Cavalier Knight
.40 S&W
New York State Court of Appeals
CPLR 5601[1] - Substantial Constitutional Question
Does “Title 38 - R.C.N.Y.” and/or “NYC Administrative Code;” discriminate against “interstate commerce;” and violate “Title 42 - U.S.C. § 1983;” by allowing “FFL 01s” with a “brick & mortar” store to only sell constitutionally protected “goods and/or services” from that physical location to residents of the City of New York; while prohibiting Knight and/or “FFL 01s” from selling their “goods and/or services;” “intrastate” at “gun shows” and “intrastate” and/or “interstate” via “mail-order” and/or “e-commerce;”
because Knight and/or “FFL 01s” do not possess a “brick & mortar” store in the City of New York; which is used to prohibit Knight from receiving a state “Firearms Dealer's License” to sell “handguns and/or ammunition” and a state “Carry Business License” to “handle” inventory; in violation of the “Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment;”
while prohibiting Knight’s ability to perform work; is an Article III economic “injury-in-fact;” that violates the “Privileges and Immunities Clause;” and the “third-party” constitutional rights of Knights customers; who are all “law-abiding” citizens prohibited from acquiring “handguns” from Knight in “interstate commerce;” which strikes at the “core” of the “2nd Amendment” right to acquire “handguns” to “possess” for “self-defense.”
Knights Jurisdictional Response Letter: Attached
Bearing Arms Article: The NYC Second Amendment Infringement Case You're Not Hearing About
CPLR 5601[1] - Substantial Constitutional Question
Does “Title 38 - R.C.N.Y.” and/or “NYC Administrative Code;” discriminate against “interstate commerce;” and violate “Title 42 - U.S.C. § 1983;” by allowing “FFL 01s” with a “brick & mortar” store to only sell constitutionally protected “goods and/or services” from that physical location to residents of the City of New York; while prohibiting Knight and/or “FFL 01s” from selling their “goods and/or services;” “intrastate” at “gun shows” and “intrastate” and/or “interstate” via “mail-order” and/or “e-commerce;”
because Knight and/or “FFL 01s” do not possess a “brick & mortar” store in the City of New York; which is used to prohibit Knight from receiving a state “Firearms Dealer's License” to sell “handguns and/or ammunition” and a state “Carry Business License” to “handle” inventory; in violation of the “Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment;”
while prohibiting Knight’s ability to perform work; is an Article III economic “injury-in-fact;” that violates the “Privileges and Immunities Clause;” and the “third-party” constitutional rights of Knights customers; who are all “law-abiding” citizens prohibited from acquiring “handguns” from Knight in “interstate commerce;” which strikes at the “core” of the “2nd Amendment” right to acquire “handguns” to “possess” for “self-defense.”
Knights Jurisdictional Response Letter: Attached
Bearing Arms Article: The NYC Second Amendment Infringement Case You're Not Hearing About
