Georgia Woman Arrested After Running Out Of Gas !
- Thread starter GOYABEAN
- Start date
As of right now, none. However, California for example, issues concealed carry less than 4% of the time. Imagine those numbers in all blue states.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Could you imagine what the prison population would be like if the 2A wasn't infringed upon at all and drugs and prostitution were legal?
There would be no need for cops in the numbers you have today. The prisons would damned near be empty, gangs wouldn't have anything to sell, and criminals would think twice because a crime might mean their lives.
Oh. The horror!
There would be no need for cops in the numbers you have today. The prisons would damned near be empty, gangs wouldn't have anything to sell, and criminals would think twice because a crime might mean their lives.
Oh. The horror!
meketrefe
.450/400 Nitro Ex
NYS will do whatever it takes to freeze reciprocity even if it becomes law and history says they will not care about the implications for law
abiding citizens.
meketrefe
.450/400 Nitro Ex
meketrefe
.450/400 Nitro Ex
Here another good one about HR-38...
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Just like they did with LEOSA and FOPA right?
He'll, I wish they would just copy LEOSA. I really do. Make it the exact same for all people.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
My point is that they tried to ignore both but it didn't work. The only way for them to successfully combat reciprocity is to abolish concealed carry and like I said, that isn't going to happen. Judges, the politically connected, and retired cops who live in NY would be left with no way to carry.
meketrefe
.450/400 Nitro Ex
UNSAFE was not supposed to happen neither. ...specially passed the way they did.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
That's neither here nor there. Bad analogy. It isn't federal law.
Darth, usual argument: Cops decisions ruin people's lives daily.
Darth, today: Cop's decision weighs the same as mine.
Yes, because I don't have the authority to do such.
Darth today: Let's nuke NK.
Trump today: Let's nuke NK.
Both interpretations carry the same weight on right or wrong. Both can be just as illegal.
One has the ability to use their interpretation to ruin lives, the other doesn't.
Just as illegal, fine. Just as important, wrong. When Darth defines an oath, it means nothing. When the Supreme Court does, it has meaning. That's the difference here, and it's quite a large one.
We aren't defining an oath. Those words are as clear as day.
We are defining things the oath covers. Specifically the constitution.
meketrefe
.450/400 Nitro Ex
I don't agree. The SAFE ACT didn't care about federal or constitutional laws and it DID IMPACT conceal carriers in NYS in
several ways.
And just WHO defines the Constitution?
Members of this forum, often.
I didn't know that we had SCOTUS justices on this forum!!!! Silly ME!!!
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
So you are saying that a federal law passed banning safe acts and they didn't care and passed it anyway?
Now you see why it isn't the same thing?
Reciprocity would be a federal law just like LEOSA and FOPA both of which NY didn't want to follow but were forced to anyway.
Did you even read the bill? It clearly had punishments for those that choose to ignore it.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
The Constitution itself. Unless you think the founding fathers intended them to ban muskets based on features.
And has that made it to the SCOTUS?
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
So the Constitution needs to go to SCOTUS. That's what you are saying?
When it is challenged yes!
Perfect, thanks. You don’t define the Constitution, the Court does. As we say when we close cases: No further necessary.
I consider Heller settled law and choose it before NY law whenever necessary. It’s not the same thing because the Supreme Court of the land is higher than NY’s state courts.
Two months ago, a NJ resident walked into our precinct with a handgun to figure out what he needed to do (it left with me, Ruger .22), I handled it like free citizens because Heller says handguns are protected by the 2nd.
NY law is invalidated by Heller whether FUAC likes it or not, but contrary to forum musings, the Court decides that, not the internet.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
And you think it should be challenged. You believe that the 2A is vague? Are the words "the right to keep and bear and shall not be infringed" confusing? Does it say anywhere in that text "certain arms" or "arms that have scary, cosmetic features?"
Come on dude. I know you don't really believe that. Unless you really do think it's okay for states to infringe upon rights until it's settled by politically bought men and women in robes.
Do you think Ginsberg and Sotomayor rule fairly?
I have a brand new fully featured NY legal AR rifle that accepts detachable magazines that I'll sell to you.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
And the court is just too right? It's settled then.
Your internet argument is sad. You know what the founders intended. I know you can read English.
So I tell you that we both define the constitution, and then you say "no the court does", when no, it doesn't, lest we couldn't overrule it.
Some twisted logic it takes to "go home to your family at night", but whatever floats your boat.
Again you have not read the Heller ruling have you?
And no I don't think Ginsberg or Sotomayor or the other two liberals rule fairly!!