Temporary Restaining Order Issued For Concealed Carry Improvement Act (merged thread)

[Saltwater60]

This guy is basically laying it out that there's nothing we can do about CCIA.
Other than vote. We already know where that goes.

I’m sick of hearing how Oregon's ballot measure 114 is worse than what we deal with here in NYS or those in CA do. I’m sorry NYS is the worst for gun laws.
Also I’m sure this guy is right that the only thing we can do is vote but it doesn’t work. There is either not enough voters or they don’t show up, you decide.
Also as for there is nothing we can do flying jow they are allowed to sooner the laws and constitution but he says we have to abide by the 11th amendment!! If they violate their oath of office purposefully as she has done here and many others have done they should immediately be removed from office with no option to run in the future.

 

[ROBBARTLEY]

This guy is basically laying it out that there's nothing we can do about CCIA.
Other than vote. We already know where

Yes, we missed our opportunity there.

 

[Saltwater60]

Yes, we missed our opportunity there.

It was never going to happen. Zeldin had a chance but a slim chance.

 

[FrankenCub]

I’m sick of hearing how Oregon's ballot measure 114 is worse than what we deal with here in NYS or those in CA do. I’m sorry NYS is the worst for gun laws.
Also I’m sure this guy is right that the only thing we can do is vote but it doesn’t work. There is either not enough voters or they don’t show up, you decide.
Also as for there is nothing we can do flying jow they are allowed to sooner the laws and constitution but he says we have to abide by the 11th amendment!! If they violate their oath of office purposefully as she has done here and many others have done they should immediately be removed from office with no option to run in the future.

This political immunity needs to be put to an end. There's no compelling reason for them to look further than their pocket books.

 

[Uninformed and Compliant]

This guy is basically laying it out that there's nothing we can do about CCIA.
Other than vote. We already know where that goes.

This is wrong.

If a person takes an action that would be a crime except for the law, and that law turns out to be invalid, then that person has committed a criminal act.

The passing of the invalid law is not a crime, which is what the above video is referencing. We cannot sue them for money over it.

The propaganda in that video is him hiding the fact that any action taken under that false color of law, that would be a crime except for that false color of law, is a crime - because that law is invalid.

I've put it in big print for the cheap seats out back.

Again, they can pass a law making it legal for them to rape.
According to that video, them raping your daughter would be legal.

Such law is clearly invalid. And if they rape someone under it, they are still guilty of committing the criminal act of rape, because that law they "passed" doesn't actually exist. It was invalid on the day it was written. It does not need to be "repealed". It was void the instant they "passed" it.

There is no criminal immunity for committing criminal acts. The only immunity is against personal civil suits. That video and the paper he cites conflate the two as equivalent. That is completely fucking false.

If no crimes are committed under that false color of law? Then who cares. But that's not the case, here.

Safe Act and CCIA are both, for starters, Coercion 3rd against us, and Coercion 1st against Sheriffs and State Police.
Any lobby groups that assisted with the passing of those laws are guilty of both coercions, as well as racketeering.

 

[FrankenCub]

This is wrong.

If a person takes an action that would be a crime except for the law, and that law turns out to be invalid, then that person has committed a criminal act.

The passing of the invalid law is not a crime, which is what the above video is referencing. We cannot sue them for money over it.

The propaganda in that video is him hiding the fact that any action taken under that false color of law, that would be a crime except for that false color of law, is a crime - because that law is invalid.

I've put it in big print for the cheap seats out back.

Again, they can pass a law making it legal for them to rape.
According to that video, them raping your daughter would be legal.

Such law is clearly invalid. And if they rape someone under it, they are still guilty of committing the criminal act of rape, because that law they "passed" doesn't actually exist. It was invalid on the day it was written. It does not need to be "repealed". It was void the instant they "passed" it.

There is no criminal immunity for committing criminal acts. The only immunity is against personal civil suits. That video and the paper he cites conflate the two as equivalent. That is completely fucking false.

Safe Act and CCIA are both, for starters, Coercion 3rd against us, and Coercion 1st against Sheriffs and State Police.
Any lobby groups that assisted with the passing of those laws are guilty of both coercions, as well as racketeering.

