|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 members (J.B.Patton),
410
guests, and
1
robot. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,900
Posts550,591
Members14,458
|
Most Online1,344 Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,158 Likes: 114
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,158 Likes: 114 |
Today, the 9 justices decide the fate of the NYC carry law-- sure wish we had Anton Scalia with us--a good friend of the 2nd. Am. and a fellow hunter, shooter, collector. We shall see, indeed we shall. RWTF
"The field is the touchstone of the man"..
|
1 member likes this:
dirty harry |
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,457 Likes: 88
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,457 Likes: 88 |
What did the scrotum rule ?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,798 Likes: 566
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,798 Likes: 566 |
It will be weeks before we know most likely. They like to “draft” their ruling and drop a bunch of them at the end of the term. Court speak for we will have to circle back to that for you.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 283 Likes: 11
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 283 Likes: 11 |
probably in the summer is what I have heard
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,466 Likes: 487
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,466 Likes: 487 |
If past history is any indicator, it is very likely that the three Justices who were nominated by Liberal Left Democrats will rule against the right of concealed carry.... even though they all swore under oath to respect the 2nd Amendment during their Senate confirmation hearings.
We are most fortunate that Donald Trump was able to seat three Justices who have a history of supporting the gun rights of law abiding citizens. Had Hillary Clinton been elected, it is unlikely the N.Y. State Rifle and Pistol Assn. would have even attempted this case.
It really does make a difference who gun owners support and vote for. However, even if we win this, I predict that anti-gun Democrats will find some way to do an end run, and violate settled law. It's what they do.
I further predict that if our site Administrator approves this post, the supporters of anti-gun Democrats will be clamoring to have the truth deleted and censored. It's what they do.
A true sign of mental illness is any gun owner who would vote for an Anti-Gunner like Joe Biden.
|
2 members like this:
dirty harry, Stanton Hillis |
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 504 Likes: 7
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 504 Likes: 7 |
The SC only heard oral arguments in the case, based on briefs submitted week/months ago by the appellant and appellee and interested parties (amicus cure) months ago. Opinions are usually issued after the end of the courts current term, in June or July.
Around the steel no tortured worm shall twine.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,857 Likes: 384
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,857 Likes: 384 |
There was a state court ruling against special taxes, taxing guns and ammo the state court ruled it unconstitutional so the city changed the definition and applied a tax anyway.new York will never give up they elected deblasio twice .
|
2 members like this:
keith, Stanton Hillis |
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,804 Likes: 101
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,804 Likes: 101 |
the law we are discussing here is the sullivan act of 1911...it is settled law as well... one could argue that it is the business of ny state, and certainly not the bidness of the federal gubmint... but then read what wiki has it say about its original purpose... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sullivan_Actand as it is no longer legal nor fashionable to discriminate against someone just because of who they are or where their ancestors came from, that may be another reason to repeal it...
Last edited by ed good; 11/06/21 08:13 PM.
keep it simple and keep it safe...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 504 Likes: 7
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 504 Likes: 7 |
The case that was heard by the SC is New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which and concerns a New York law governing licenses to carry concealed handguns in public for self-defense that requires a resident to obtain a license to carry a concealed pistol or revolver and demonstrate that "proper cause" exists for the permit. I will most certainly be held unconditional as similar laws have been held in other states.
Around the steel no tortured worm shall twine.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,804 Likes: 101
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,804 Likes: 101 |
hussey...not necessarily...this is long settled state law going back to 1911... the court has been reluctant in the past to meddle in state affairs, figuring that if state laws are no longer the will of the people, then the states will fix their own laws without federal intervention...
could it be that more voters in ny dont want the law changed than do?
keep it simple and keep it safe...
|
|
|
|
|
|