Malpasso v Pallozzi SCOTUS Cert Petition Filed

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!
  • I think that every day that NYSRPA is not mooted raises the odds in our favor.

    The odds are never are in our favor. SCOTUS has declined to hear or ruled against the 2A more than twice as many times as they have provided relief...AND in the cases where the 2A has "won" there is always a lop hole or gray area that the gun grabbers march right through and infringe anyway.

    the 2A will lose in the NYSRPA case regardless of whether the court upholds the lower court decision or not. The ONLY opinion the court could give that would help is to uphold the amendment as written and that is never going to happen. Some how the court continues to find hidden meaning in those words and thanks to Heller the 2A has been declared not to be an unlimited right....which gives a HUGE loop hole for gun grabbers.
     

    Occam

    Not Even ONE Indictment
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 24, 2018
    20,239
    Montgomery County
    SCOTUS has declined to hear or ruled against the 2A more than twice as many times as they have provided relief

    Over what period of time? With which mix of justices sitting in those seats? Talking about the impact of the court as if its ideological makeup never changes over time is just silly. The court is not, today, the same as it was four (or even two) years ago.
     

    Steel Hunter

    Active Member
    Nov 10, 2019
    548
    I believe the new SuperNintendo becomes the named defendant. But I am not a lawyer, nor did I play one one TV. But I stayed at a Holiday Inn a few times.

    Everyone better start pressing A-B-A-B-UP-UP-DOWN-DOWN-LEFT-RIGHT-LEFT-RIGHT to enable the cheat codes for a quick win.

    The NYSRPA case seems far from closure. Hopefully we get something by summer on that.
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,878
    WV
    The odds are never are in our favor. SCOTUS has declined to hear or ruled against the 2A more than twice as many times as they have provided relief...AND in the cases where the 2A has "won" there is always a lop hole or gray area that the gun grabbers march right through and infringe anyway.

    the 2A will lose in the NYSRPA case regardless of whether the court upholds the lower court decision or not. The ONLY opinion the court could give that would help is to uphold the amendment as written and that is never going to happen. Some how the court continues to find hidden meaning in those words and thanks to Heller the 2A has been declared not to be an unlimited right....which gives a HUGE loop hole for gun grabbers.

    It certainly can't get any worse.
     

    delaware_export

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 10, 2018
    3,144
    I’m not a lawyer... as a layman trying to learn, it seems that Scalia was too gentle, or tried to be too cleaver, in his wording. As folks here seemed to explain, it was to keep support.

    I think the worst phrasing in my non legal opinion was the part where he said something like “people should not be allowed to carry firearms in any manner whatsoever.”

    My original thought was that this translates to walking down the street, waiving it around, pointing it at people, threatening them, shooting them, and in general, being stupid.

    Now in several states, this seems to be translated to... you CAN NOT carry a gun. In any manor!!! Whatsoever.

    Whoever writes the pro gun opinion, majority or dissent, needs to be direct, blunt, and not try to “cleaver” in their wording. I think that’s the issue with heller. The cleaver wording is twisted in something not intended.

    Also the part about not invalidating long standing laws... seems to be aimed at the NFA. Much like slavery, long standing laws don’t make them good or lawful.

    Lawyer speak.

    The odds are never are in our favor. SCOTUS has declined to hear or ruled against the 2A more than twice as many times as they have provided relief...AND in the cases where the 2A has "won" there is always a lop hole or gray area that the gun grabbers march right through and infringe anyway.

    the 2A will lose in the NYSRPA case regardless of whether the court upholds the lower court decision or not. The ONLY opinion the court could give that would help is to uphold the amendment as written and that is never going to happen. Some how the court continues to find hidden meaning in those words and thanks to Heller the 2A has been declared not to be an unlimited right....which gives a HUGE loop hole for gun grabbers.
     

    danb

    dont be a dumbass
    Feb 24, 2013
    22,704
    google is your friend, I am not.
    I’m not a lawyer... as a layman trying to learn, it seems that Scalia was too gentle, or tried to be too cleaver, in his wording. As folks here seemed to explain, it was to keep support.

    I think the worst phrasing in my non legal opinion was the part where he said something like “people should not be allowed to carry firearms in any manner whatsoever.”

    My original thought was that this translates to walking down the street, waiving it around, pointing it at people, threatening them, shooting them, and in general, being stupid.

    Now in several states, this seems to be translated to... you CAN NOT carry a gun. In any manor!!! Whatsoever.

    Whoever writes the pro gun opinion, majority or dissent, needs to be direct, blunt, and not try to “cleaver” in their wording. I think that’s the issue with heller. The cleaver wording is twisted in something not intended.

    Also the part about not invalidating long standing laws... seems to be aimed at the NFA. Much like slavery, long standing laws don’t make them good or lawful.

    Most people think that the wording was watered down to obtain Kennedy's vote (possible Roberts, we will soon know more on that).

    "majority" opinions are typically a compromise position of 5+justices.

    The wording was aimed mainly at Kennedy IMO who feared a wide ranging parade of horrible (or which only NFA is one).
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,930
    Messages
    7,259,487
    Members
    33,350
    Latest member
    Rotorboater

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom