FPC and SAF sue NYS to stop the CCIA
- Thread starter Jchrisls
- Start date
CaliberPlus
.45 acp
I wish it were the whole damn package rather than just the handgun part. Pages and pages of crap.
US RIFLE M1A
.45 acp
I ask, albeit without permission from others, that you could help us understand the legal aspects of this case. Based solely on responses I've observed in other posts by you that your legal acumen is far above most I've encountered. Would you be willing to help us understand the case, it's outlook and keep us abreast as it progresses? We have lost valuable insight into pending litigation with the exit of a member, and your views would be invaluable. I hope you will consider this.
In addition @US RIFLE M1A , what would you consider a reasonable timeline for trial?
That_FNG
.308 Win
Latest lawsuit targeting NY gun ban centers on parks, public transit and private property
The lawsuit brought by two local gun owners and two national Second Amendment rights organizations seeks to overturn a provision that puts all private property off-limits to firearms without the expressed consent of the property owners.
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
It all needs to go and we need to get compensated for the damages we’ve all had.
Acer-m14
20×102mm Vulcan
yep ..
you would have to be the 110 % perfect plaintiff that could hit every part of the CCIA to take it down all at once ..
ManualF150
.308 Win
They can make it OK with me if they give me 50,000 CCI small pistol primers, 200 lbs of smokeless HS-6 powder, 50,000 brass cases, and 50,000 124gr round nose bullets (any brand is OK) for my damages. On top of being able to be unrestricted without all the red tape nonsense.
I would prefer that those responsible for passing this legislation whom has protection provided by the taxpayers that thier own personal protective service members be held to THE EXACT SAME LIMITATIONS and standards that the average resident must abide by.
Mag limits
Round limits
Training requirements
Background checks
Social media review by CITIZENS
No evil features on ar15s
Rifle permits
Recertification every 3 years and the best of it all
No Carry in sensitive places deemed inappropriate without signage.
If they were held to the same standards, these restrictions would evaporate.
FrankenCub
.338 Win Mag
Unless something radical happens where I don't need to blow $500 to take this stupid ass course to unrestrict my permit IDGAF! Otherwise my NY permit is absolutely useless.
Kinda makes you wonder what they're afraid of huh....
Right now even unrestricted permits are useless.
I wouldn’t bother until this gets sorted.
US RIFLE M1A
.45 acp
Plaintiff challenges three worst aspects of CC!A; public transportation, parks and local stores. Plaintiff is a motorcycle enthusiast who regularly travels through the ADKS, and is afraid to do so due to poorly written law which seems to prevent travel in that entire area. As a motorcyclist, he has little recourse in locking up handgun; no privacy within vehicle to move handgun to locked case.
Also prevented entirely from accessing restrooms, stores, gas stations and hotels on trip thereby entirely restricting his freedom of movement. Plaintiff also uses public trans to enjoy his hometown of Buffalo, and will be prevented from going legally armed when doing so.
Information is also out that case was moved TO known conservative judge in WDNY. Casual analysis may indicate libby judge saw loser (NY's loss) case and did not want to be dis-invited from libby cocktail party circuit for the rest of her life due to one case. So she had it moved to conservative judge. Speculation, but it's a good move for us.
Once standing is established, case needs to be narrow to have all challenged aspects affect plaintiff's civil rights. Freedom of movement is a biggy.
Analysis also tends to predict that NY would not appeal to 2nd Circ if they lose, they don't want to get involved with SCOTUS again, especially if Justice Thomas is as angry as people suggest he may be.
Timeline? Nov 30 for hearing, if it goes to trial, the spring. If we get an injunction, it really does not matter, because we will live with whatever the injunction says which will be better that what we have now.
My hope is the plaintiff will represent us better than the last lawsuit and thank you
That_FNG
.308 Win
I thought I had read it as two plaintiffs but is just one then?
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
I’d just prefer we get their privilege and be done with it. After all we have equal protection under the law right?
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
Didn’t they remedy the ADK parks being a no go zone with guns. It’s not a park they call it something else. This is addressed somewhere. They call them state forests and say you’re allowed to go in them while CC’ing now. Do I agree it’s confusing and hard to get yes? They say any property owned is off limits but then allow this? Why? Because it would quickly be struck down. So confusing yes, but likely remedied. We will see how good the Trump judge is.
