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

M

ManualF150

.308 Win
Messages
4,836
Reaction score
8,831
Location
Cayuga
I wonder what kind of "Huge Surprise" or other fanciful lingo that Armed Scholar, Four Boxes, and the other Tubers will come up with to keep the wishful thinkers happy -- errrr, I mean to keep the ad/click revenue coming in? :ROFL:

I've watched their videos from the start of Bruen till now, and wow. The ship can only take on so much water, if you know what I mean.

Heck, my waders aren't good enough, I better get out my drysuit with SCBA gear... but I'll run out of air waiting.
 
Saltwater60

Saltwater60

.950 JDJ
Messages
34,988
Reaction score
39,378
Location
Western NY
ManualF150 said:
I wonder what kind of "Huge Surprise" or other fanciful lingo that Armed Scholar, Four Boxes, and the other Tubers will come up with to keep the wishful thinkers happy -- errrr, I mean to keep the ad/click revenue coming in? :ROFL:

I've watched their videos from the start of Bruen till now, and wow. The ship can only take on so much water, if you know what I mean.

Heck, my waders aren't good enough, I better get out my drysuit with SCBA gear... but I'll run out of air waiting.
Click to expand...
Well one of two things IMO a will happen.
1.) the second circuit will toss us a bone in an attempt to save face and prevent it from going to the SC.
2.) they will save face with the powerful liberals and deny everything forcing the Supreme Court to take the case and make the decision. This will allow the liberals to say how extreme the SC is and how they need to be checked or to expand the court.
3.) I know I said one of two things but the liberals also might be thinking we’re out of money and won’t proceed to the Supreme Court.
These are my meager thoughts and take them for what they are.
 
kev74

kev74

20×102mm Vulcan
Messages
49,998
Reaction score
158,177
Location
Orange Co.
You guys are funny. How quickly did you expect this all to play out?

Lincoln gave the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863. 160 years later, democrats are still coming up with new ways to subjugate and oppress brown people.

After Brown vs. Board of Ed, some democrat controlled school districts closed their schools for a decade to resist integration. They closed public schools for 10 years to avoid complying with a Supreme Court decision.

The commie democrats play the long game. We're not going to win with a single home run.

We're going to win in small incremental steps. Bruen was a big step forward with some uncomfortable but predictable side effects. When the 2nd Circuit gives their ruling, probably in a few months, we'll be lined up for another step forward.
 
Saltwater60

Saltwater60

.950 JDJ
Messages
34,988
Reaction score
39,378
Location
Western NY
For anyone interested in listening to the recordings they can be found here. I listened to two of them so far and they are quick and to the point. So far it doesn’t seem like things are going badly to me. Of course there’s time to go down in flames.

United States Court of Appeals 2nd Circuit

www.ca2.uscourts.gov
Look under oral arguments recordings.

Oral Arguments

www.ca2.uscourts.gov
 
Last edited:
Saltwater60

Saltwater60

.950 JDJ
Messages
34,988
Reaction score
39,378
Location
Western NY
Here is a good overview of what went down. IMO the one lawyer did do a bad job of defending sensitive places and to me it’s pretty easy to determine what a sensitive place is and it should be controlled entry with people(cops or security guards) monitoring or entering who can come in through some sort of screening means. This guy failed at that horribly. I think the justices are struggling how to decide and it will be some time before we hear. The one judge did say we will rule and it will stand until the SC over rules is so I think we won’t be to happy with their decision.
I think the state struggled to defend how they made up what a sensitive location is and why churches are one as well as the private property ban. The state is saying they didn’t ban guns on private property and that property owners did.
Here is a good review of what occurred.
www.niagara-gazette.com

Appeals court reserves decision on constitutionality of New York gun law

NEW YORK CITY — For just over two and a half hours Monday, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals seemed to struggle to find a
www.niagara-gazette.com www.niagara-gazette.com
 
maverick52

maverick52

.223 Rem
Messages
1,114
Reaction score
2,197
Location
Knowhere
The attorney representing Antonyuk was horrible. He’s the GOA attorney. Real embarrassment. He also did a shabby job in front of Suddaby if you recall. The one thing we have to remember is that oral arguments are only one aspect. There are a lot of briefs that have been filed. The panel must read through all of the briefs and through Bruen before rendering a decision. I still think that the court shows their cards. They are true blue liberals and I think they will side with the state. This will be a long slog and most of us won’t be living around here by the time it’s settled.
 
