You're preaching to the choir. We've been waiting decades for this. We're all exhausted from being cranky about it for years on end, and poorer for having to fund litigation to try to fix it. There's light, now, at the end of the tunnel. Patience, if you don't want to wrestle with all of the permit steps. Or, if you have no more patience, just go get the required prints (I know, I know) and submit that application. Go! Or, wait a bit, and then go.The days of having to jump through hoops to exercise an enumerated right SHOULD be over!
For the lucky ones, very true.Not really, training exempt need not have the 16 hours and qualifying score.
Read the opinion again.I do not see why it is not Constitutional carry until Frosh wakes up and comes up with whatever scheme he wants...
I respectfully disagree, in part.Read the opinion again.
The Supreme Court remanded the lawsuit (NYSRPA v Bruen) to the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals for a new hearing.
The NY government (AG, Governor, Mayors, and Bloomberg) will have the opportunity to file extensive briefs citing the dissenting Justices comments, and any other “evidence” they wish to present while arguing that the majority of the Supreme Court are mistaken.
What is the qualification score or course of fire for the non-security guard/LE route? All I've seen it is fired at out to 15 yards and 25 rounds. Anyone have details on the course of fire? I'd like to hit the range before my W&C class next week and shoot it just to make sure.Because you need the 16 hour training PLUS the qualification score.
Soooo worth repeating....thank you 6 pack!!!I respectfully disagree, in part.
The opinion decided that subjective determinations used by may issue states is unconstitutional. Since New York's law was declared unconstitutional, it was sent back to the lower court so the lower could rule consistently with the US Supreme Court's ruling. In other words, the Supreme Court decided it is in fact unconstitutional and the lower could needs to reexamine the evidence in the case and make a ruling consistent with the Supreme Court's opinion. The Supreme Court merely decided the constitutional question - the lower court must now consider the answer to the constitutional question when rendering its new opinion.
Dissenting remarks are dicta and hold no legal weight. However, dissents are used to help analyze how the court's majority reached its decision.
Upon remand, there will be no new evidence admitted, so the court will make its decision as to whether NY's law can stand given the Supreme Court's opinion (spoiler alert: there's no way in hell they can uphold NY's may issue law).
The Supreme Court isn't mistaken - it's the law of the land. Stare Decisis holds a lot of weight, and the court rarely reverses itself (which was somewhat surprising Roe was overturned). Plessy v. Ferguson (segregation is lawful if "separate but equal" facilities exist) was overturned by Brown v. Board (segregation is unconstitutional).