly going to make people uphold the oath they took and hold those who don't liable, it's only going to get worse. As mentioned, it's spreading and spreading fast. If you can afford to move, great. But the liberal anti-gun people are doing the same. Look how many states used to be free that are now starting to pass anti-gun laws.

Another fact people may not get is the younger generations (and some older people too) are following the latest cool thing on social media. The cool things are to hate guns and America. Those are the future leaders, so....... Escape will soon be futile.

Saltwater60 · Tuesday at 1:16 PM

Old Jalopy said:
Weren't Trump and Bondi supposed to start making all of this go away back in February? Even going by 30 "working days", that 30 time frame has long since elapsed. The fact is, until we get a top dog who is truly going to make people uphold the oath they took and hold those who don't liable, it's only going to get worse. As mentioned, it's spreading and spreading fast. If you can afford to move, great. But the liberal anti-gun people are doing the same. Look how many states used to be free that are now starting to pass anti-gun laws.

Another fact people may not get is the younger generations (and some older people too) are following the latest cool thing on social media. The cool things are to hate guns and America. Those are the future leaders, so....... Escape will soon be futile.

Not my kids. I raised them right. Both did or would vote for Trump. Both like guns and the oldest will apply for his pistol permit soon. Both think trans is crazy and mock liberals routinely for their crazy ideas. My oldest sees their stupidity firsthand at UB and can’t stand them.

Criticalt · Tuesday at 2:18 PM

Old Jalopy said:
Weren't Trump and Bondi supposed to start making all of this go away back in February? Even going by 30 "working days", that 30 time frame has long since elapsed. The fact is, until we get a top dog who is truly going to make people uphold the oath they took and hold those who don't liable, it's only going to get worse. As mentioned, it's spreading and spreading fast. If you can afford to move, great. But the liberal anti-gun people are doing the same. Look how many states used to be free that are now starting to pass anti-gun laws.

Another fact people may not get is the younger generations (and some older people too) are following the latest cool thing on social media. The cool things are to hate guns and America. Those are the future leaders, so....... Escape will soon be futile.

According to the people who follow this crap, gen Z is the most conservative in years.
I recently saw a "study" done by.....some group.

They polled thousands of gen Alpha kids age 13-17. They were asked who they would have voted for in 2024. 61% said they would have voted for Trump.
I'll look for the study, I believe it was done by "Campus Reform", but not sure.
I'm the first one to say polls are idiotic, but hey, it's something.

DoD1776 · Tuesday at 3:01 PM

Modean said:
If they won't enforce their own rulings, what good are they?

ACB is probably the most liberal one. Out of all right leaning justices.

thisIslandEarth · Tuesday at 3:48 PM

spat said:
You're not wrong, but if moving buys be a couple decades more freedom then it was easily worth it.

And whether NY is eventually forced kicking and screaming to drop their totalitarian shtick, or if they eventually "California my Arizona", either way I will probably get a decade or two of freedom the NYers don't.

For the past decade, an estimated 630,000 people have moved from California to Arizona, which averages to about 173 people a day...just saying

Vicarious · Tuesday at 4:00 PM

FP1201 said:
I do want to point out that NYSRPA had no hand in this lawsuit.

The CCIA is a direct result or rather, a full on retaliation for the audacity, of NYSRPA v. Bruen.

spat · Tuesday at 4:37 PM

thisIslandEarth said:
For the past decade, an estimated 630,000 people have moved from California to Arizona, which averages to about 173 people a day...just saying

It's true, but they are largely conservatives escaping.

Just like I came from NY and am not about to start voting Dem, lots of the CA escapees are well aware of what they are running from too.

But, it *is* slowly dragging us leftward.

Antonyuk v James is dead, denied Cert by libtard Robert's SCOTUS court.

.308 Win

.950 JDJ

.475 A&M Magnum

.475 A&M Magnum

.308 Win

.223 Rem

.223 Rem

.308 Win

.308 Win

.40 S&W

.44 mag

.44 mag

.338 Win Mag

.45 acp

.45 acp

.950 JDJ

6.5 Creedmoor

.700 Nitro Express

.338 Win Mag

.475 A&M Magnum

.950 JDJ

.44 mag

.700 Nitro Express

.45 acp

.950 JDJ

.338 Win Mag

NYGF's own Whippersnapper !

.357 mag

.40 S&W

.700 Nitro Express