Can I possess a firearm, rifle or shotgun in the Adirondack and Catskill Parks?
Certain areas of the parks are not considered “sensitive locations” under the law, as the state- owned or managed lands are legally classified as state forest preserve or are generally private lands.There are areas inside the Adirondack and Catskill Parks, however, that are classified as sensitive locations or restricted locations under the new gun law (e.g., libraries and government administrative facilities) and these specific locations are subject to the sensitive and restricted location restrictions under the law, which are detailed in Question 23. Please review the Department of Environmental Conservation’s FAQs for more information.
I would believe that based upon the entirety of the suit and his loss of freedom in travel is the linchpin of the case in his inability to use public places in his travels is the center of it all.
nortatoga
.338 Win Mag
US RIFLE M1A
.45 acp
There are many things going on at once here. Yes, there is more than one case, I commented on the Boron case out of Buffalo (NDNY)
Keep in mind when you look back at where we have come from to establish a possible trajectory for the future.
First, New York has a habit of writing gun laws which establish 'dejure' illegality. Dejure means harmless yet unlawful, like a rifle hand grip that extends... etc etc. These dejure laws are by definition difficult to both comply with and to enforce, because no one is specifically injured by someone violating the law. Fin grips, backward angle grips, those silly shorty grips, etc. Purely cosmetic.
The problem for our side is that these laws are easy to write, you just come up with a list of harmless things you do not want people to do, with the nefarious purpose of infringing against the law abiding. This was done with both SAFE and CCIA. However, a plaintiff (with standing) still has to methodically break down the law using a rational argument, even if the law itself is irrational. Actually takes quite a bit of skill.
Second, New York has a habit of taking the weasel route when faced with a lawsuit. These weasel moves are actually unsung 2A victories.
One recent 2A victory was in the Antonyuk case in which, contrary to the way the law was written, upstaters now do NOT have to take the 16 hour training when recertifying.
Another example of this is instead of arguing the merits of the case in Antonyuk, they attacked his standing as the primary focus of their defense. Yes, this weasel route worked partially, but you cannot deny standing forever. Someone, somewhere has standing, and the potential plaintiffs get to refine their approach each time.
Relying on weasel moves, and presenting shitty arguments to actually justify the CCIA actually got the law declared unconstitutional by the judge. This is not a short term victory, but will set the foundation for a longer term victory. People underestimate this.
Apparently, they have also now weaseled out of the Adirondacks being a Park. It's not a Park, it's a the Adirondack Park, which is not a park. But there are 'certain' locations within the park...
Honest judges (and SCOTUS justices) will see these weasel moves for what they are. AND, enough weasel moves by the state, and we will erode the law just via perseverance, bit-by-bit, which is a legitimate legal tactic.
BOTTOM LINE is that I am looking forward to reading the state's response in Boron. Will they weasel out of more, by declaring, contrary to the law, that 'certain' locations are not really those 'certain' locations you cannot carry to if... maybe you are en route to hunting or target shooting (or to and from work as armed security? )
Combine that with the fact that there are a multitude of cases, and the state will run out of arguments as honest judges see through each of them. You can use a legitimate argument as many times as you wish, you can only use an illegitimate argument once.
Whatever the situation at present, winter is coming and New York is a cold, cold place. Sweaters are bulky, heavy coats are bulkier...
Keep in mind when you look back at where we have come from to establish a possible trajectory for the future.
First, New York has a habit of writing gun laws which establish 'dejure' illegality. Dejure means harmless yet unlawful, like a rifle hand grip that extends... etc etc. These dejure laws are by definition difficult to both comply with and to enforce, because no one is specifically injured by someone violating the law. Fin grips, backward angle grips, those silly shorty grips, etc. Purely cosmetic.
The problem for our side is that these laws are easy to write, you just come up with a list of harmless things you do not want people to do, with the nefarious purpose of infringing against the law abiding. This was done with both SAFE and CCIA. However, a plaintiff (with standing) still has to methodically break down the law using a rational argument, even if the law itself is irrational. Actually takes quite a bit of skill.
Second, New York has a habit of taking the weasel route when faced with a lawsuit. These weasel moves are actually unsung 2A victories.
One recent 2A victory was in the Antonyuk case in which, contrary to the way the law was written, upstaters now do NOT have to take the 16 hour training when recertifying.
