Concurrence don't hold the and weight as the actual opinion, especially when both said in their concurrence that they fully support the majority opinion
NY's Vindictive Plans for carry - special session next week to respond to SCOTUS's ruling. (Merged)
- Thread starter Cavalry
- Start date
Concurrence don't hold the and weight as the actual opinion, especially when both said in their concurrence that they fully support the majority opinion
subsonic
.44 mag
To the extent there's any thought in it they are pushing restricted permits, which don't require training. Then you can train on your own pistol to get the carry permit.
The text of the new exception is:
3-A. POSSESSION OF A PISTOL OR REVOLVER BY A PERSON UNDERGOING LIVE-FIRE RANGE TRAINING PURSUANT TO SECTION 400.00 OF THIS CHAPTER WHILE SUCH PERSON IS UNDERGOING SUCH TRAINING AND IS SUPERVISED BY A DULY AUTHORIZED INSTRUCTOR.
New York ranges don't rent pistols because of New York laws. Most ranges don't rent period. It would be hard to make a business out of renting pistols exclusively for licensing training. If trainers have to provide training pistols, this will really jack up costs/availability and limit options. I guess trainees could also get a friend/family permittee to accompany them to training and loan it to them only while the training is happening. They'd have to come along since it's a felony a second before training starts and after it is concluded, a huge barrier to ordinary people going for a carry license without starting out restricted. Or if the training was at an FFL I suppose they could turn it in to the shop to hold until the permit-holding owner came back to collect it (probably with another BG check and transfer fee, why not!).
Or you would just buy a pistol and keep it in a locker at the training facility. Who knows. There are ways to do it. Or maybe the trainers would have a handful of guns to teach with that would stay with them. You dont necessarily have to train on the exact gun you want to buy.
That_FNG
6.5 Creedmoor
I don’t think it is in line though. For over 100 years these areas were not sensitive areas and were perfectly fine to carry in. Restaurants, stores, gas stations and private property in general were not sensitive areas for the last 100 years. Now because of the Supreme Court ruling they suddenly have been? Why? What was the immediate urgency or special threat that suddenly happened to immediately necessitate such a change? If NYS did not view these areas as such before why now?
just for kicks maybe NYS should have to show good cause or a special need above and beyond all the other states in order to declare any area to be a sensitive area. I mean after all, nys is such a big fan of having those requirements
I mean we know why now. Because now people other than their special friends will be given permits. They could argue that before there was a higher burden for issuance therefore the areas weren't as sensitive as they would be if higher numbers of the general population were allowed to carry there. Its BS but thats what they could be thinking.
spat
.700 Nitro Express
What if you need to muck out the stalls at night in your Amish barn ?
spat
.700 Nitro Express
We know they will argue it, and we know whatever argument they present will be pure bovine excrement, so yours is as good a guess as any.
Maybe NY should have to get references from 4 other states that don't live in the same region to declare any areas sensitive....
Thomas’s ruling is the only one that matters. Kavanaugh’s or Alito’s concurrence has as much merit as Breyer’s dissent has.
The way it works is we litigate against it. It goes to our local courts who will most likely rule in favor of the state. It then gets appealed to the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. If they still don’t rule in our favor and we chose to appeal further, it goes back to SCOTUS.
pshift
.338 Win Mag
We can bombard them with letters. This is a good one from GOA:
www.gunowners.org
NY: Governor Kathy Hochul Ignores SCOTUS Decision; Makes it Harder to Carry Anyway | GOA
Despite the Supreme Court opinion stating that New York’s “may issue” permitting system is unconstitutional, your State Legislators and Governor Kathy Hochul just launched a direct attack on concealed carry. All in a matter of just a few days, a bill was slapped together, passed, and signed into...
www.gunowners.org
Last edited:
Well I can tell you the dam current process gets you more of the same. If you take their homes and cars via lawsuits on a individual level that would get their attention.
We Are All Incorporated
Thursday, May 26th, 2022 Live Stream Guest: Bobby Graves https://tasa.americanstatenationals.org Special Ops training - https://fightlikeacanadian.com/ Book - The Birth of Special Operations in Canada
rumble.com
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
9/1
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
It’s possible, but unlikely to happen in a broad scale.
No it doesn't. It should be up to the private property owners if guns are allowed or not. Either forcing private establishments to allow or disallow guns is equally stupid.
Egret-II
.40 S&W
Just submitted my amendment for full carry at the County Clerk's office. The guy there told me that the wait time was 3 to 6......... months!!! I was like what tha hell! Why? He said that's what the New York state police told them.
Last edited:
knuts
.45 acp
wait... you have to send in your amendment for full carry in person?! I thought we could just mail them in?
Mail or hand deliver. No difference.
Steal2B
.700 Nitro Express
maverick52
.223 Rem
that’s a good question. I assume we are still under the old system until Sept 1. It’s not quite clear what happens at that point
So exactly what suspicion would a 50 cal ammo can raise ? Would you think it has ammunition in it ? In your previous scenario, some guy has an ammo can in his back seat at 2:00 am, and has an order of protection against him. Do you think you have probable cause for a warrant when he refuses to let you look inside ?
There are a ton of containers that get cross purposed. Exactly what is a container "associated with a gun " ?
Egret-II
.40 S&W
When you call, there's an automatic message saying they still don't have info from the state police blah, blah. Ignore that. I did. Talked to a person there. And they told me to bring (or mail in) 2 amendments and a authorization form for the release of personal information, and they'll remove the "target" restriction. No explanation needed no extra requirements. Just bring those 3 papers. That's what they said. And that's what I did. And since y live 10 minutes away from there I hand delivered it to be sure.
4WHLDRFTN
6.5 Creedmoor
Did anyone figure out the safe act yet 
They just updated their definition. It's going to be hard and soft armor. They are re writing it
Truebeliever
6.5 Creedmoor
They aren’t in line with Thomas or Kavanaugh’s. Most of it will get knocked down in the lower courts.
Truebeliever
6.5 Creedmoor
It has weight especially where it doesn’t have direct conflict with the assigned majority opinion. A concurrent opinion can actually have more weight . The writer of the majority opinion is not a vote by the justices on which one is more popular with them. It’s assigned.
It probably was on the frontier
Truebeliever
6.5 Creedmoor
Nope. The example I’m thinking of was in the state of PA