What I took out of that video was the political immunity, there is no recourse for politicians passing unconstitutional laws. I didn't say criminal immunity, and didn't catch him saying it. He may have. But still not my point. They can not be removed from office, unless voted out. In our circumstance, won't happen. They can't be arrested for passing an unconstitutional law, but If we violate an unconstitutional law, we will still be arrested and forced to spend our life savings trying to fight the charges, or take a plea and loose everything anyway.
Or option 3, wait to see if SCOTUS takes it up, eventually. Only for the leftitst to play the game again and pound us harder yet.

 

[Saltwater60]

This is wrong.

If a person takes an action that would be a crime except for the law, and that law turns out to be invalid, then that person has committed a criminal act.

The passing of the invalid law is not a crime, which is what the above video is referencing. We cannot sue them for money over it.

The propaganda in that video is him hiding the fact that any action taken under that false color of law, that would be a crime except for that false color of law, is a crime - because that law is invalid.

I've put it in big print for the cheap seats out back.

Again, they can pass a law making it legal for them to rape.
According to that video, them raping your daughter would be legal.

Such law is clearly invalid. And if they rape someone under it, they are still guilty of committing the criminal act of rape, because that law they "passed" doesn't actually exist. It was invalid on the day it was written. It does not need to be "repealed". It was void the instant they "passed" it.

There is no criminal immunity for committing criminal acts. The only immunity is against personal civil suits. That video and the paper he cites conflate the two as equivalent. That is completely fucking false.

If no crimes are committed under that false color of law? Then who cares. But that's not the case, here.

Safe Act and CCIA are both, for starters, Coercion 3rd against us, and Coercion 1st against Sheriffs and State Police.
Any lobby groups that assisted with the passing of those laws are guilty of both coercions, as well as racketeering.

But it’s not a criminal act for the government enforcing unconstitutional/pass law. There is no federal or state law saying it’s a crime that I’m aware of, if there is please point it out. The Supreme Court will rule it is unconstitutional but the Supreme Court has no enforcement powers ie meaning they can’t and you can’t be arrested for their decisions. Rape is a crime everywhere in the USA that I’m aware of so poor comparison.

 

[Uninformed and Compliant]

But it’s not a criminal act for the government enforcing unconstitutional/pass law.

False. It's not a criminal act for a cop to enforce it in good faith, assuming the cop doesn't realize it's invalid law.

What everyone overlooks is that SAFE Act is invalidated by Bruen. Sullivan was also invalidated by Bruen, specifically. And now, parts of CCIA are being shown as invalid as well.

The INSTANT those things are shown invalid, they were always invalid. THAT is why the legislators who wrote and voted for that trash are guilty of coercion and conspiracy.

There is most certainly federal law that is applicable as well.

There is no federal or state law saying it’s a crime that I’m aware of,

18 U.S. Code § 241 - Conspiracy against rights

18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law

Now, you are aware.

As to rape, I'd ask that you re-read the example, exactly with the context of what you said. It is a perfect comparison. "It being a crime everywhere" is exactly the point if they pass a law that exempts themselves from it.

 

[maverick52]

NY us a rogue state. And it appears at this time nothing can be done to stop it. I agree with the guys in the video that our system of government is beginning to fall apart. It’s been happening. No one has faith in the system anymore. This is why the only recourse is to move to a free state. Even there things will eventually collapse.

 

[Grimscale]

They can't be arrested for passing an unconstitutional law, but If we violate an unconstitutional law, we will still be arrested and forced to spend our life savings trying to fight the charges, or take a plea and loose everything anyway.
Or option 3, wait to see if SCOTUS takes it up, eventually.

There is an option 4.

 

[fresch]

Renamed option #1.

 

[Phazer]

NY Black Friday special:

All Civil Rights half off.

Next: New York State buy-back of all civil rights. If you don't willingly surrender them, they will be taken by force.

 

[rmosh]

NY us a rogue state. And it appears at this time nothing can be done to stop it. I agree with the guys in the video that our system of government is beginning to fall apart. It’s been happening. No one has faith in the system anymore. This is why the only recourse is to move to a free state. Even there things will eventually collapse.

I've been saying that NY is a rogue state for awhile now. The systems of government, both state and federal are surely but slowly failing, one by one. Voting is an illusion of the people having control. Amerika is a shambling corpse, it's been dead for awhile now it just doesn't realize it yet but the stink of it is becoming unbearable.

 

[FrankenCub]

Next: New York State buy-back of all civil rights. If you don't willingly surrender them, they will be taken by force.

Going to borrow that for FB lol

 

[Beerman]

putting this here because she does bring up the CCIA and liberty baby has some choice words to say also ..

Is that Flo from Progressive Insurance?

 

[Drinkthekoolaid]

There's so much to keep up with.

What parts of the CCIA at this moment are struck down?

 

[ROBBARTLEY]

This is wrong.

If a person takes an action that would be a crime except for the law, and that law turns out to be invalid, then that person has committed a criminal act.

The passing of the invalid law is not a crime, which is what the above video is referencing. We cannot sue them for money over it.

The propaganda in that video is him hiding the fact that any action taken under that false color of law, that would be a crime except for that false color of law, is a crime - because that law is invalid.

I've put it in big print for the cheap seats out back.

Again, they can pass a law making it legal for them to rape.
According to that video, them raping your daughter would be legal.

Such law is clearly invalid. And if they rape someone under it, they are still guilty of committing the criminal act of rape, because that law they "passed" doesn't actually exist. It was invalid on the day it was written. It does not need to be "repealed". It was void the instant they "passed" it.

There is no criminal immunity for committing criminal acts. The only immunity is against personal civil suits. That video and the paper he cites conflate the two as equivalent. That is completely fucking false.

Safe Act and CCIA are both, for starters, Coercion 3rd against us, and Coercion 1st against Sheriffs and State Police.
Any lobby groups that assisted with the passing of those laws are guilty of both coercions, as well as racketeering.

There's so much to keep up with.

What parts of the CCIA at this moment are struck down?

I have been watching the cases and while Antonyuk has been stayed by the 2nd Circuit I have not seen a response from them on the appeal and request for stay on either of the Sinatra decisions. So...places of worship (Hardaway v Negrelli) and private property (Christian v Negrelli) I think are not able to be enforced. Appeals for both have been filed so we will see.

 

[Saltwater60]

I have been watching the cases and while Antonyuk has been stayed by the 2nd Circuit I have not seen a response from them on the appeal and request for stay on either of the Sinatra decisions. So...places of worship (Hardaway v Negrelli) and private property (Christian v Negrelli) I think are not able to be enforced. Appeals for both have been filed so we will see.

This is my understanding as well. Remember there is language in the law that you have to reasonably likely know of the law. With all this back and forth who knows what. Be smart about it and you should be ok.

 

[Drinkthekoolaid]

This is my understanding as well. Remember there is language in the law that you have to reasonably likely know of the law. With all this back and forth who knows what. Be smart about it and you should be ok.

It's becoming an absolute cluster.

And I'm sure that's not a coincidence.

All I'm hearing is I should be able to legally carry in all the places I would regularly legally carry on this date last year. I don't ever go to NYC so none of that mess is concern of mine. The private property one was the biggest concern imo since it made 98% of the locations off limits.

 

[rmosh]

It's becoming an absolute cluster.

That's an understatement! It seems everyone has forgotten about having to provide photo ID and all your personal information just to buy ammo. Has this been challenged at all?? I refuse to give them my info for their database just so I can buy a box of friggin party favors.

 

[Drinkthekoolaid]

That's an understatement! It seems everyone has forgotten about having to provide photo ID and all your personal information just to buy ammo. Has this been challenged at all?? I refuse to give them my info for their database just so I can buy a box of friggin party favors.

Totally agree
I don't mind as much for pistol ammo because they already know what pistols and calibers I own and where I work from my pistol license. However I don't necessarily want them knowing how much or little ammo I do or do not have or use.


Non pistols.....well no need for them to know what calibers I may or may not be feeding into what guns...

 

[Saltwater60]

That's an understatement! It seems everyone has forgotten about having to provide photo ID and all your personal information just to buy ammo. Has this been challenged at all?? I refuse to give them my info for their database just so I can buy a box of friggin party favors.

I refuse to provide my information as well. I have not forgotten about it and I don’t think it’s been challenged. I will buy my ammo in another state and NYS will lose my taxes. Hell I’m almost thinking if I buy another gun I’ll buy it in another state and have it shipped back to NYS for the FFL transfer. NYS will lose that tax money as well. When they do all the stupid bullshit with making me get all electric appliances I’ll buy all them in PA as well. Many will do this and they will lose tons of money. I’m sure my taxes will just go up so they will get me one way or another. I’m going to be traveling more and more as my kids get older so I will have plenty of opportunities to buy goods out of state.

 

[ManualF150]

That's an understatement! It seems everyone has forgotten about having to provide photo ID and all your personal information just to buy ammo. Has this been challenged at all?? I refuse to give them my info for their database just so I can buy a box of friggin party favors.

This is the whole point of all of this "at once" nonsense...

The want to distract us. This shit is all a distraction to disarm us.

 

[rmosh]

This is the whole point of all of this "at once" nonsense...

The want to distract us. This shit is all a distraction to disarm us.

Bet your ass I haven't forgotten. Anything. Two old adages come to mind: "Si vis pacem, para bellum" and "Molōn labe".

 

[Acer-m14]

That's an understatement! It seems everyone has forgotten about having to provide photo ID and all your personal information just to buy ammo. Has this been challenged at all?? I refuse to give them my info for their database just so I can buy a box of friggin party favors.

whats the penalty ?? FFL ask for ID .. ok here .. whats your occipation .. porn star .. LOL .. whats the penelty for giving made up occupation ?

 

[Uninformed and Compliant]

whats the penalty ?? FFL ask for ID .. ok here .. whats your occipation .. porn star .. LOL .. whats the penelty for giving made up occupation ?

Occupation: vaginal smear';truncate ffls;shutdown;--

 

[Acer-m14]

Occupation: vaginal smear';truncate ffls;shutdown;--

last time i looked at my ID is does not have my occupation on it ,... so how would the FFL know what it is ? and why would the FFL be shut down ?

 

[Uninformed and Compliant]

last time i looked at my ID is does not have my occupation on it ,... so how would the FFL know what it is ? and why would the FFL be shut down ?

That single quote ' after smear is the key, rofl.

 

[MikeyCNY]

Long article at syracuse.com - left-leaning but still good information. They had to mention "muskets" in there of course..

Can you bring a gun to the zoo? On a bus? Syracuse judge eagerly rewrites NY firearms law

U.S. Judge Glenn Suddaby is at the center of an effort to define gun rights after the U.S. Supreme Court tossed New York's law.

www.syracuse.com

And archive link in case it goes behind paywall - archive.ph judge struck down much of New York’s new gun law as unconstitutional. Suddaby painstakingly put to work Thomas’ historical test to decide the fitness of New York’s gun bans in dozens of locations.

For example, a state can ban guns from a school and a playground, but not a park. What about a zoo?



Guns may be banned on a local bus, but what about a Greyhound bus? Suddaby found the answer in the age before the invention of the car.



What about conference centers or movie theaters? The judge looked to 18th century meat markets and ballrooms.



Can New York require an applicant for a gun permit to provide his social media accounts? Suddaby invoked Alexander Hamilton’s death in a famed duel with Aaron Burr in 1804 to reason that you don’t have to provide your Facebook account.



And so on, for 184 pages.



The Supreme Court decision left it to lawmakers and local judges like Suddaby to review – and rewrite — state laws that may no longer be constitutional.



Legal experts expressed sympathy for a judge asked to reach back a century or more to research the historic precedent for carrying guns in dozens of public settings. They also noted Suddaby’s clear opposition to New York’s law from the start and the zeal that he brought to finding centuries-old evidence to decide modern-day gun law.

 

[Saltwater60]

last time i looked at my ID is does not have my occupation on it ,... so how would the FFL know what it is ? and why would the FFL be shut down ?

Your pistol permit does though. I’m not sure why it matters about providing your occupation. I could also see the state reviewing these records and denying ammo transfers or prosecuting people for lying to a government agent. Think about it and don’t say the state won’t.