G

GlockModel29

.40 S&W
Messages
143
Reaction score
264
Location
Sand Lake, NY
maverick52 said:
The attorney representing Antonyuk was horrible. He’s the GOA attorney. Real embarrassment. He also did a shabby job in front of Suddaby if you recall. The one thing we have to remember is that oral arguments are only one aspect. There are a lot of briefs that have been filed. The panel must read through all of the briefs and through Bruen before rendering a decision. I still think that the court shows their cards. They are true blue liberals and I think they will side with the state. This will be a long slog and most of us won’t be living around here by the time it’s settled.
Click to expand...
I'd be overjoyed if the 2nd Circuit squashed the private property BS and let SCOTUS squash the rest....
 
kev74

kev74

20×102mm Vulcan
Messages
49,998
Reaction score
158,177
Location
Orange Co.
I didn't think the GOA lawyer was that bad. Definitely not as polished of a speaker as the others, but I thought he got his point across.
 
Saltwater60

Saltwater60

.950 JDJ
Messages
34,988
Reaction score
39,378
Location
Western NY
maverick52 said:
The attorney representing Antonyuk was horrible. He’s the GOA attorney. Real embarrassment. He also did a shabby job in front of Suddaby if you recall. The one thing we have to remember is that oral arguments are only one aspect. There are a lot of briefs that have been filed. The panel must read through all of the briefs and through Bruen before rendering a decision. I still think that the court shows their cards. They are true blue liberals and I think they will side with the state. This will be a long slog and most of us won’t be living around here by the time it’s settled.
Click to expand...
Correct and I agree he did a terrible job. He spent so much time off track his point was never made. When asked what makes a sensitive location sensitive the guy sucked terribly. The statement should have been courts are sensitive because police control the entry and exit with screenings and metal detection. He stumbled horribly.
 
W

Willyone

6.5 Creedmoor
Messages
2,164
Reaction score
3,998
Location
Elbridge, NY
camper4lyfe said:
Feel like giving a synopsis for those without a subscription?
Click to expand...
Yeah, can't read the article unless/until... bla bla bla...

What I think it means is this; Andy won't let Barney put a bullet in his gun. So Barney now needs to take it up with Aunt Bee. Aunt Bee might say it's ok for Barney to load a bullet into his gun. But then Andy probably won't allow Barney to have a bullet. So it seems to be going....
 
John Stark

John Stark

.44 mag
Messages
940
Reaction score
2,747
Location
IAM
camper4lyfe said:
Feel like giving a synopsis for those without a subscription?
Click to expand...
It basically briefly rehashes how Hardaway v. Nigrelli went in front of the 3 judge panel @ the 2nd Circuit; the case that deals with Arms in houses of worship. There's just about nothing new in the article beyond a little commentary on how the judges behaved and predictions of how its going to pan out:

The president of the New York County Lawyers’ Association, Vincent Chang, told the Sun that based on the oral arguments Monday, the Hardaway case will likely make its way to the Supreme Court by the end of the next term in 2024.

“I think the judges probably think this is going to the Supreme Court,” Mr. Chang said after listening to the oral arguments. The three judges “definitely want to get this right with respect to the historical antecedents of firearms regulation in houses of worship.”

The three judges on the panel — Dennis Jacobs, Gerard E. Lynch, and Eunice C. Lee — were appointed by Presidents George H.W. Bush, Obama, and Biden, respectively.

