NYSRPA v. Bruen, NY 2A Case Supreme Court case and decision
- Thread starter ManualF150
- Start date
camper4lyfe
.308 Win
It's too early to know that just yet
camper4lyfe
.308 Win
I read that as well. It certainly opens the door to more lawsuits, especially those around mag sizes and AWB bullshit (in my limited understanding)
Onegunnotenough
.40 S&W
Will it be seperate permit or will my green go to red?
Why would they keep a premise permit if red covers all?
Why would they keep a premise permit if red covers all?
Yes, I was just about to post this very passage.
There are also other sections that affirm the right to bear instruments in "common use."
It seems like this opinion could be used in arguments against the SAFE act and other restrictions.
pshift
.338 Win Mag
They will need to change this as well for NYC Carry permisison:
RedBreast21
.223 Rem
Every county does it differently so basically the law is premise or carry so my guess anyone with a restriction, it doesn't apply anymore I guess. Haven't read it yet. I'm sure the counties, if they comply, will take a fee to remove restrictions..
subsonic
.44 mag
You do and the court did not say restrictions are unconstitutional. It said a "proper cause" requirement is unconstitutional.
RedBreast21
.223 Rem
NY law has a permise and carry statue so why anyone would do premise is beyond me.
RedBreast21
.223 Rem
That case was shot down by our 2nd circuit court. No idea where it is now but it will take a long time to get to SCOTUS.
Does this mean New York is a shall issue? Haven’t been able to read up on it yet
gun_slinger_boy
.338 Win Mag
Some here have argued for a long time that restrictions were never really a thing in the first place. I was of that opinion when I lived NY. Although I had a non-restricted permit, if I would have gotten a restricted one that would still have been my opinion. I'll leave that there. What is still a bit unclear to me is if this makes the state shall issue. It kinda sounds like it does but I'm not 100%. If so that's huge because it has effectively made the whole U.S. shall issue (the way it was always intended). Now the shenanigans that states will pull to make the process inconvenient is a whole other can of worms.
PA Guns & Ammo
.45 acp
So you will still need a pistol permit to purchase and possess and handgun in NY state and handgun registration is still on the books. So from what I read and hopefully I'm wrong, the only ruled on "proper cause" for concealed carry. So now all permits in NY state would have to be conceal carry but you still need to ask for permission from the government to exercise your right. Does not seem like much of a win to me. Again, I hope Im totally wrong on this.
speedkills27
6.5 Creedmoor
Don't get me wrong I'm absolutely ecstatic for this ruling but more for what it may bring in the future and less about what it does for now.
Seeing as it doesn't get rid of permitting schemes its like "yea! I don't have to ask for as much permission!" Also from what I understand, the way its written opens a lot of doors to freedom and may even close a few on restrictions.
Now lets see what kind of fucking Hochul and the NYC crew have in mind as retaliation
Seeing as it doesn't get rid of permitting schemes its like "yea! I don't have to ask for as much permission!" Also from what I understand, the way its written opens a lot of doors to freedom and may even close a few on restrictions.
Now lets see what kind of fucking Hochul and the NYC crew have in mind as retaliation
Last edited:
It's gone. SCOTUS didn't grant cert back in what 2014
OwnTheRide
.44 mag
This was a great ruling in our favor. But don't be fooled, it does not mean things are going to get better. For one, NY has a long history of playing the time game: they'll make some new laws that blatantly violate this ruling, then wait years for a court challenge to come up and wind its way through the courts.
More immediately, Hochul is about to call for a special session of the legislature. They're going to re-write our gun laws. We both know there is no way we will come out of this re-write better than we are today. They will take this as an opportunity to introduce all kinds of other bullshit, some new, some that they've been trying for years (microstamping, for example).
In other words, the immediate, medium-term, and possibly long-term impact of this ruling is that we will be fucked.
More immediately, Hochul is about to call for a special session of the legislature. They're going to re-write our gun laws. We both know there is no way we will come out of this re-write better than we are today. They will take this as an opportunity to introduce all kinds of other bullshit, some new, some that they've been trying for years (microstamping, for example).
In other words, the immediate, medium-term, and possibly long-term impact of this ruling is that we will be fucked.
And if everyone now needs to "reapply" for a CCW permit, then they will simply delay that process for a long, long time.....................potentially years based on the volume of applicants and the "processing time" they will say they need
BerettaGuy
.308 Win
Tranlation!
This decision severely severely public safety not just in New York City, but around the country.
NO! It doesn’t! Only in NY State and City does a law abiding citizen have to receive permission to own a handgun after showing cause. The Public Safety prior to today was non-existent in that criminals did not have to show such cause and could carry a gun at will. If caught they are released without bail. It is still non-existent.
While the Court has now made it more difficult to limit the number of guns in our communities, I am committed to doing everything in my power to fight for the safety everyone in this city deserves,
Whose agenda, duty or right is it to limit the number of guns in our community? You are only lilmiting the number of legally owned guns by law abiding citizens. Someone's liberal slip is showing.
New York still has some of the toughest gun laws in the country on the books, and we will continue to use these statutes to hold accountable those who commit gun violence.
Those statutes were never used against those that committed gun violence. They were only used to track and record law abiding citizens that are by definition law abiding because they "qualified" for a permit or the law abiding out of state visitor that got caught up in the NY Sullivan Pistol Permit Licensing Scheme.
At this very moment, my office is analyzing this ruling and crafting gun safety legislation that will take the strongest steps possible to mitigate the damage done today.
At his very moment we are analyzing what other unconstitutional rules we can implement that will make some in our community as well as all the “progressives” feel more safe even though it will do nothing to keep anyone safe.
Besides, the Courts have ruled that Police have no duty to protect anyone. So what is the point?