Another example of this is instead of arguing the merits of the case in Antonyuk, they attacked his standing as the primary focus of their defense. Yes, this weasel route worked partially, but you cannot deny standing forever. Someone, somewhere has standing, and the potential plaintiffs get to refine their approach each time.
Relying on weasel moves, and presenting shitty arguments to actually justify the CCIA actually got the law declared unconstitutional by the judge. This is not a short term victory, but will set the foundation for a longer term victory. People underestimate this.
Apparently, they have also now weaseled out of the Adirondacks being a Park. It's not a Park, it's a the Adirondack Park, which is not a park. But there are 'certain' locations within the park...
Honest judges (and SCOTUS justices) will see these weasel moves for what they are. AND, enough weasel moves by the state, and we will erode the law just via perseverance, bit-by-bit, which is a legitimate legal tactic.
BOTTOM LINE is that I am looking forward to reading the state's response in Boron. Will they weasel out of more, by declaring, contrary to the law, that 'certain' locations are not really those 'certain' locations you cannot carry to if... maybe you are en route to hunting or target shooting (or to and from work as armed security? )
Combine that with the fact that there are a multitude of cases, and the state will run out of arguments as honest judges see through each of them. You can use a legitimate argument as many times as you wish, you can only use an illegitimate argument once.
Whatever the situation at present, winter is coming and New York is a cold, cold place. Sweaters are bulky, heavy coats are bulkier...
Last edited:
nortatoga
.338 Win Mag
District of Columbia v. Heller - Wikipedia
The Heller case started out with six plaintiffs..
In 2002, Robert A. Levy, a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute, began vetting plaintiffs with Clark M. Neily III, for a planned Second Amendment lawsuit that he would personally finance. Although he himself had never owned a gun, as a constitutional scholar he had an academic interest in the subject and wanted to model his campaign after the legal strategies of Thurgood Marshall, who had successfully led the challenges that overturned school segregation.[6] They aimed for a group that would be diverse in terms of gender, race, economic background, and age, and selected six plaintiffs from their mid-20s to early 60s, three men and three women, four white and two black:[7]
If the weasel judge's reasoning for lack of standing was that the infringing law hadn't taken effect yet, wouldn't that mean Antonyuk could now file, as the law is in place. Wouldn't he now have standing to sue?
US RIFLE M1A
.45 acp
IMO Antonyuk's flaw was that he challenged the entire law. Boron specifically challenges aspects which will affect plaintiff in his daily life.
nortatoga
.338 Win Mag
I believe also he was a little wishy-washy on his answers about carrying in the sensitive areas questions..
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
Agreed 100% with the weasel aspect. The problem I see is that this weaseling will force us to file 50 lawsuits in the end to get most of our rights back and that takes time and money.
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
What loss in travel? I’m not being a jerk, but you can drive through any public road while CCing outside of banned locations and you can now drive through the Adirondack state forest. He specifies the ADK state forest as the issue and that has been resolved now. That part of the lawsuit is now moot as I see it or at least has a good chance of being declared that way. They did this because people live there and it would have been struck down anyway.
Now let me ask you this they single out the ADK state forest well there are many more state forest in NYS can I CC there? Likely no since no one lives in those and they are state owned. I still Do agree it’s confusing because it says state, city, county owned property and the ADK national forest is state owned. Side walks and roadways are city, state, county or federally owned and they are all sensitive places in NYS per CCIA just because of the ownership aspect yet hochul specifically states we can carry at those locations.
I do hope the judge just literally laughs and says you fools this is ridiculous and the law gets tossed, but I trust very few to do the right things these days as we just saw happen with the stay of the law being implemented.
Steal2B
.700 Nitro Express
We went through this before, GOA had a significant opportunity that was blown by their poor litigant selection. I can't celebrate crumbs as a victory when the state is on such poor footing. The be patient, just wait, and send us even more money GOA storyline is disgusting while many concealed carriers are faced with real life choices of violating the CCIA or disarming and risking their lives because of real threats / risks. Bearing arms is a right and not a feel good hobby.
camper4lyfe
.308 Win
I'm with you. As it stands, I can't currently afford to get my CCW, between permit costs, training costs, and firearm costs, it's not financially viable for me. I'm looking at $1000+ to be able to carry.