Judge Jacobs seemed especially enlivened by the case. Just minutes into the oral arguments, he told the lawyer who was defending the law that houses of worship and schools are two sides of the same coin — both important for civic life, one being religious and one being secular. Because banning firearms from schools is constitutional, then it could be logical that banning firearms from churches should be too, he told counsel.

The judge also showed little patience for the arguments of those seeking to challenge the law, often interrupting and asking pointed questions. The Second Amendment advocates engaged in a “selective reading of history,” Judge Jacobs said as one lawyer attempted to recount the history of 18th and 19th century firearms regulation...

....Last year, Judge Glenn Suddaby of the Western District of New York sided with Reverend Hardaway, ruling that the state could not prove the necessary historical tradition of regulating firearms in places such as churches or synagogues...

“Since the plain text of the Second Amendment presumptively protects Plaintiffs’ proposed course of conduct—carrying handguns for self-defense—the State bears the burden of ‘demonstrating’ that its modern enactments are ‘consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation,’” Reverend Hardaway’s lawyers wrote in their argument. “In order to do so, the State needs to come forward with evidence of historical laws that similarly burden the right to bear arms for similar reasons.”

Mr. Chang says Judge Suddaby’s decision could fall on deaf ears, though. “My prediction is that they’ll reverse the lower decision, based on what I’ve heard,” he said. He also predicted that the nine justices may have to find some stricter guidelines than the ones they set forth last year so that the Supreme Court won’t be hearing gun rights cases every few months.

“In Bruen, Kavanaugh was the swing vote, if there was one,” Mr. Chang said. “He constructed a narrower set of guidelines than the majority did. He’ll look very closely so that they can provide clear guidelines going forward.”
Click to expand...

Article is essentially pointless and comes across as filler clickbait as far as I'm concerned.
 
pshift

pshift

.338 Win Mag
Messages
8,627
Reaction score
25,651
Location
Stalag 13
Here is the article in question...
 

Attachments

  • nysun.com-2nd Circuits Fumble of New York Gun Law Could Soon Return the Issue to Supreme Court...pdf
    143.6 KB · Views: 12
maverick52

maverick52

.223 Rem
Messages
1,114
Reaction score
2,197
Location
Knowhere
camper4lyfe said:
Feel like giving a synopsis for those without a subscription?
Click to expand...
Nothing new other than they like many others are predicting this is all going to the Supreme Court and that the Second Circuit wont bend an inch. It appears the writer is familiar with the second circuit and feels they were hostile. Just a confirmation of what we all already know.
 
dwa12479

dwa12479

.338 Win Mag
Messages
7,024
Reaction score
14,417
Location
Dark Side of the Moon
kev74 said:
I didn't think the GOA lawyer was that bad. Definitely not as polished of a speaker as the others, but I thought he got his point across.
Click to expand...
I don't know, I thought he sounded like a babbling fool at times, getting WAY off topic. And a lot of searching for answers rather than having them at the ready. Like trying to do a book report in front of your English class and you only read the cliff notes on the bus ride in to school that morning. (Not that I have experience with that....)
 
maverick52

maverick52

.223 Rem
Messages
1,114
Reaction score
2,197
Location
Knowhere
I know this was mentioned before. But can one of the mods change the title of this post? This is the CCIA lawsuits page. The TRO is long behind us. Any idea how to change it?
 
kev74

kev74

20×102mm Vulcan
Messages
49,998
Reaction score
158,177
Location
Orange Co.
I believe the hearings last week were to determine the status of the stays placed on the TROs.

Ridiculous as it is, the thread title is still applicable.
 
maverick52

maverick52

.223 Rem
Messages
1,114
Reaction score
2,197
Location
Knowhere
kev74 said:
I believe the hearings last week were to determine the status of the stays placed on the TROs.

Ridiculous as it is, the thread title is still applicable.
Click to expand...
Actually the hearings were for the preliminary injunctions…not the TROs. TROs are temporary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top