Second Circuit NYC transport law upheld

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!
  • swamplynx

    Active Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jul 28, 2014
    678
    DC
    Am I understanding this right? If you have NYC premise license for a firearm, you can only transport it to a range in New York City. Does this only apply to handguns or does it apply to all firearms? You can't take it to a range outside the city limits? You can't take it to a shooting contest outside the city limits? You can't take it on vacation, say to a state that allows open carry? So then you can't take it with you if you move out of state to be a resident of that new state?

    Yep. That sums it up. Though you would have FOPA as an affirmative defense of transporting it out of state, though I’m sure the commie bastards would still arrest you.
     

    Kharn

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 9, 2008
    3,578
    Hazzard County
    Yep. That sums it up. Though you would have FOPA as an affirmative defense of transporting it out of state, though I’m sure the commie bastards would still arrest you.

    I guess you could have an NYC FFL send the pistol to an FFL in your new state of residence for you to retrieve once you've worked through their bureaucracy for a new driver's license and any special licensing.
     

    Kharn

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 9, 2008
    3,578
    Hazzard County
    No action in today's orders, but while we're waiting, Iancu v Brunetti was granted. It's a trademark case about the law stating scandalous or immoral marks shall be denied protection, the application for "FUCT" as a trademark, and the First Amendment.

    Citations to Urban Dictionary are included. :lol2:
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,878
    WV
    Yep. That sums it up. Though you would have FOPA as an affirmative defense of transporting it out of state, though I’m sure the commie bastards would still arrest you.

    I don't think FOPA necessarily even applies since it seems to only apply to crossing a state on the way to another for instance.
    In this case the person's home jurisdiction is the one going after it's own citizens.
     

    swinokur

    In a State of Bliss
    Patriot Picket
    Apr 15, 2009
    55,394
    Westminster USA
    Yep. FOPA only covers Interstate transport, not intrastate transport.

    Sad because NYC thinks of itself as a state unto itself
     

    ed bernay

    Active Member
    Feb 18, 2011
    184
    what crime would NYC charge you with if you have an unloaded firearm in your moving truck and you already have their unconstitutional premise possession permit? Obviously they could charge you with anything they want but would it lead to a conviction? I would guess the worst they could do is revoke your permit but if you are moving who cares.
     

    esqappellate

    President, MSI
    Feb 12, 2012
    7,407
    any day there is no denial is a good day.

    I'd bet on another dissent from denial of cert.

    Too soon to tell. Wait until tomorrow to see if it is relisted. Generally the odds of a grant go up with one to three relists. They go down after that, suggesting a dissent from a denial of cert. But even then, the Court will grant cert even after six or 7 relists. Relisting would be a *good* thing.
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,878
    WV
    Too soon to tell. Wait until tomorrow to see if it is relisted. Generally the odds of a grant go up with one to three relists. They go down after that, suggesting a dissent from a denial of cert. But even then, the Court will grant cert even after six or 7 relists. Relisting would be a *good* thing.

    Distributed for the 1/11/18 conference.

    If memory serves, I can only recall one case (Drake) where a case was relisted only to be dismissed without comment. I could be wrong but we seem to be on track for the court to at least say something.
     

    esqappellate

    President, MSI
    Feb 12, 2012
    7,407
    Distributed for the 1/11/18 conference.

    If memory serves, I can only recall one case (Drake) where a case was relisted only to be dismissed without comment. I could be wrong but we seem to be on track for the court to at least say something.

    We shall see. Woollard was not relisted at all. The Court seems to be more or less following its practice of doing at least one relist prior to a cert grant. The good thing about this case is that Paul Clement is Counsel of Record, and the Court knows and trusts him. And yes, that matters.
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,878
    WV
    Yes, please. 47 pages of legalese is a little much for us peons

    The case has passed a major hurdle toward SCOTUS review. It doesn't necessarily mean they will review but probably 99 percent get denied the first conference.
     

    Kharn

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 9, 2008
    3,578
    Hazzard County
    We shall see. Woollard was not relisted at all. The Court seems to be more or less following its practice of doing at least one relist prior to a cert grant. The good thing about this case is that Paul Clement is Counsel of Record, and the Court knows and trusts him. And yes, that matters.

    Hopefully the former 10th Justice can work some magic. :fingerscrossed:
     

    danb

    dont be a dumbass
    Feb 24, 2013
    22,704
    google is your friend, I am not.
    According to SCOTUSBLOG:

    A full April calendar would probably consist of around 12 cases, which means the court is looking for something in the neighborhood of eight more cases to round out the last of the October Term 2018 arguments. Some cases considered at the court’s January 18 conference could squeeze in to the tail end of the April argument sitting by shaving a few days off the 30 days petitioners ordinarily would have to file reply briefs. But this Friday’s conference is where the court is likely to decide on the bulk of the April sitting.

    http://www.scotusblog.com/2019/01/relist-watch-returns-2/

    They had 8 slots, and granted 8. ... Odds are now pretty high we are getting another dissent from denial of cert. Tiny tiny chance we are getting a PC opinion, but seems unlikely since nothing in Heller or Caetano seems on point to me.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,915
    Messages
    7,258,430
    Members
    33,348
    Latest member
    Eric_Hehl

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom