Day444
.223 Rem
Your point is well made.
Georgia Woman Arrested After Running Out Of Gas !
- Thread starter GOYABEAN
- Start date
Your point is well made.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
The UCMJ isn't unconstitutional.
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
"""You don’t make decisions at work based on whether King Kong might punch your train as it drives past him do you?""
Wait, Queens or Manhattan?
Wait, Queens or Manhattan?
meketrefe
.450/400 Nitro Ex
Maybe reciprocity is the reason NYS needs to suspend many licenses
and make the may issue the norm.
I think reciprocity the way it is right now is very dangerous for new Yorkers.
I am less worried going other places than people coming here with a gun
because of the kind of thugs we are dealing with here in government.
...the workarounders near King Cuomo I mean.
Yes, what I'm saying is that if you enforce a clearly illegal law, in order to protect a pension, you are the problem.
Cop bashers again.
It’s safe to assume that “clearly illegal” is defined by you as opposed to the highest court in the land. Got it.
Except it is not a hypothetical. We also aren’t discussing the safe act, so lets not muddy the waters.
It's certainly not defined by the 9th Circuit...
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
So I'll ask again. If a Circuit Court compromised of the enemy or SCOTUS compromised of the enemy whether Communist or Rhino interprets that handguns aren't protected by the 2A and bans them only for active law enforcement, is that what you will follow because it's the law of the land?
Do you see what I'm getting at or will you just make excuses to protect police actions?
And please don't say that the above scenario is far fetched. Give it some years. 25 years ago we would have never thought AR's would be illegal. They were just rifles back then.
Funny, I didn’t mention them. They’re as relevent to my comment as the High Court of Mars which will be invented for real in 300 years or in hypotheticals proving the “slippery slope” right now!
Heller already said that handguns are specifically protected by the 2nd. The Court almost never reverses itself (look it up). So in other words, another pointless hypothetical.
I’m not defending police actions with made up nonsense like you are trying to pick apart police actions, with made up nonsense.
Stay in the NOW when making logical decisions. Anything else is sensationalism. Period, end of story.
But you still implied that my view was somehow less relevant because there are courts higher than I.
That's simply not true.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Boy you are really ignoring the point and focusing on things that do not matter. How about this scenario? You insert what a court banned next that is ridiculous and politically motivated that is legal today. This court is compromised of your enemies. Let's see what you say now. You can't use the ridiculous scenario argument now.
Your argument seems to mean that you agree with court decisions because they are court decisions and who are you to judge. I know you don't really believe that the founding fathers intended for the Sullivan and the Safe Acts but you use the courts as scapegoats to enforce those unconstitutional laws for a paycheck.
I'm out of here. Keep defending the boys in blue.
Last edited:
Nothing decided by Darth has the force of law in this country. Relevent to this conversation, what I said was true and always will be. Your definition of any oath, except maybe your D&D club’s, is just yours.
I’ve never enforced either of those laws. Well sort of Sullivan, but on people who’ve deserved it.
Sorry, I’ve been clear and consistent: I don’t do hypotheticals. We can talk about the facts at hand that actually happened or you can play imagination with Darth. Not my thing. Not being facetious.
If it’s a fact I cannot legally use to make a decision at work, then it’s not real and I don’t care about it (in regards to a policing conversation that is).
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Look. I'm not specifically calling you out about enforcement so don't get defensive. Whether you do or not is none of my business. What I'm saying is that the founding fathers where clear. Shall not be infringed. They didn't mean shall not be infringed except for handguns in NY and certain type of rifles with plastic, cosmetic features. You know that and I know that no matter what the politically motivated 2nd Circuit or Supreme Court says.
To say that the court decisions are what it is and it's okay for law enforcement to enforce those laws is disingenuous. I know you don't really believe that but are using that argument to defend anyone that does.
Those court decisions are politically motivated abominations and clearly aren't what the founders intended. If you read the Declaration of Independence it clearly states what their intentions were regarding arms.
So you can say that my interpretation doesn't matter or Darth's interpretation doesn't matter because we aren't courts but you know the truth. I know deep down inside you do but aren't doing so and are no pun intended "Copping out" with the court decisions and the hypotheticals so you don't have to admit that law enforcement is going against the Constitution.
meketrefe
.450/400 Nitro Ex
With the ninth circuit ruling against not extending the 2nd amendment outside the home and on top SCOUTS not picking it up
to fix that ruling it’s gonna be an lawsuit fest in communist states like Maryland, New York, California, etc...
This is why reciprocity can become a shit storm for NY conceal carriers.
The antis have been very clear they will do whatever it takes to stop this in NY.
I hope you are not trusting Cuomo and his gang to follow federal and constitutional law when they have pissed all over them in the past.
She explains this very well...
It carries exactly the same weight as yours. You deciding "well this law is OK because nobody shot it down yet" is exactly the same as me deciding it's not. You simply choose to enforce to save the cash flow.
Right but your original statement was some shit about new york changing the state law or some shit and then some shit about may issue some nonsense.
Ok so if somehow (don't forget it's county to county) the state is all you need to be super mean on who you approve for a pistol permit, most counties will do what they do now and well issue how they already issue.
And it' not like the state itself can just rewrite the law to then make it so the state doesn't issue any licenses to any of the people living in the state. Worse case get stuck with a made up restricted license and get an out of state licenses.
And didn't watch your video but I'm half convincrd it was done by the nra themselves to scare people into not wanting national reciprocity
nortatoga
.338 Win Mag
Boy O Boy @meketrefe your avatar is so appropriate for this responds ^^^ !!!
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Please explain why it would be a disaster.
nortatoga
.338 Win Mag
Guess you didn't watch the video either?
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Nope.
nortatoga
.338 Win Mag
That figures!!
Too many people cannot see the forest through the trees.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
I'm at work so I can't but I wouldn't either if I could. I would really like to know though how they would skirt federal law.
Just imagine if NY State decided to slow the process down even further.
Imagine if the made the Sullivan Act stronger.
Imagine if NY State decided that only one hand gun was allowed.
Imagine if all Permits issued were non-carry.
Not saying they would do all of this, but it could always be worse.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
NYS would have to amend the penal law and take over licensing. In that case, my out of state license would cover me unless they made it a no issue for everyone. That wouldn't happen. Retired cops, judges, and the politically connected wouldn't be able to carry.
Come on now, even you have to know this is phooey.
Don't you always complain about how badly a cop can mess up innocent lives? I mean you believe in like 5 laws and think only citizens can enforce them. That being the case, obviously my robotic, mercenary-like, illegally granted power holds more weight than your musings.
Name one state that doesn't issue (on law not because they choose to not issue) a form of concealed carry licnese