Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: gunsmith on July 08, 2019, 11:16:18 PM
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sv-dgA1CSI4&t=362s
are we talking about this?
I have not been following as close as i used to.
NYC and ny state are strange, if you have a permit ( premise and carry permits are two separate things there )
you can carry in the city but nyc makes it illegal to take it out of the city -
your permit for the state is null/void in the city.
i heard it was going to scotus but have no idea whats up
-
I believe there is an ongoing court case about the restriction on travel outside the state. I haven't heard about anything on the permits.
It would be consistent. Kniferights.org had a case moving forward on the gravity knife restrictions. The NY Gov finally signed the knife law reform bill then had his lawyers try to close down the lawsuit despite the fact that NYC said they would still enforce the ban based on local ordinances.
-
The Truth about Guns has a handful of links about New York. I think these are all related.
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/breaking-scotus-to-city-of-new-york-nrsrpa-v-nyc-goes-forward/
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/new-york-still-struggling-to-avoid-a-hit-to-gun-control-laws/
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/new-york-state-bill-would-allow-nyc-keep-restrictions-at-heart-of-scotus-case/
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/new-york-desperately-tries-to-squirm-out-of-scotus-case/
-
The Pro-gun side seems the think they are fated to win this one (the NY law is unbearably stupid and unique in the entire country)... they are just trying to see how much they can push the court to clarify & expand gun rights that might be applicable in other cases.
-
(the NY law is unbearably stupid and unique in the entire country).
California and Illinois: Hold my beer
-
Can I just point out that the video in the OP is absolutely horrible. Having watched it I still have no understanding of what the current laws/regulations are. What the conflict betweeen them are, what the suit is about, and what New York is trying to do to make the suit moot as h4 k4pw pointing out.
Maybe someone can explain it.
-
NYC prohibits people who have a "premises permit" for a handgun from taking the gun out of your house anywhere except to one of the few gun ranges in the city. It is illegal to transport the gun to another home you own, or out of state etc. This is what the suit is about.
-
NYC prohibits people who have a "premises permit" for a handgun from taking the gun out of your house anywhere except to one of the few gun ranges in the city. It is illegal to transport the gun to another home you own, or out of state etc. This is what the suit is about.
The only reason I can think of for that sort of restriction is to be sure the gun is available - in the city where NYPD has jurisdiction - when they come to confiscate it.
-
The only reason I can think of for that sort of restriction is to be sure the gun is available - in the city where NYPD has jurisdiction - when they come to confiscate it.
One of the moderators on The Firing Line forum has reported more than once that he escaped from New York (state) many years ago. Twenty five YEARS after he left, NY contacted him and wanted his to return his NY carry permit, and tell them where the guns listed on the permit were located.
-
The case is not only about the right to travel with a firearm, but what level of scrutiny should be applied by courts in 2nd Amendment matters.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-280/62499/20180904122332608_NYSRPA%20cert%20petition%209-04-18%20FINAL.pdf
-
What part of "Shall not be infringed" are they having trouble understanding?
-
What part of "Shall not be infringed" are they having trouble understanding?
Only the word "not" . . .
-
The crux of the issue at the moment is that NYC is trying to have the SCOTUS drop the case as moot on the basis that they (NYC) are thinking about maybe, possibly, sort of changing the way they might or might not enforce the law in the future.
It's a sham. The way it works is, if someone challenges a law as unconstitutional and, by the time the case finds its way up the chain to the SCOTUS the law has been repealed or revised sufficiently that the original problem no longer exists, then the SCOTUS may decide that the case is moot (not worth hearing) because the law no longer exists.
But in this case, NYC has not repealed or revised the law, and they don't intend to. They haven't as yet even changed the way they enforce the law. What they are telling the court is, basically, "Trust us. We're not going to change the stupid, unconstitutional law, but we absolutely promise that we're seriously considering maybe telling the police to enforce it a little differently beginning, oh ... sometime down the road. So let's just all go home and not have a hearing on our stupid law."
-
The case is not only about the right to travel with a firearm, but what level of scrutiny should be applied by courts in 2nd Amendment matters.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-280/62499/20180904122332608_NYSRPA%20cert%20petition%209-04-18%20FINAL.pdf
A lot of people I hear comments assume the SC will decide NY is wrong and a lot of them seem to think they will decide strict scrutiny is required. That would be great, but I am not certain that is a guarantee.
IMO, strict scrutiny should be used for anything covered by the Bill of Rights, but we will see.
-
A lot of people I hear comments assume the SC will decide NY is wrong and a lot of them seem to think they will decide strict scrutiny is required. That would be great, but I am not certain that is a guarantee.
IMO, strict scrutiny should be used for anything covered by the Bill of Rights, but we will see.
Nothing is guaranteed, but comments I have seen from SCOTUS followers on other sites suggest that if SCOTUS grants certiorari, the case has a much better than even chance of prevailing. And that's what NYC is now desperately trying to derail. The city is somewhat frantic because they know they'll probably lose, so they're playing this "moot" game without actually changing the law -- which is what's called for to moot a case.
-
Nothing is guaranteed, but comments I have seen from SCOTUS followers on other sites suggest that if SCOTUS grants certiorari, the case has a much better than even chance of prevailing. And that's what NYC is now desperately trying to derail. The city is somewhat frantic because they know they'll probably lose, so they're playing this "moot" game without actually changing the law -- which is what's called for to moot a case.
Well, I'm 99% sure the NYC law will be struck down... but the only think I'm worried about if they will say it is not strict scrutiny, and go back to letting lower courts continue crapping all over the Second. We will see if the new justice makes any difference at all I guess.