NYC CCW case is at SCOTUS!

camo556 · Nov 23, 2021

jcutonilli said:
They released an opinion written by Roberts on a MS/TN water dispute. https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/11/...ssee-in-groundwater-dispute-with-mississippi/

Are you still going through with your training now?

Thomas' concurrence was perfect.

Shall not be infringed mfrs. Long gun open carry for everyone!

delaware_export · Jan 30, 2022

The libs are getting worried about this. The article sort of lays out possible next steps. All sort of what would be expected from the usual culprits… if they lose.

Just curious, the author says he’s from Maryland. Which one of you is it????

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/national-concealed-carry-it-might-be-sooner-you-think

Bertfish · Jan 30, 2022

delaware_export said:
The libs are getting worried about this. The article sort of lays out possible next steps. All sort of what would be expected from the usual culprits… if they lose.

Just curious, the author says he’s from Maryland. Which one of you is it????

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/national-concealed-carry-it-might-be-sooner-you-think

Says The Machine Gun Nest right at the top...

DanGuy48 · Jan 30, 2022

Bertfish said:
Says The Machine Gun Nest right at the top...

Clicking on that link shows a line at the top of the article, “BKROP
JANUARY 26, 2022”

Rob and Stephanie Krop are two of the owners of TMGN. BKROP is probably Brittany Krop.

press1280 · Jan 30, 2022

delaware_export said:
The libs are getting worried about this. The article sort of lays out possible next steps. All sort of what would be expected from the usual culprits… if they lose.

Just curious, the author says he’s from Maryland. Which one of you is it????

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/national-concealed-carry-it-might-be-sooner-you-think

Here's the assembly bill: https://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?d...ttee%26nbspVotes=Y&Floor%26nbspVotes=Y#A08684

4 A person is guilty of criminal possession of a firearm when he or she:
5 (1) possesses any firearm [or]; (2) lawfully possesses a firearm prior
6 to the effective date of [the] chapter one of the laws of two thousand
7 thirteen [which added this section] subject to the registration require-
8 ments of subdivision sixteen-a of section 400.00 of this chapter and
9 knowingly fails to register such firearm pursuant to such subdivision;
10 or (3) knowingly has in his or her possession a rifle, shotgun, or
11 firearm in or upon the following locations:
12 (a) Any form of public transportation, including but not limited to
13 railroads, ride sharing services, paratransit services, subways, buses,
14 air travel, taxis or any other public transportation service;
15 (b) Food and drink establishments; or
16 (c) Large gatherings, which for the purposes of this section shall
17 mean a gathering together of fifteen or more persons for amusement,
18 athletic, civic, dining, educational, entertainment, patriotic, poli-
19 tical, recreational, religious, social, or similar purposes.

A bit of a tougher call on the public transportation but B and C make the leap from government controlled locations over to privately controlled locations. Pretty clear this is an end run around what we expect the SCOTUS decision to be. "Large gatherings" doesn't even specify a place.

DanGuy48 · Jan 30, 2022

“Large gatherings, which for the purposes of this section shall
17 mean a gathering together of fifteen or more persons for amusement,
18 athletic, civic, dining, educational, entertainment, patriotic, poli-
19 tical, recreational, religious, social, or similar purposes.”

What about shooting ranges?

Occam · Jan 30, 2022

DanGuy48 said:
“Large gatherings, which for the purposes of this section shall
17 mean a gathering together of fifteen or more persons for amusement,
18 athletic, civic, dining, educational, entertainment, patriotic, poli-
19 tical, recreational, religious, social, or similar purposes.”

What about shooting ranges?

Well, since going to the range is educational, entertaining, recreational, and social, that obviously must be banned. No range for you!

Unless you promise to go there strictly to be by yourself, grumpy, uncivil, and sedentary, then it's OK. I already have that stuff mastered.

rbird7282 · Jan 30, 2022

press1280 said:
Here's the assembly bill: https://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?d...ttee%26nbspVotes=Y&Floor%26nbspVotes=Y#A08684

4 A person is guilty of criminal possession of a firearm when he or she:
5 (1) possesses any firearm [or]; (2) lawfully possesses a firearm prior
6 to the effective date of [the] chapter one of the laws of two thousand
7 thirteen [which added this section] subject to the registration require-
8 ments of subdivision sixteen-a of section 400.00 of this chapter and
9 knowingly fails to register such firearm pursuant to such subdivision;
10 or (3) knowingly has in his or her possession a rifle, shotgun, or
11 firearm in or upon the following locations:
12 (a) Any form of public transportation, including but not limited to
13 railroads, ride sharing services, paratransit services, subways, buses,
14 air travel, taxis or any other public transportation service;
15 (b) Food and drink establishments; or
16 (c) Large gatherings, which for the purposes of this section shall
17 mean a gathering together of fifteen or more persons for amusement,
18 athletic, civic, dining, educational, entertainment, patriotic, poli-
19 tical, recreational, religious, social, or similar purposes.

A bit of a tougher call on the public transportation but B and C make the leap from government controlled locations over to privately controlled locations. Pretty clear this is an end run around what we expect the SCOTUS decision to be. "Large gatherings" doesn't even specify a place.

So they will basically go from not issuing permits to having to issue permits but making carry pretty much illegal almost anywhere. (Assuming we get a favorable ruling from SCOTUS in this case)

I would see this getting smacked down quickly by the courts.

Much like MD, CA, and NJ, these lawmakers are nothing but f'ing tyrants.

teratos · Jan 30, 2022

rbird7282 said:
So they will basically go from not issuing permits to having to issue permits but making carry pretty much illegal almost anywhere. (Assuming we get a favorable ruling from SCOTUS in this case)

I would see this getting smacked down quickly by the courts.

Much like MD, CA, and NJ, these lawmakers are nothing but f'ing tyrants.

