2A Lawsuits and their progress we have here in NY

[Truebeliever]

i KnOw wHaT iM tAlKiNg aBoUt..... hahagahhahahahahhahhaha

Again read the fucking court opinion, (may i also suggest a little read called Heller V DC) and not just cherry pick tid bits and one liners just to push your stupid beliefs on how it was ruled .

Otherwise stfu

Go read it again yourself. Did Bruen throw out the permit system? The answer is no. You still have to apply for a permit. It says a “shall issue” permit system is constitutional . The only question is the criteria for the permit. A true “ shall issue” permit requirement will survive court challenges.
If you think I am wrong, explain you position rather than just say I’m wrong.

 

[Edwardteach72]

Go read it again yourself. Did Bruen throw out the permit system? The answer is no. You still have to apply for a permit. It says a “shall issue” permit system is constitutional . The only question is the criteria for the permit. A true “ shall issue” permit requirement will survive court challenges.
If you think I am wrong, explain you position rather than just say I’m wrong.

The permit system for carrying guns out in public...

Maybe you should again read the fucking opinion

 

[Edwardteach72]

Truebeliver gathering talking points for his arguments

 

[Truebeliever]

The permit system for carrying guns out in public...

Maybe you should again read the fucking opinion

I did. Go show me where it says New York, your need for a gun permit is unconstitutional despite needing one to touch a handgun? It doesn’t .
Bruen is not the precedent in which the government “ BS was upheld by the court.
Heller was about DC not issuing permits to the general public to have a gun in the home. Dick Heller won and got the right to have a gun in the home. The gun has to be registered— another word for license if they can deny it.
Here is what is required to register your gun for home use( not carry)

“Understanding the Registration Process​

Some claim the process of legal firearm possession in DC is fairly simple. Someone who wants to register a gun must go to the Metropolitan Police Department, provide the proper documentation for their gun, and pass a background check to have their gun registered. That registration only permits a person to keep a gun in their home or their place of business; the registration does not permit them to carry a gun outside of their home or place of business.”

Process of Legal Firearm Possession in DC | How to Register a Gun

If you are interested in learning more about the process of legal firearm possession in Washington, DC, discuss your next steps with a gun attorney.

criminallawdc.com

In other places, that registration is called a license or permit.

That’s the system under Heller where Heller took DC to court twice.
The permit system wasn’t thrown out with Palmer v DC either.
Bruen is about how the permit is issued.
Thomas did not throw out the permit system in Bruen. And thr concurrent opinions support the shall issue system.

But wait, is that cherry picking or is that how the courts are going to interpret the case? Hmmm.
Tell me how I am wrong? Explain.

 

[Edwardteach72]

Yaaaaawwwwwn.

 

[4WHLDRFTN]

 

[Truebeliever]

Yaaaaawwwwwn.

Keep trolling. You were wrong before and you are wrong now. When have you been right EVER-lol

 

[Edwardteach72]

yOu wErE wRoNg, i kNoW wHaT iM TaLkInG AbOuT

 

[Jsmegs77]

"I'm the NRA"
Yep that's me a Fudd with EBR's, etc.
I contribute to the 2AF,GOA and others.

Since the NRA paid the freight on the Bruen/NYSRPA case, they ought to get a pass from now on.

So a totally unexpected win on one case atones for GCA 68, Brady, 94 AWB, et al? Sorry, no. The broken clock was right for once, and they’ll get the recognition for one win, but there’s a whole lot of shit shoveling ahead and this in no way absolves them of the other miscarriages of justice they’ve been complicit with or outright supported over the past half century or better.

 

[dsdmmat]

Gentlemen, let’s keep this civil. I personally hope it all burns down, but Hope is not a military method. I won’t hold my breath waiting on the lower courts will do the right thing. I won’t hold my breath waiting on the dictatorship in the PRNY will be held accountable either.

 

[Jem45472]

It's pretty interesting to me how defeated a lot of people are acting, and yes part of me somewhat gets it because the new carry bill that was signed into law is absolutely horrible.

But it seems like most are missing the big picture, I think you keep putting it best. NY showed all its cards before the start of the hand.

What NY believed to be a power move (similar to Cuomo and the safe act) and pushing a bill through start to finish in only a few hours is actually the complete opposite. It was a sign of panic and weakness.



Side note NY also shot itself in the foot (pun intended) by doing what well I and many others (but not enought) 2A advocates have been trying to do for years, they exposed and took down the NRA.. by doing this they have removed a powerful ally who would have worked with them hand in hand for "compromise" (aka mutual sustainability), they have open the flood gates to true 2A organizations who are going for real change.

Like x3

 

[Acer-m14]

Thomas did not throw out the permit system in Bruen.

yes he did ..

Thomas has long been a proponent of supersizing the Second Amendment and has argued that lower courts were treating the Second Amendment as a second-class right. Thomas and his fellow originalists have set out to analogize the Second Amendment to core free speech rights,

either toss the permit or add all the same to 1A 4A 5A 14A ect .. and voting ..

