Search results

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!

    • Register Log in
    1. V

      SAF files for cert in Drake (NJ may-issue)

      I wasn't arguing the merits of the argument. I was simply pointing out that it is an effective argument because it utilizes an analogy to something that is often common experience (having a car and driver's license) to articulate a position to people who often have limited, if any, experience...
    2. V

      SAF files for cert in Drake (NJ may-issue)

      The most effective argument that the anti-gun folks make is when they compare having a gun to driving a car. It isn't enough for us to say: driving a car is a privilege, having a gun is a right. That is true and it sounds good, but it doesn't mean squat to most people. The average American is...
    3. V

      SAF files for cert in Drake (NJ may-issue)

      Yes. And all the more reason to let the NJSC have a shot at the issue first.
    4. V

      SAF files for cert in Drake (NJ may-issue)

      And it is the first real chance for the NJSC to weigh in on the Second Amendment since Heller. That is kind of a big deal and why SCOTUS might be waiting.
    5. V

      SAF files for cert in Drake (NJ may-issue)

      Right. And SCOTUS probably reviewed the case before making a decision in DRAKE. Because DRAKE hinges, at least in part, on the construction of and a historical analysis of NJ state law, SCOTUS probably wants to defer to the NJSC for now. They will take a carry case within the next 2 years...
    6. V

      SAF files for cert in Drake (NJ may-issue)

      This is my theory on why Drake was denied The case is: In the Matter of the Application of Richard Pantano. I think that SCOTUS wants to give the NJSC a chance to weigh-in first.
    Top Bottom