Temporary Restaining Order Issued For Concealed Carry Improvement Act (merged thread)
- Thread starter Glock_USA
- Start date
arp228
.38 Special
I hope you are correct.
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
Just sent them this in their contact form on the website:
I am a NY gun owner who has been following the case regarding the TRO. It has just come to my attention that as I type this your legal team/plaintiffs are backing down. You are not challenging:
Times Square
Bars and restaurants
Camps
Shelters
Health facilities
Library
Areas where Children gather
Public transport except for checking a gun to fly on a plane.
Also it seems to be there is a problem with standing. No injured party they say. Is your legal team a bunch of rank amateurs? How the hell are they so unprepared and spineless? What game is being played here? I am disgusted at the concessions GOA is making here. I don't want to hear about the "small victories" today mentality. Unconstitutional is UNCONSTITUTIONAL! If I am wrong please enlighten me. If I am correct I am expecting a full refund for any money paid to you for this farce. Please let me know which one it is.
I am a NY gun owner who has been following the case regarding the TRO. It has just come to my attention that as I type this your legal team/plaintiffs are backing down. You are not challenging:
Times Square
Bars and restaurants
Camps
Shelters
Health facilities
Library
Areas where Children gather
Public transport except for checking a gun to fly on a plane.
Also it seems to be there is a problem with standing. No injured party they say. Is your legal team a bunch of rank amateurs? How the hell are they so unprepared and spineless? What game is being played here? I am disgusted at the concessions GOA is making here. I don't want to hear about the "small victories" today mentality. Unconstitutional is UNCONSTITUTIONAL! If I am wrong please enlighten me. If I am correct I am expecting a full refund for any money paid to you for this farce. Please let me know which one it is.
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
Kind of like telling a stalking victim we can't do anything unless your stalker kills you.
Shit show does not begin to describe this. And while plaintiff's Atty. Stambouleih may have submitted a well written petition, he appears to suck in terms of his verbal argument abilities.
What a fucking nightmare.
What a fucking nightmare.
“Our” attorney was unprepared and stumbling over his words the whole time. Kept losing his place too. The other side was polished and has sources for everything they mentioned. I can’t see the judge ruling in our favor after hearing this.
Truebeliever
6.5 Creedmoor
Let’s wait and see. They might know something we don’t . For example, they know the judge might say “ lack of standing “ for a lot of the places on that list. Or that they know the judge will rule against them— don’t let that be an issue in the case so it is not a precedent for other challenges.
They might have decided to challenge those sensitive or restricted areas in another federal district before a better judge like the one in Buffalo , It would be binding to the law in the rest of the state unless this judge says otherwise.
They might have decided to challenge those sensitive or restricted areas in another federal district before a better judge like the one in Buffalo , It would be binding to the law in the rest of the state unless this judge says otherwise.
Truebeliever
6.5 Creedmoor
That is often the case with private lawyers. They tend to get very little actual courtroom experience as compared to lawyers in government service or legal aid . It’s how the DA’s office can often attract the the “ best and the brightest “ ( their words -not mine) to public service . Court room experience.
Truebeliever
6.5 Creedmoor
Don’t panic yet. Judges don’t base their opinions just on the courtroom performance but on the briefs. Why? Because that is what the appeals courts will focus on rather than the hearing transcripts.
John Stark
.44 mag
Neither of which (arrest or permit denial) ought to be in play here, for numerous reasons.
For starters, prior to Bruen, NY "allowed" carry with the permit in many places. Now the rug has been yanked out from under permit holders on that... IN DIRECT VIOLATION OF BRUEN. SCOTUS has already ruled on this horseshit when it comes to "sensitive places," and NY is in flagrant disregard of that ruling. The plaintiffs have been harmed, or at least are in threat of direct harm, by NYs bullshit.
Further, where is the "history, text, and tradition" about carry (Bearing) arms that delimits such broad and vast restrictions where Americans can exercise their Second Amendment right (or any other right) to be armed and take care of their own self-defense? Did the state filing have anything to back up their bullshit on that? Rhetorical question...
Are Americans allowed to travel to any state? Yes. Are they allowed to travel withing their state? Yes. Then they are allowed to exercise all of their rights, with certain exceptions (can't vote in a state they do not have residency, can't speak out of turn in a court of law, can probably be restricted from bringing a gun into a courthouse or onto a military base, etc. I.E., very circumstantial restrictions). Can we speak almost anywhere in NY? YES! Can we exercise our religion almost anywhere in NY? YES! Can we read and write printed materials (on paper or digitally) in NY? YES! Can I Assemble with other citizens in NY? YES! Then WE the People can Keep and Bear Arms in NY too!!!
And that includes the Rotten Apple! Its part of NY, and anytime any of us want to visit there and exercise our rights there we absolutely can. Clearly so (prima facie)!
There is NO NEED TO PROVE that we are ever, sometime in the "imminent" future, going to visit every single available place open to the public or that is otherwise a place we are lawfully allowed to be in order to exercise our Rights. Its a fucking ABSURD standard, and utterly unconstitutional.
As well, being arrested or denied the right to Keep & Bear (with or without a permit) are both egregious "standards" that NO fucking court in this Union should ever demand, suggest, or hint at. If a law clearly violates our Constitutional rights as enumerated, then it ought to be tossed as soon as ANY citizen has the gumption to stand up again that tyranny and bring a suit against the jackboots. Period!
As well, a law that is unconstitutional, especial prima facie (on its face, i.e., obviously so at a glance) is NULL and VOID (Marbury vs. Madison).
The US Constitution is not a suicide pact. It does not demand that we have our lives ruined by rotting in jail or prison, or become bankrupted by the government in legal and court fees while the jackboots use our own tax dollars against us, in order to have some kind of fucking standing with any given court when it comes to fundamental rights. There is NO interpretation of the Constitution that could or should demand that, be it from some asshole judge who doesn't want to do his job, to any politician, cop, or any other citizen or non-citizen walking down any street in this nation.
Any judge who rules that way is utter trash, and if Suddaby is doing so he ought to be removed from the bench as a traitor to his oath.
Anyone else remember that clause in the US Constitution that states, "Any citizen wishing to defend and uphold their Rights protected by Article or Amendment must first submit to arrest, punishment, confinement, and loss of job, family, wealth, property, dignity, etc., before he has fucking STANDING to seek relief from any American court" ???????
Me neither.
Last edited:
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
This is not needed for standing. This is on Suddaby and him being a bought and paid for scum.
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
I’m sure, but the judge did say it was all unconstitutional so how can he not?? This is a shit show.
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
Problem is now if they aren’t challenging those locations the judge can’t side in our favor for them any longer.
Did anyone else who called in to listen hear the states attorney say that 2A covers weapons in common use? I couldn't believe they actually said that in court. How are we not fighting for mags and real AR's? Seems like a big missed opportunity.
arp228
.38 Special
I did hear him say this. What about what Cippee commented above? That they aren’t arguing people possessing guns under the influence not in places that sells alcohol in general. Did you hear it this way?
Also for those who couldn't listen live, the judge said he'll issue his decision "as soon as possible" for whatever that's worth. I listened to the entire thing. I'm not trying to be negative but I don't think it went very well for us. The judge let them get away with a lot of stuff. Citing wrong time periods, militia training requirements disguised as safety training and more. It was about a 3 hour call so I cant remember everything off the top of my head.
John Stark
.44 mag
Apparently the Potomac Two-Step isn't just for DC any more...
The government is NOT going to rescue us from itself.
The government is NOT going to rescue us from itself.
I heard the state start talking about other states that prohibit carrying in bars generally then he mentioned carrying while intoxicated as a separate item. The judge then said they weren't arguing that and the state atty moved on to something else. So not sure if that means the entire thing isn't being challenged or just part of it. I would think it's the entire thing since they moved on to the next thing.
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
As has been the case in the past. He has allowed them to site inappropriate timeframes in past hearings. I expect nothing.
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
I don’t drink but I go to restaurants that serve alcohol so that’s what they are referring to. I should be able to carry and yes I get if you’re smashed carrying isn’t a good idea. There’s a lot of in between.
Something not being a good idea and something having historical analogue to be constitutionally legal are two vey different things. There is no tradition in this country of banning guns in bars. This was already addressed in the TRO.
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
Agreed. I’m just sick of the games.
maverick52
.223 Rem
Welp. Not surprised. GOA is a big disappointment. NYSRPA did a much better job. I think they have a lawsuit in court now too. Let’s see what happens there. Hopefully they get Sinatra.
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
Here is the pathetic response from the email I sent to GOA. Not much different than when I used to send emails to Schumer:
Thank you for contacting Gun Owners of America (GOA) and for supporting our lobbying efforts.
I can confirm GOA's legal team is currently arguing in court today for a permanent injunction against the NY carry restrictions.
GOA is doing everything we can to fight for Second Amendment rights for our members.
Please stay tuned on our website for an official update.
I hope this helps. If I can further assist you, please let me know.
Thank you again for contacting GOA and for your support of the Second Amendment.
My response:
You can further assist me by actually reading and responding to my previous email instead of this generic automated one.
Thank you for contacting Gun Owners of America (GOA) and for supporting our lobbying efforts.
I can confirm GOA's legal team is currently arguing in court today for a permanent injunction against the NY carry restrictions.
GOA is doing everything we can to fight for Second Amendment rights for our members.
Please stay tuned on our website for an official update.
I hope this helps. If I can further assist you, please let me know.
Thank you again for contacting GOA and for your support of the Second Amendment.
My response:
You can further assist me by actually reading and responding to my previous email instead of this generic automated one.