 

[spat]

You think the body armor challange will fail Bruen but the semi auto rifle license won't hahahahhahahhahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahhahahaahhahahahhahahahahahahahhahaha

They allow licenses for pistols, nothing qualitatively different for a rifle license.

A couple states require a FOID card or something equivalent which is basically a license for any gun.

As long as they are shall issue and not too onerous Bruen would probably allow them.

They are unconstitutional of course, but not badly enough for Bruen to strike them down.

Maybe a future case could though.

 

[Acer-m14]

history text and tradition ..

good thing body armor wasn't banned back then

 

[Defilade]

So what is the timeline you have to give up your social media accounts? Who is going to comply with that baby? Lol

 

[Truebeliever]

yes he did ..

Thomas has long been a proponent of supersizing the Second Amendment and has argued that lower courts were treating the Second Amendment as a second-class right. Thomas and his fellow originalists have set out to analogize the Second Amendment to core free speech rights,

either toss the permit or add all the same to 1A 4A 5A 14A ect .. and voting ..

They won’t throw out the permit system. It’s the very reason Kavanaugh made his concurrent opinion. They don’t have the votes to take down the permit system.

 

[Edwardteach72]

They allow licenses for pistols, nothing qualitatively different for a rifle license.

A couple states require a FOID card or something equivalent which is basically a license for any gun.

As long as they are shall issue and not too onerous Bruen would probably allow them.

They are unconstitutional of course, but not badly enough for Bruen to strike them down.

Maybe a future case could though.

No the case said for carrying of a gun concealed in public. It does not say a blanket "to own"

FOID have not been Challanged. Let alone under bruen

 

[nortatoga]

The final ruling...

New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Four
teenth Amendment in that it prevents law-abiding citizens
with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right
to keep and bear arms. We therefore reverse the judgment
of the Court of Appeals and remand the case for further pro
ceedings consistent with this opinion.
It is so ordered.

14th Amendment

www.law.cornell.edu

Section 1.​

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Koch and Nash were denied equal protection of the laws as half the State issued unrestricted licenses.

 

[spat]

No the case said for carrying of a gun concealed in public. It does not say a blanket "to own"

FOID have not been Challanged. Let alone under bruen

No, but the *ruling* laid out the framework to evaluate laws under.

Not sure a FOID would pass the "text and tradition" test.

But as you state, that's not what Bruen was about, so it'll take another case to find out.

 

[Edwardteach72]

Not sure a FOID would pass the "text and tradition" test.

Weird because just a post ago you along with true were saying that bruen said license to own rifles was upheld by bruen... now call it a foid and you don't think it'd survive
“¯\_(ツ)_/¯“

 

[spat]

Weird because just a post ago you along with true were saying that bruen said license to own rifles was upheld by bruen... now call it a foid and you don't think it'd survive
“¯\_(ツ)_/¯“

I don't think it's a slam dunk that Bruen would outlaw them. I can see several circuits allowing them.

I think there's a chance you could use the Bruen ruling as a spring board to get them overturned.

But that would be going back to SCOTUS for sure.

And it would not be the same SCOTUS that decided Bruen.

 

[US RIFLE M1A]

Chief Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 7/21/2022.

Antonyuk et al V. Bruen (Filed 7-11-22)
Challange to the new NY concealed carry laws.

United States District Court for the Northern District of New York

TEXT ORDER granting in part and denying in part 10 Defendant's letter-motion for an extension of the deadline by which he must respond to Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction. Although Defendant certainly must (as he argues) review "extensive" history to brief the Court on the relevant historical traditions in his response, he has already gotten a head start in amassing the necessary historical sources in N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Assoc., Inc. v. Bruen, 18-CV-0134 (N.D.N.Y.). Moreover, although Plaintiffs did not also file a motion for emergency relief in the form of a Temporary Restraining Order, the law they challenge does take effect on September 1, 2022: the Court could not grant Defendant (NY/Bruen) the full extension he seeks without shortening (1) the seven-day period for Plaintiffs' reply, (2) the time afforded the Court to review that reply before the hearing, (3) the window of time in which to hold the hearing, and (4) the time afforded the Court (between the hearing and September 1, 2022) to prepare a Decision and Order. In short, the complete relief that Defendant seeks in his letter-motion would deprive Plaintiffs of their right to have their motion for a preliminary injunction fairly and justly decided, if not the very relief they are seeking. As a result, the deadline for Defendant's response to Plaintiffs' motion is extended five days to the end of MONDAY, AUGUST 15, 2022; and the deadline for Plaintiffs' reply is extended five days to the end of MONDAY, AUGUST 22, 2022. Defendant is respectfully advised that the partial granting of his letter-motion is contingent on him making himself available for an in-person hearing at any point between TUESDAY, AUGUST 23, 2022, and the end of FRIDAY, AUGUST 26, 2022. A Decision and Order on Plaintiffs' motion will be issued before the statute in question takes effect on September 1, 2022. SO ORDERED by Chief Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 7/21/2022. (sal ) (Entered: 07/21/2022)

Note: everyone should read the brief on behalf of Antonyuk (Plaintiff) it is beautifully written. Also note that this judge is a Bush 43 appointee, for what that's worth. He also seems serious about following the previous Bruen (SCOTUS) decision.

 

[Truebeliever]

Chief Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 7/21/2022.

Antonyuk et al V. Bruen (Filed 7-11-22)
Challange to the new NY concealed carry laws.

United States District Court for the Northern District of New York

TEXT ORDER granting in part and denying in part 10 Defendant's letter-motion for an extension of the deadline by which he must respond to Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction. Although Defendant certainly must (as he argues) review "extensive" history to brief the Court on the relevant historical traditions in his response, he has already gotten a head start in amassing the necessary historical sources in N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Assoc., Inc. v. Bruen, 18-CV-0134 (N.D.N.Y.). Moreover, although Plaintiffs did not also file a motion for emergency relief in the form of a Temporary Restraining Order, the law they challenge does take effect on September 1, 2022: the Court could not grant Defendant (NY/Bruen) the full extension he seeks without shortening (1) the seven-day period for Plaintiffs' reply, (2) the time afforded the Court to review that reply before the hearing, (3) the window of time in which to hold the hearing, and (4) the time afforded the Court (between the hearing and September 1, 2022) to prepare a Decision and Order. In short, the complete relief that Defendant seeks in his letter-motion would deprive Plaintiffs of their right to have their motion for a preliminary injunction fairly and justly decided, if not the very relief they are seeking. As a result, the deadline for Defendant's response to Plaintiffs' motion is extended five days to the end of MONDAY, AUGUST 15, 2022; and the deadline for Plaintiffs' reply is extended five days to the end of MONDAY, AUGUST 22, 2022. Defendant is respectfully advised that the partial granting of his letter-motion is contingent on him making himself available for an in-person hearing at any point between TUESDAY, AUGUST 23, 2022, and the end of FRIDAY, AUGUST 26, 2022. A Decision and Order on Plaintiffs' motion will be issued before the statute in question takes effect on September 1, 2022. SO ORDERED by Chief Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 7/21/2022. (sal ) (Entered: 07/21/2022)

Note: everyone should read the brief on behalf of Antonyuk (Plaintiff) it is beautifully written. Also note that this judge is a Bush 43 appointee, for what that's worth. He also seems serious about following the previous Bruen (SCOTUS) decision.

A Bush appointment means nothing. They used let the Senator of that state judge would serve in, “ pick” the judge for the president.

 

[US RIFLE M1A]

Suffice it to say there are no founding-era analogues in accord with the CCIA’s (Hochul's new law) demands. In 1776, it would have been preposterous to have required William Floyd (an original signatory to the Declaration of Independence from New York) to sit down with a British licensing official to receive a permit to carry a firearm. Perhaps one of those interview questions would be, “Why do you need to carry a firearm, Mr. Floyd?” And perhaps the answer would have been, “Well governor, we intend to sign a Declaration of Independence, and withdraw our consent to be governed.” It is doubtful the Crown’s licensing official would have given Mr. Floyd a license. Would Alexander Hamilton have been approved to carry a firearm if the government learned that he wrote Federalist No. 33: “If the federal government should overpass the just bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its powers, the people, whose creature it is, must appeal to the standard they have formed, and take such measures to redress the injury done to the Constitution as the exigency may suggest and prudence justify”? Likely no British “licensing officer” would have found any of this nation’s Founders to have “good moral character” defined as “the essential character, temperament and judgement [sic] necessary to be entrusted with a weapon.” And because licensing for concealed firearms did not start until the 1890s, long after ratification, none of these absurd and imaginary analogues could have occurred in the first place.

Excerpt from Antonyuk et al V. Bruen (Filed 7-11-22)

 

[Acer-m14]

really low audio .. click the CC button for subs ..

 

[ArmedCorgi]

really low audio .. click the CC button for subs ..

Such a great series.

 

[Acer-m14]

and the laws come crumbling down .. one brick at a time ..

 

[ManualF150]

and the laws come crumbling down .. one brick at a time ..

Yep. I like sitting back watching it all crumble down. Agreed -- one brick at a time!

 

[Cavalry]

The current tactic seems to be to take down these shit laws one piece at a time. After the class/range/minimum standards mandate goes into effect someone legally blind needs to apply for a pistol permit.
There is nothing that says you need to be sighted in order to posses a pistol. In the vast majority of the country a blind person could with no problems. This should be clear cut discrimination based on disability.

 

[CaliberPlus]

There are a LOT more laws that so far, I am not seeing any suits against. I am hoping NYSRPA is going to go whole hog.