NYSRPA v. Bruen, NY 2A Case Supreme Court case and decision

[nortatoga]

This..

NY has done one thing very well, and thats to cuck gun owners.. so bad so that even with a win cucks will do the work for the state and try and poison the waters

Glad I just picked up new bottle....

 

[spat]

I would assume the more immediate ramification is the likelihood of losing your permit altogether.

That would be very difficult to reconcile with the new ruling.

The new ruling would require them to issue you a new permit if you applied, since they have no reason to deny it.

Justifying revoking a permit that you are required to re-issue on demand is pretty shaky ground.


That's like revoking a parade permit after you find out it's an RKBA protest.

 

[gun_slinger_boy]

This..

NY has done one thing very well, and thats to cuck gun owners.. so bad so that even with a win cucks will do the work for the state and try and poison the waters

Stockholm syndrome is a coping mechanism to a captive or abusive situation. People develop positive feelings toward their captors or abusers over time. This condition applies to situations including child abuse, coach-athlete abuse, relationship abuse and sex trafficking.

 

[Steal2B]

Then why is she panicking and calling an emergency session of the Legislature?

 

[Deplorable Me]

Someone needs to point out to Hochul the number of NY women holding and applying for NY concealed carry permits. There are 5 in my immediate circle of friends. Whenever I have gone to the Erie County NY permit office it was common to see 50% of the persons in line applying for permits or "adding" a pistol to their existing permit being women. The women were of diverse ethnic background as well. Many being women owned businesses.

How's that for pro choice governor Hochul?

I'd like to know if the Governor or her retired judge husband have concealed carry permits?

 

[Glock_USA]

That would be very difficult to reconcile with the new ruling.

The new ruling would require them to issue you a new permit if you applied, since they have no reason to deny it.

Justifying revoking a permit that you are required to re-issue on demand is pretty shaky ground.


That's like revoking a parade permit after you find out it's an RKBA protest.

I mentioned something similar to this the other day. The whole "may be revoked at any time" thats printed on the back of the permits is pretty much out the window now, isn't it?

No longer is it like they did you a favor and gave you a permit. Now its more like they gave you the permit because they had to.

 

[nortatoga]

Some are now worried about business's posting NO GUNS signage...



Just don't shop there!!

 

[4WHLDRFTN]

So now more infringement’s ?

 

[That_FNG]

This is now a fantastic opportunity for governor whorechul to make some more fresh laws to say fuck you to every CCW permit holder in the entire state, not just NYC. We would NOT have been targeted for more carry restrictions and laws upstate had this not happened.

But what other new infringements are headed our way? I'm not sure, but it's more than likely not going to be worth trying to restore NYC's gun rights. This poking at the hornets nest was a big fucking mistake. You have criminals running the state, there will never be any restoration of the second amendment. If there is, it's going to backfire just like this is going to.

the bigger they are, the harder they fall. Already California and New Jersey are adjusting things to comply.

 

[nortatoga]

The 2A has landed at Normandy Beach, and now Patton can start to roll across Europe (USA)

 

[Darth]

Because, like your fictional colonel, SCOTUS leaves the details to it's subordinates.


SCOTUS didn't invalidate anything other than the appellate court decision upholding the law.

What SCOTUS did was issue an order to the appellate court to do their job right.


Just like the colonel will never order the privates to clean up the motor pool, he will order the Lt to get it done, and *he* will pass that down to the privates.

And at what point does the Lt say "nah, hard pass bro?"

 

[Truebeliever]

If that is what was said, then it opens the door to adding background checks, fingerprinting, ID requirements, and any other of the various restrictions that have been placed on pistol permits, to voter registration requirements and voting requirements.
in fact, it opens the door to adding all of that to EVERY Right.

"I'm sorry, Mr Smith, but to plead the 5th you need to pass a background check, which you obviously can't do since we just arrested you."

"I'm sorry, Mrs. Doe, but you need to show your permit to attend this church gathering."

I'm pretty sure that is not a slippery slope they are going to enjoy.

I don’t think they are going to apply it equally across the board. Th

the Court said the 2nd is no different then the 1st ..

so do you need a permit to speak ?

a permit to go to a church .. ?

a permit for free press ?

do you have to pay for them too and get trained .. to use your 1st ?

The court did uphold the shall issue permits system. And yes, some rights you do need to permit to exercise . A protest march needs a parade permit in many areas of the country ( a denial of that permit would be unconstitutional in many cases) for example for both right of assembly and free speech.
We can’t cherry pick only part of the majority and concurrent opinions and expect it to be enforced as such.
The shall issue system was upheld

 

[redtail]

I'm glad more and more are now coming back to reality after jumping up and down in celebration and coming to the realization that this decision is now going to criminalize more gun owners and existing permit holders that were able to carry in places with no issues of any kind for many years and decades to just start with.

This is now a fantastic opportunity for governor whorechul to make some more fresh laws to say fuck you to every CCW permit holder in the entire state, not just NYC. We would NOT have been targeted for more carry restrictions and laws upstate had this not happened.

But what other new infringements are headed our way? I'm not sure, but it's more than likely not going to be worth trying to restore NYC's gun rights. This poking at the hornets nest was a big fucking mistake. You have criminals running the state, there will never be any restoration of the second amendment. If there is, it's going to backfire just like this is going to.

Respectfully disagree.
Rights surely would have continued to erode under these tyrant's directions without any legal pushback ,ending with their eventual goal of total disarmament.
Could it become a focal point for additional restrictions and immediate new infringements ? , Sure , but that is what the courts are there for.
They will get smacked down eventually.

 

[Saltwater60]

I'd love to see what the charge would be if someone was "open carrying". You're telling me that a right that was just reaffirmed by the Supreme Court is invalidated if I don't have a piece of cotton fabric covering my gun? Not trying to put you on the spot, just saying.

Feel free to open carry in NYC and let me know how that goes for you. I’m not trying to put you in the spot either I don’t think open carrying in most of NYS would go so well these days. I never said it was illegal just they don’t really want you to do it and the ruling had nothing to do with open carrying. From what I saw it didn’t even mention it and yes I’m aware it’s not illegal in NYS to open carry, but I’d say there’s a descent chance these days some crazy liberal would say he threatened me with that gun. I don’t want to deal with that.

 

[DoOver]

 

[Uzi]

the bigger they are, the harder they fall. Already California and New Jersey are adjusting things to comply.

Respectfully disagree.
Rights surely would have continued to erode under these tyrant's directions without any legal pushback ,ending with their eventual goal of total disarmament.
Could it become a focal point for additional restrictions and immediate new infringements ? , Sure , but that is what the courts are there for.
They will get smacked down eventually.

I understand the bigger picture here, I do. I still personally have no faith or hope in the overall restoration of the 2A on any meaningful level. IMO I think this was blown too out of proportion due to exaggerated assumptions. We still have the worst assault weapons law and ban in the nation, the safe act, and not to mention many more unconstitutional gun laws just this year. NYS literally has one of the very very worst in depth bans on assault weapons. I have no interest in hunting, no interest in skeet shooting, no interest in bolt guns. I only have fun guns, and guns that excel at defensive purposes that I train with. In almost every other state there are either loopholes or these firearms are perfectly legal. Not in NYS, sorry. That is the reality. No NFA firearms, no this no that, ban this, ban that.

Anytime more of my rights are threatened in anyway, or infringed more and more, for any reason I do not celebrate. Even if a shithole city now has the ability to apply for a permit or get handguns easier now.

Again, I am happy for the 1% of residents that aren't opposed to owning guns in NYC and don't support more gun laws and are interested in getting a NYC carry permit. HOWEVER, If the result means more of my freedoms are now under attack and infringed as a jab of the anti gun lefts reaction, I cannot celebrate the accelerated ill effects on my everyday life when I carry all day everyday with more threats of getting arrested or thrown in jail.

Right now I personally don't give a shit about CA or NJ because it doesn't effect me in any way. Good for them too, but we still have our own shit to worry about, and plenty of it. As soon as it has a positive effect on myself and my neighbor, I don't care and I will focus on what does. Right now there is nothing from this that appears to be positive for me. I don't find it selfish as I play no role in these decisions, but yet am now being threatened with more infringements seemingly VERY likely to happen.

I'm happy for hyper liberal hyper anti self defense and ultra hyper super anti gun controlled NYC's win, but now it means that I and many others will have more reasons to get arrested or thrown in jail potentially for doing the same shit we were doing forever. Anything like restricted access with heavier penalties, things like carrying in a park or a grocery store? Fuck that, I'm sorry, but that is NOT a win in my book. I ignore many already, but depending on what level of the law they plan on going, That is not anything for me to celebrate. We called this way before it happened. We'll see definitively how this all actually plays out. It will be a waiting game.

 

[Glock_USA]

Feel free to open carry in NYC and let me know how that goes for you. I’m not trying to put you in the spot either I don’t think open carrying in most of NYS would go so well these days. I never said it was illegal just they don’t really want you to do it and the ruling had nothing to do with open carrying. From what I saw it didn’t even mention it and yes I’m aware it’s not illegal in NYS to open carry, but I’d say there’s a descent chance these days some crazy liberal would say he threatened me with that gun. I don’t want to deal with that.

I have no intention of doing it, I was just pointing out how ridiculous it is that you have these natural rights, but they hinge on wether or not you have a piece of t-shirt covering a certain area or not. Either you can do it or you can't. Hochul has been saying that people get uneasy when they see someone carrying a gun, so she's clearly not talking about concealed carrying. Did the decision specifically say you have the right to carry *concealed* or did it just say you have the right to carry a gun outside of the home?

 

[spat]

And at what point does the Lt say "nah, hard pass bro?"

He can say that.

The general isn't going to physically force him to comply.

But the general can issue other orders to other people.

He can call the MPs to arrest the Lt.

He can relieve the Lt of command and tell everyone they are no longer subject to the Lt's orders.

Imagine in our example, FUKH decides she just wants to ignore the ruling. She will get away with it for a bit, but eventually she will be held in contempt and an arrest warrant will be issued for her personally.

 

[spat]

I have no intention of doing it, I was just pointing out how ridiculous it is that you have these natural rights, but they hinge on wether or not you have a piece of t-shirt covering a certain area or not. Either you can do it or you can't. Hochul has been saying that people get uneasy when they see someone carrying a gun, so she's clearly not talking about concealed carrying. Did the decision specifically say you have the right to carry *concealed* or did it just say you have the right to carry a gun outside of the home?

The decision said you have a right to carry.

It was unclear about the manner, and based solely on the text it's likely a court would rule that as long as either open or concealed were allowed, then you can exercise your right to carry so that law isn't a violation of your rights.

I would disagree, but it's unlikely a court would.

 

[nortatoga]

New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment in that it prevents law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms. We therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. It is so ordered

Glossary of Supreme Court terms

Amicus curiae brief: “Friend of the court” brief; a brief filed by a person, group or entity that is not a party to the case but nonetheless wishes to provide the […]

www.scotusblog.com

Remand: The term “remand” means “to send back” and refers to a decision by the Supreme Court to send a case back to the lower court for further action. When it remands a case, the court generally includes instructions for the lower court, telling it to start an entirely new trial or directing it, for example, to look at the dispute in the context of laws or theories it might not have considered the first time around.

 

[nortatoga]

 

[BMF JK]

I swear some here could win the lotto and say well shit I’ll probably die tomorrow.
Take the win and be excited . I believe the scope of this case is broad and the gun grabbers know it !
If you didn’t expect public grandstanding and theatrics , you don’t follow politics much . The left is notorious for being judged only by intentions not actual results that much is obvious. Oh and it’s midterms and Kathy is up for election . They will say any outlandish bull shit to satisfy their base and pull votes .

 

[redtail]

That was good.

 

[Darth]

He can relieve the Lt of command and tell everyone they are no longer subject to the Lt's orders.

How is this decision not the second half of this line?

This seems incredibly inefficient to the point of being unbelievable.

"Sir, the US has been attacked. We have a limited window for retaliation. Here are the strike options."

"Execute option C immediately."

"Yes sir, let me just check it out with a few if your subordinates first to make sure they are good with it, and if they wish to follow your orders, we will do it at once!"

 

[Newguyhere]

Explainer: Oneida County Pistol Licensing Office breaks down SCOTUS ruling

The U.S. Supreme Court today struck down a New York law that placed limits on carrying guns outside the home, saying it was at odds with the second amendment.

www.wktv.com

What about us Westchester residents who possess the Sportsperson's restriction? Do I finally get my full carry?

Who is calling them Monday morning?

 

[Edwardteach72]

Who is calling them Monday morning?

Everyone

 

[Newguyhere]

Everyone

I am just not confident that the county will react in a timely manner. Btw, I work for the county in LE.

 

[spat]

How is this decision not the second half of this line?

This seems incredibly inefficient to the point of being unbelievable.

"Sir, the US has been attacked. We have a limited window for retaliation. Here are the strike options."

"Execute option C immediately."

"Yes sir, let me just check it out with a few if your subordinates first to make sure they are good with it, and if they wish to follow your orders, we will do it at once!"

No, the Lt is supposed to follow the orders. 99.99% of the time they do immediately.

Your question was about the incredibly rare case where the Lt flat out refuses and how that's dealt with.

Sort of like asking what you do when your car catches on fire? And someone says grab a fire extinguisher and put it out.

Then your next comment is "that seems very inefficient, how do people drive anywhere".

 

[spat]

What about us Westchester residents who possess the Sportsperson's restriction? Do I finally get my full carry?

Who is calling them Monday morning?

Once the 2nd circuit finishes their part of this the sportsman's restriction no longer exists.

The county or state *could* completely invalidate any restricted licenses and require everyone to re-apply for a full carry. But since mere possession in NY requires a license, that would be very problematic for them.

And since the 6 month statutory limit to approve a license now finally has some teeth, it would cause major problems for those counties that chose to go that route.

Anything other than just converting all existing licenses to full carry will cause far more problems to the state than the people.

 

[spat]

How is this decision not the second half of this line?

This seems incredibly inefficient to the point of being unbelievable.

"Sir, the US has been attacked. We have a limited window for retaliation. Here are the strike options."

"Execute option C immediately."

"Yes sir, let me just check it out with a few if your subordinates first to make sure they are good with it, and if they wish to follow your orders, we will do it at once!"

Also, in your example it would go more like this:

"Execute option C immediately"

"I don't like that one general, so no"

"You're relieved then, MPs arrest him for insubordination.

LT Otherguy, take over for LT Dipshit and execute option C immediately"