krucam
Ultimate Member
IF NY moots this, Young from CA9 is teed up nicely...
I don’t think they’ll allow it to be mooted and I don’t think NY really will go shall issue.
But I don’t think SCOTUS is going to issue a broad 2A take down. I think they’ll issue a more narrow opinion, but broadly on “bear arms”. I think they will likely tell all states the right extends outside of the home, but limited restrictions are allowable in balance test of public good. So things like reasonable training or a nominal fee are are okay. As would a background check. Similar things are allowed for other rights in public, such as nominal fees and permits for 1st amendment related protests and gatherings that might disrupt traffic, etc.
So I don’t think they’ll issue a blank check for OC and CC. I think they will tell states and courts a state must allow carry of all legal arms outside of the home and that any restrictions must meet the public good test on any restrictions. So they must be shall issue, and the encumbrances have to be limited. I think some like Thomas are damned fed up and I think if they say it can be limited, they’ll make sure to give proper examples as well as make sure his limited is pretty well spelled out this time.
It’ll also likely take states awhile to comply.
I wouldn’t expect “constitutional carry” to be a thing. In a fantasy, best case world.
I think permits might end up getting respected 50 state wide, but for the method allowed in that state (and I think most states will do shall issue concealed carry. Because guns scary. Of course some will allow OC also. But I don’t see a state like Maryland deciding that to comply let’s just allow OC of handguns). Or at least states would need to recognize other states permits if they are at least as stringent.
I do think justices will be clear enough that Maryland’s law allowing OC of long guns is not sufficient under their decision for NYSRPA.
I do think things like a 2-4hr training class with live fire, fingerprint background check and a nominal fee and wait (like less than $100 and 30 days or less) would probably be deemed okay with whatever the justices decision says.
I think whatever results is going to take years and possibly a few other court cases to “settle” things.
Now of course a worse case is NY managed to successfully moot the case. I don’t see the justices handing a defeat on this. I just don’t think we will get the miracle slap down or all the various 2A infringements.
NY's Ego wont allow them to go shall issue. Now we have 5 "solid" pro 2a justices dont think mooting will happen
I've an ongoing, un-posted karma for a Maryland permit, the second we go Shall Issue.
NOTHING would make me more happy (except death) than to award that karma.
me too so we have 2 outstanding!!!! Time to bump it
FOID card in Illinois is ruled unconstitutional for in house firearms!!
https://mailchi.mp/saf/2a-lawsuit-victory-foid-card-unconstitutional
Dominoes starting to fall ??
DC did it at the Appellate Court..with this case it`s not just the 2 men that applied the NY Rifle & pistol clubs are party to the suit as well...after the last case imho the SCOTUS won't let them moot the suit this lateD.C did it in Wrenn.
I think permits might end up getting respected 50 state wide, but for the method allowed in that state (and I think most states will do shall issue concealed carry. Because guns scary. Of course some will allow OC also. But I don’t see a state like Maryland deciding that to comply let’s just allow OC of handguns). Or at least states would need to recognize other states permits if they are at least as stringent. .
Just wanted to pop in and say, on behalf of all Floridians that we are really pulling for you guys to rejoin the United States and have shall issue. Carrying a pistol is a human right, and these 8 felonious states have for far too long suppressed their flock.
On a side note, if this passes we will pray for you guys because we know the MSP will be pissing themselves and probably unloading on people at the first sign of a small bulge in your waist.
Also on a side note, I just read on the FL gun forums down here that one of our Reps in Tallahassee is pushing a bill soon that will ban any law-enforcement from one of those 8 states, Maryland included, from carrying their pistol while visiting FL due to none of those states honoring Floridians right to carry. Federal Law be damned.
Godspeed Marylanders, rejoin the United States, we’ll let you, we promise
On a side note, if this passes we will pray for you guys because we know the MSP will be pissing themselves and probably unloading on people at the first sign of a small bulge in your waist.
Maybe, but imagine the implications of losing. All of the "May Issue" States will now be "Shall Issue". That will take out MD, HI, NJ, NY etc.....forever.
As much as I hate “the war on cops,” I wouldn’t shed a single tear for a NJ state trooper that has arrested citizens transporting firearms under FOPA and saying “tell it to the judge,” spending a weekend in lockup in FL for carrying under LEOSA and being forced to use an affirmative defense himself.
Some of the worst gun control laws (CA is famous for this) are those that exempt off-duty government agents.
They were commonly carried concealed by criminals and not by law abiding citizens. Or so the claim goes. The thinking was that if you wanted to carry concealed, it must have been because you had ill intent.
But here, we're talking about concealed carry by law abiding citizens, after having decades of experience with millions of law abiding people carrying in that fashion without demonstrating ill intent.
Put another way, more recent experience blows the original justification for concealed carry prohibitions out of the water, and since the purpose of punitive law is to deal with people of ill intent and not people with no ill intent, it follows that while general concealed carry prohibitions may have had some valid reason in the past, they no longer do.
Sure, that's some sound reasoning and I agree with most of it, but law abiding folks no doubt, concealed their firearms in inclement weather,
so I would say it was common practice for them when needed. I'm sure there was a lot of concealment going on from both sides of the law. My understanding of the prohibition on carrying concealed firearms, is that people in the immediate area of one carrying a firearm, should have notice that there is a deadly weapon nearby, thus the open carry requirement.
That would certainly still apply in this day and age. But if concealed carry is to now be considered the, more appropriate way to carry in the exercise of ones fundamental right to self-defense, I don't agree with the licensing requirements. We'll surely know where the SCOTUS stands on the issue before the end of the year..It'll be a long wait.
Considering in advance what we may have to manage in the future, if you wished to emasculate a SCOTUS decision in favor of (i) shall issue and (ii) national reciprocity, what approach would you take?
Gun-free zones within one mile of a school, perhaps?