aNd fOr ThE ReCoRd
Ummmm, just go back and read the thread. It apparently “triggered “ you somehow? I mean holy shit. I said “yet “ , like insinuating NY does stupid shit all the time, are you going to really dispute that? But yeah , it’s a dumb comment because you said so. OkayImagine thinking your dumb ass comment oFfEnDeD mE
Nahhh , not butt hurt. Don’t really care about what the resident gun snob on here thinks. Was just bringing up what could come down the line here as residents of the great state of N.Y. But you had to make your snide remark like it wasn’t possible. LMFAO, nobody said anything about it sticking. Do you forget where you live?If anyone one got butt hurt it was you for getting called out on your stupid assertion that a law like that would get passed and even stand long enough to even give a second thought
“¯\_(ツ)_/¯“
Remember I saw nothing about it being illegal to buy ammo in another state or possess ammo that has not been background checked. All this speculation about being arrested for buying ammo in PA or transporting it means nothing. There is no serial number, no way to track it, no law forbidding it. Now that doesn’t mean it won’t come next week or next year, but it’s not here now.
If this goes through I fully plan to buy shotgun ammo in NYS because it seems no background check is needed for that and all other ammo in PA. I will tag a ride with some one and buy them much or split the gas with them and get what I need. I’m sure plenty of gun stores down there will want to service us and want our money. They are not breaking the law so I don’t see why they would care.
There’s some misinfo here. The 100 mile border zone is not the same as the border or ports of entry.
At a port of entry you have few constitutional rights, in that CBP may search all of your stuff and interrogate you without any cause whatsoever. They can also seize items on very flimsy pretenses (such as to investigate electronics further). Ultimately if you are a US citizen they normally have to let you in if there is no cause to charge you with something, though you have to produce a passport or other docs to prove citizenship (and now with few exceptions a passport is required). And it is illegal to cross the border other than at a port of entry, so you are subject to arrest for doing so.
The 100 mile border zone including checkpoints are not the same as the border or ports of entry. CBP has wide latitude to “operate” in this zone. They cannot arbitrarily search, detain or interrogate you in this zone. They can patrol but only pull you over on reasonable suspicion. They cannot normally search closed containers or locked compartments without consent or a warrant. They can establish enforcement checkpoints where everyone is stopped in this zone, but unless they spot something that is reasonably suspicious of a crime going on they are limited to asking if you are citizens, and if you say “yes” they would then have to let you go on your way if nothing else was suspicious. If not a citizen then they can ask for papers (since noncitizens are supposed to carry them by law). There are legal consequences associated with lying about citizenship to CBP officers.
Essentially, the 100 mile zone is just a jurisdiction where CBP can operate like other law enforcement. They need the same basis of reasonable suspicion of a violation to detain, single you out or search you that state or local police do. They can establish immigration checkpoints similar to how police can establish DUI checkpoints, to screen travelers for immigration status as do cops for sobriety status, and potentially fish for other obvious signs of criminality. Checkpoints are obnoxious but they have been upheld for their limited enforcement purposes.
Looks like we could use podmonkeys services ....we could even charter a bus for a ammo run .. LOL .
IDK, we have been through several check points in the Escape Pod, we slow way down and they just wave us through. we barely come to a stop.you know them 1A auditors .. filming in public .. well there are boarder auditors too .. just saying .. some got brass balls lol ..
Defense attorney Robert J. Campos demonstrates how to assert your legal rights at a border stop
in his discription below .. this is part and there is a whole lot more ..
"In United States v. Martinez Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543 (1976), our United States Supreme Court ruled that the Border Patrol's routine stopping of a vehicle at a permanent checkpoint located on a major highway away from the Mexican border for brief questioning of the vehicle's occupants is consistent with the Fourth Amendment, and the stops and questioning may be made at reasonably located checkpoints in the absence of any individualized suspicion that the particular vehicle contains illegal aliens. The Court went on describe the reasons for their decision and the impracticality of forcing Border Patrol Agents to obtain a warrant in advance of a checkpoint or requiring that Border Patrol Agents have reasonable suspicion for each vehicle stopped. The Supreme Court’s ruling allows Border Patrol Agents to set up permanent checkpoints along major freeways, stopping all vehicles, and allowing Agents to question United States citizens regarding their citizenship and any other question that the Agents wants to ask in relation to your immigration status. "
"I have two questions for you: One, should you care? And two, if you do, how do you assert your rights at these checkpoints? "
California did it. I think people are just predicting what NYS will do next.Show me in the Text as informed by History where there was bans on buying ammo from out of state “¯\_(ツ)_/¯“
California did it. I think people are just predicting what NYS will do next.
When was it ruled unconstitutional? And it’s a different situation compared to the example given before about a prohibited person. I hope it was ruled unconstitutional.And it was ruled unconstitutional... so who gives a shit what "California did" because guess what even their attempt to do it was shut down even at the district court level..
Now go back to your probable cause pearls
When was it ruled unconstitutional? And it’s a different situation compared to the example given before about a prohibited person. I hope it was ruled unconstitutional.
Are you a prohibited person? Then the scenario discussed would not apply to almost anyone here, correct? All of these things are important in the fact pattern. It’s still illegal for prohibited people to possession ammunition.Already pointed out when it was ruled on. But I guess if I didn't have it sitting in a repurposed 50 cal ammo can, you won't be able to find it.
Take a trip over to www.google.com and type in Rhode v. Becerra
If this goes through the on line days are over just so you know.And for the record, I buy mine all out of state/online anyways and will continue to do so anyhow so NY can eat a metric shit ton of dicks, just saying
One can bet their bottom Dollar that it could take days if not weeks to buy ammo. Have a riot like we saw in Rochester and guarantee the phone lines will be down to buy that ammo... For the duration.If this goes through the on line days are over just so you know.
I also agree NYS will attempt to stop us from buying ammo in other states if they think we are doing it in any sort of numbers.
I would guess that on-line ammo shippers who told L. James to fu<% herself and not collect NYS sales tax would continue shipping to NYS.If this goes through the on line days are over just so you know.
I also agree NYS will attempt to stop us from buying ammo in other states if they think we are doing it in any sort of numbers.
so now when I buy ammo I gotta pay an extra what 25 bucks to do a background check..as if ammo prices werent already out of wack.........ridiculous.......what is a background check gonna stop......NOTE...if bad guy can get around the initial background check all that legal stuff to get the gun in the first place do you really think he cant also get ammo for it without said same BGCK........DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm thinking it works the other way - a criminal attempts to buy some ammo...if he gets the approval, he now knows he'll probably be approved for a gun too, so why not try to buy one ?so now when I buy ammo I gotta pay an extra what 25 bucks to do a background check..as if ammo prices werent already out of wack.........ridiculous.......what is a background check gonna stop......NOTE...if bad guy can get around the initial background check all that legal stuff to get the gun in the first place do you really think he cant also get ammo for it without said same BGCK........DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
My reading of the "bill / ammendments" garnered that ammo purchase checks differed from firearm background checks and were not envisioned to be part of the $25 fee. Who knows, some assholes would love a $25 infringement for a box of 22lr or a Fudd's annual 5 round hunting purchase.so now when I buy ammo I gotta pay an extra what 25 bucks to do a background check..as if ammo prices werent already out of wack.........ridiculous.......what is a background check gonna stop......NOTE...if bad guy can get around the initial background check all that legal stuff to get the gun in the first place do you really think he cant also get ammo for it without said same BGCK........DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And it was ruled unconstitutional... so who gives a shit what "California did" because guess what even their attempt to do it was shut down even at the district court level..
Rhode v. Becerra[edit]
The case Rhode v. Becerra is challenging Proposition 63's requirement for background checks to purchase ammunition as well as its prohibition against importation of ammunition into the state by residents, unless importation takes place through a licensed ammunition dealer. On April 22, 2020, Judge Roger Benitez of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California struck down the requirement and prohibition, stating “California’s new ammunition background check law misfires and the Second Amendment rights of California citizens have been gravely injured.” California's Attorney General Xavier Becerra filed for and was granted a stay of the injunction to appeal the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.[17]
Seems at the moment it is still in affect.
Went to buds site and most of their ammo is sold out.And it begins. I received this today. View attachment 165918
Who is this from?And it begins. I received this today. View attachment 165918