Furthermore, we have already built detailed processes and put them in place to manage any litigation related to our ongoing cases.
If you think our background checks took long before, you redneck right wing gun lovers aint seen nothing yet.
The Supreme Court may have made our work harder, but we will only redouble our efforts to develop new solutions to end the epidemic of gun violence and ensure lasting public safety.”
That is my translation of what the guy is babbling about.
BerettaGuy
.308 Win
A shall issue is you apply for a license and pay the fee. You get the license.
A shall issue doesn't need the make model and serial number listed on the license. That alone is an infringement.
kaliber
.44 mag
Suck it Kathy
Paperpunch
.40 S&W
Since semi-auto rifles are now under the same license as handguns, then you should be allowed to carry licensed rifles also. Oops Governor Hockul.
BerettaGuy
.308 Win
NY Gov. Hochul defiant after Supreme Court gun decision: 'We're just getting started'
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul condemned a Supreme Court decision striking down a state law that restricted Americans' access to concealed carry permits Thursday.
www.foxnews.com
Onegunnotenough
.40 S&W
I wonder if we will have 1 permit.
I used to have target that changed automatically to premise,hope premise just changes to carry!
I used to have target that changed automatically to premise,hope premise just changes to carry!
The Supreme Court Thursday ruled 6-3 that New York’s regulations that made it difficult to obtain a license to carry a concealed handgun were unconstitutionally restrictive, and that it should be easier to obtain such a license.
The existing standard required an applicant to show "proper cause" for seeking a license, and allowed New York officials to exercise discretion in determining whether a person has shown a good enough reason for needing to carry a firearm. Stating that one wished to protect themselves or their property was not enough.
"In this case, petitioners and respondents agree that ordinary, law-abiding citizens have a similar right to carry handguns publicly for their self-defense. We too agree, and now hold, consistent with Heller and McDonald, that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home," Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the Court's opinion, referencing two previous gun cases. "Because the State of New York issues public-carry licenses only when an applicant demonstrates a special need for self-defense, we conclude that the State’s licensing regime violates the Constitution."
Thomas noted that the state statute does not define what "proper cause" means, and that courts had ruled that the standard was met by people who showed a "special need for self-protection."
"This ‘special need’ standard is demanding," Thomas wrote. "For example, living or working in an area ‘noted for criminal activity’ does not suffice."
In 43 other states, Thomas noted, authorities are required to issue licenses to applicants who meet certain requirements, and officials do not have discretion to say no due to what they believe is an insufficient need.
The case, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, was the first major gun rights case before the Supreme Court in more than a decade. Thomas referenced 2010's McDonald v. City of Chicago and D.C. v. Heller in his reasoning for Thursday's ruling.
"As we stated in Heller and repeated in McDonald, ‘individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment right,’" the justice cited. He also referenced how Heller made clear that restrictions on carrying guns in "sensitive places" is permissible, and how New York was wrong for arguing that it's law was merely doing just that.
"[W]e do think respondents err in their attempt to characterize New York’s proper-cause requirement as a ‘sensitive-place’ law," Thomas wrote, explaining that New York viewed "sensitive places" as anywhere "where people typically congregate and where law-enforcement and other public-safety professionals are presumptively available."
This definition, Thomas said, is too broad.
"Put simply, there is no historical basis for New York to effectively declare the island of Manhattan a "sensitive place" simply because it is crowded and protected generally by the New York City Police Department," he wrote.
The conservative justice also looked at the plain language of the Second Amendment, which protects the right "to keep and bear arms." He described keeping and bearing as two separate things, noting that Heller defines "bear" as "to wear, bear, or carry." This implies public carrying, Thomas said, because someone would not generally wear their gun in a holster at home, but would "keep" it somewhere.
The 63-page opinion also explored historical restrictions on carrying handguns that New York relied on. Thomas explained why they do not justify a current restriction, noting how past regulations from centuries ago focused on "dangerous and unusual weapons," while handguns today are relatively commonplace. While the handgun may have been considering dangerous and unusual during colonial times, the opinion said, in modern times it is "the quintessential self-defense weapon."
The Court's opinion also stated that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms should not be held to a lower standard than other constitutional rights.
"We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need. That is not how the First Amendment works when it comes to unpopular speech or the free exercise of religion. It is not how the Sixth Amendment works when it comes to a defendant’s right to confront the witnesses against him. And it is not how the Second Amendment works when it comes to public carry for self-defense," Thomas wrote.
Justice Stephen Breyer wrote an impassioned dissenting opinion in which he referenced present-day fervor over gun violence, as well as recent events. Joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, Breyer cited statistics including 45,222 Americans killed by firearms in the U.S. in 2020, the number of mass shootings that have already taken place in 2022, and how gun violence is now the leading cause of death for children and adolescents.
"Many States have tried to address some of the dangers of gun violence just described by passing laws that limit, in various ways, who may purchase, carry, or use firearms of different kinds," Breyer wrote. "The Court today severely burdens States’ efforts to do so."
Breyer recognized legitimate purposes for guns, such as sport, self-defense, or types of employment like security guards, but he said it is the responsibility of elected officials to balance "these lawful uses against the dangers of firearms" when crafting legislation.
"That consideration counsels modesty and restraint on the part of judges when they interpret and apply the Second Amendment," he said.
I may try and meet up with you that date
There are like 5 other threads on this.
I understand the excitement but come join our other conversations
I understand the excitement but come join our other conversations
4WHLDRFTN
.308 Win
NY Gov. Hochul defiant after Supreme Court gun decision: 'We're just getting started'
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul condemned a Supreme Court decision striking down a state law that restricted Americans' access to concealed carry permits Thursday.
ah,,the abuse of power will now begin…