This stuff won’t fly. Foolish to hand this law to the same SCOTUS that just found carry outside the home protected.

Ever hear the story of the guy who mistook a hornets nest for a glory hole, NY?

whistlersmother · Jan 30, 2022

teratos said:
This stuff won’t fly. Foolish to hand this law to the same SCOTUS that just found carry outside the home protected.

Ever hear the story of the guy who mistook a hornets nest for a glory hole, NY?

NY will try and when it gets granted at the very same SCOTUS, will change the law to moot the case - that is, if there's still a 2A majority by the time the case makes it there.

Inigoes · Jan 30, 2022

whistlersmother said:
NY will try and when it gets granted at the very same SCOTUS, will change the law to moot the case - that is, if there's still a 2A majority by the time the case makes it there.

Can't this time, monetary damages have been attached to the complaint.

MigraineMan · Jan 30, 2022

DanGuy48 said:
What about shooting ranges?

Weren't ranges in NYC (or lack thereof) part of the original Catch-22? As in - there's a training requirement to get the license, but you can't legally take your firearm to a range to get the training to obtain the license.

I looked up the NYC license application. Really like the "please try to justify your need" section, followed by the "beg for a pre-license exemption" and the attestation from your co-habitant that you have his/her/its permission to apply for a rifle/shotgun permit or handgun license.

No, I don't think I embellished that part at all.

Kharn · Jan 30, 2022

whistlersmother said:
NY will try and when it gets granted at the very same SCOTUS, will change the law to moot the case - that is, if there's still a 2A majority by the time the case makes it there.

Displeased judges are how 'mandatory shall issue' becomes nationwide constitutional carry with zero exceptions.

Roberts is no spring chicken with his health issues, I expect him and Thomas to retire during the next R administration.

ed bernay · Jan 30, 2022

NY state is still criminalizing possession of an unregistered handgun. Unless SCOTUS seriously revises absolute and qualified immunity, politicians will never stop with this nonsense. Sponsoring politicians should be held liable for 10% of damages for their laws that are held unconstitutional by SCOTUS. They need to have skin in the game.

DC-W · Jan 30, 2022

ed bernay said:
NY state is still criminalizing possession of an unregistered handgun. Unless SCOTUS seriously revises absolute and qualified immunity, politicians will never stop with this nonsense. Sponsoring politicians should be held liable for 10% of damages for their laws that are held unconstitutional by SCOTUS. They need to have skin in the game.

I really think the most important amicus brief filed in any gun case I’ve ever read is the filing from the Black Attorneys of Legal Aid and the Bronx Defenders https://www.supremecourt.gov/Docket...01034102_20-843 Amici Brief revised cover.pdf

This isn’t just about what actual gun control looks like but so too of the criminal justice system in general and policing. The Bill of Rights — all of it — is supposed to apply everywhere in the US, not just à la carte in particular pockets of the country.

ed bernay · Jan 30, 2022

DC-W said:
I really think the most important amicus brief filed in any gun case I’ve ever read is the filing from the Black Attorneys of Legal Aid and the Bronx Defenders https://www.supremecourt.gov/Docket...01034102_20-843 Amici Brief revised cover.pdf

This isn’t just about what actual gun control looks like but so too of the criminal justice system in general and policing. The Bill of Rights — all of it — is supposed to apply everywhere in the US, not just à la carte in particular pockets of the country.

Thanks for posting that link. I agree, it is powerful. I wish the NRA would make a donation to that organization and advertise that brief in minority neighborhoods and newspapers. It would have an effect on those local politicians.

DC-W · Jan 30, 2022

NYSRPA’s counsel Paul Clement did mention it at oral argument. I only wish their social messaging were as willing to admit the realities plead within that brief.

press1280 · Jan 31, 2022

rbird7282 said:
So they will basically go from not issuing permits to having to issue permits but making carry pretty much illegal almost anywhere. (Assuming we get a favorable ruling from SCOTUS in this case)

I would see this getting smacked down quickly by the courts.

Much like MD, CA, and NJ, these lawmakers are nothing but f'ing tyrants.

I would hope that even the district courts see through this nonsense but a lot depends on how NYSRPA gets worded. The "large gatherings" should be DOA for simply being vague; so you have to count how many people are gathering and base your CCW on that??
On the "Food and drink," establishments, is that "Food establishments" AND "Drink establishments", or Red Lobsters,exc (place that serves food & booze)? In any event these places to my knowledge are all private property so they can ban carry there if they want. The current "Restaurant Carry" map at OCDO shows ZERO states ban carry and only 4 require one mode of carry over another.

press1280 · Jan 31, 2022

Inigoes said:
Can't this time, monetary damages have been attached to the complaint.

I suppose they could still moot the case if they outright capitulate on the law and pay out plaintiffs' damages but we've already had oral arguments. The previous NYSRPA case saw NY change the law before oral arguments, so likely not going to happen at this point.

press1280 · Jan 31, 2022

MigraineMan said:
Weren't ranges in NYC (or lack thereof) part of the original Catch-22? As in - there's a training requirement to get the license, but you can't legally take your firearm to a range to get the training to obtain the license.

I looked up the NYC license application. Really like the "please try to justify your need" section, followed by the "beg for a pre-license exemption" and the attestation from your co-habitant that you have his/her/its permission to apply for a rifle/shotgun permit or handgun license.

No, I don't think I embellished that part at all.

This wouldn't fly for even a second. Shooting ranges are spelled out as an OK place to carry, this new proposed law has no mention of a specific place.

NYC CCW case is at SCOTUS!

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Throw bread on me

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Not Even ONE Indictment

Ultimate Member

My hair is amazing

Peace through strength

Head'n for the hills

Defenestration Specialist

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Attachments

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics