New York concealed carry laws challenged in court

[Acer-m14]

New York concealed carry laws challenged in court

Richard Azzopardi, a spokesman for Gov. Andrew Cuomo, called the latest lawsuit “disturbing, but not surprising that the mini-NRA is once again seeking to waste taxpayer money on a frivolous lawsuit to make New York less safe.”

anyone else hear of this case .. its king again ...

 

[Acer-m14]

http://14544-presscdn-0-64.pagely.n...-concealed-carry-laws-challenged-in-court.pdf

 

[Darth]

Yes, it was mentioned on here recently.

Yes is is a complete waste of time.

 

[spat]

Yes, it was mentioned on here recently.

Yes is is a complete waste of time.

Why do you say that ?

I agree it's not a slam dunk, and that the 2nd circuit would rubber stamp anything the state wanted, but everyone knows this has to go to SCOTUS to get anything done.

If the makeup of the court doesn't change they'll probably just take a pass on this one too, but maybe Ginsburg will kick the bucket and we'll have another Trump appointee by the time it gets there.

We can't just give up.

 

[Darth]

Why do you say that ?

I agree it's not a slam dunk, and that the 2nd circuit would rubber stamp anything the state wanted, but everyone knows this has to go to SCOTUS to get anything done.

If the makeup of the court doesn't change they'll probably just take a pass on this one too, but maybe Ginsburg will kick the bucket and we'll have another Trump appointee by the time it gets there.

We can't just give up.

It's NYSRPA.

</thread>

 

[Edwardteach72]

Again they need to stop challenging the license as a whole, or stop challenging it as a carry license, and start attacking it as a license to own.

It might be small but if they can get the laws changed to keeping the may issue on carry (unrestricted) but no need for any license to just purchase and own a handgun that is an actual start. Then go from there and challenge the may issue to a shall issue

 

[Darth]

My problem with this specific challenge is that they are challenging an imaginary law.

There is no law about restrictions. How the hell can you challenge a non law?

 

[Edwardteach72]

My problem with this specific challenge is that they are challenging an imaginary law.

There is no law about restrictions. How the hell can you challenge a non law?

Rhtorical But you know the answer, this is just smoke and mirrors.

They want it to fail so they can blam the courts and the state and use that to scare up more membership moonies every month/year

 

[Darth]

Rhtorical But you know the answer, this is just smoke and mirrors.

They want it to fail so they can blam the courts and the state and use that to scare up more membership moonies every month/year

I've always had this issue with this challenge. NYSRPA or not.

 

[Edwardteach72]

I've always had this issue with this challenge. NYSRPA or not.

Shit they want to challenge no laws. Why are they not going after counties that think the judge has to approve any "amendments" added to a persons license, and then go after the counties that are not updating that shit on the spot fuck thst oh bought a gun hope I hear back from the permit office with in the next 4-20 weeks so I can go pick it up.

 

[1075tech]

Richard Azzopardi, a spokesman for Gov. Andrew Cuomo, called the latest lawsuit “disturbing, but not surprising that the mini-NRA is once again seeking to waste taxpayer money on a frivolous lawsuit.....

Doesn't FUAC and his goon Scneiderman do this on a regular basis?

 

[SomeSoldier]

My problem with this specific challenge is that they are challenging an imaginary law.

There is no law about restrictions. How the hell can you challenge a non law?

You can challenge the overreach. There is no law permiting restriction or saying a judge can make them up. So that would be overreach.

 

[Darth]

You can challenge the overreach. There is no law permiting restriction or saying a judge can make them up. So that would be overreach.

But his restrictions hold no legal weight whatsoever. People choose to follow them of their own free will.

So there is nothing to challenge.

 

[ArmedCorgi]

What I find interesting with this is that the guy who is suing has and was denied his full carry by the same judge I have. I have heard that my judge needs good cause and is a bastard when it comes to 2A. Then I jave also heard that he has lightened up with some of his personal policies with guns. If that is true, perhaps it's because of this lawsuit....anyway, I'm interested but not hopeful.

 

[Darth]

This is just yet another area where NY and NYers drive me up the wall.

We (some of us...I sure as the dickens did not when I had restrictions) go out of our way to follow NON EXISTENT laws (Carry restrictions) out of PURE fear mongering (the judge might YANK IT), we spread that practice to others like it is gospel and then we file a lawsuit saying it's not OK.

!?

There is no such thing as a "full carry" pistol permit in NY. You either have a carry permit, or you don't. (Not counting things like premises, etc.)

You simply can't say "I know that it's not really the law, but I don't want to chance my permit" and then the next day challenge the "law."

 

[misunderestimated]

I am happy somebody is challenging it.

 

[togmaster]

This case is a long shot but not a waste of time. The anti's have chipped away at the 2A bit by bit and it is working. Why not take it back piece by piece? Let's go after restrictions first then challenge the need for a license.

 

[Celt]

Rhtorical But you know the answer, this is just smoke and mirrors.

They want it to fail so they can blam the courts and the state and use that to scare up more membership moonies every month/year

If the NRA really wants to try to challenge this they need to take up a case in a state that has similar permitting laws but a more conservative Court.

 

[ArmedCorgi]

This is just yet another area where NY and NYers drive me up the wall.

We (some of us...I sure as the dickens did not when I had restrictions) go out of our way to follow NON EXISTENT laws (Carry restrictions) out of PURE fear mongering (the judge might YANK IT), we spread that practice to others like it is gospel and then we file a lawsuit saying it's not OK.

!?

There is no such thing as a "full carry" pistol permit in NY. You either have a carry permit, or you don't. (Not counting things like premises, etc.)

You simply can't say "I know that it's not really the law, but I don't want to chance my permit" and then the next day challenge the "law."

K sorry Darth, all I meant was zero restrictions. Like it or not they are a thing and while you are right about them being unconstitutional and not being in the pl400, it has been upheld that the issuing officer has the "authority" to place restrictions on the NYS carry permit. It is also held up and says right on your permit, that your permit can be revoked at anytime. So it becomes a question for each permit holder with restrictions on their permit to either follow them and go through the proper channels to have them lifted, or to not follow them (since you aren't breaking the law) and risk a situation where you end up having your permit revoked by your judge, who likely could give two shits about your second amendment rights and has no time or desire to listen to a non lawyer try to explain to them what the constitution says.

I don't like it. It's not right by any means and as futile as it may be, it does need to be challenged. However, restrictions and judges unwilling to lift restrictions and willing to revoke permits are the landscape here.

 

[Darth]

K sorry Darth, all I meant was zero restrictions. Like it or not they are a thing and while you are right about them being unconstitutional and not being in the pl400, it has been upheld that the issuing officer has the "authority" to place restrictions on the NYS carry permit. It is also held up and says right on your permit, that your permit can be revoked at anytime. So it becomes a question for each permit holder with restrictions on their permit to either follow them and go through the proper channels to have them lifted, or to not follow them (since you aren't breaking the law) and risk a situation where you end up having your permit revoked by a your judge, who likely could give two shits about your second amendment rights and has no time or desire to listen to a non lawyer try to explain to them what the constitution says.

The judge can "write" anything he wants on your permit. He can write "I'm a little teapot" on there if he wants. That's all that was upheld. What was ALSO upheld is that they have no force of law.

The judge not listening to a non lawyer talk about 2A issues and pulling the "unlimited discretion" ploy WOULD actually be the time that the lawyers could get involved, as that actually is a violation of the law.

Currently, it's pissing into the wind.

 

[Cooolone]

Why do you say that ?

I agree it's not a slam dunk, and that the 2nd circuit would rubber stamp anything the state wanted, but everyone knows this has to go to SCOTUS to get anything done.

If the makeup of the court doesn't change they'll probably just take a pass on this one too, but maybe Ginsburg will kick the bucket and we'll have another Trump appointee by the time it gets there.

We can't just give up.

Agreed about not giving up, but damage could be done fighting the wrong fight! Where were they when the Safe Act was ramrodded into creation? Where have they been with NYC? "CONVENIENT" application of dedicating resources to fighting for your Rights isn't advantageous to anyone with the exception of those lending the perception of "DOING SOMETHING" when they actually aren't and are just shuffling papers around to look busy! Further complicating the issue is the State knows full well how to avoid creating the perfect case which would allow a challenge, which of course muddies the course for someone to exhibit "standing" to even have a case considered by the SCOTUS. And even then, has been discussed, the SCOTUS has no teeth, no enforcement ability, the States know this and is a prime example of why recent decisions (with regard to firearms) are just ignored!

You can challenge the overreach. There is no law permiting restriction or saying a judge can make them up. So that would be overreach.

Correct, a Judge cannot legislate from the Bench, cannot create what doesn't exist, only apply as written... But practical application is different as the machine doesn't feed on its own. Unless completely malicious or arbitrary, a higher court isn't going to handcuff lower courts by telling them to play nicely! Especially with something so emotionally hot as "GUNS".

But his restrictions hold no legal weight whatsoever. People choose to follow them of their own free will.

So there is nothing to challenge.

Ding Ding Ding! Winner winner chicken dinner! Our "ENTIRE" form of Government and Laws is a "VOLUNTARY" exercise by "The People" who voluntarily subject themselves to the laws enacted by the legislature! The Civil Obedience is in no way shape or form, an absolution from enjoying your "Rights". But in order to have those "Rights" you need to exercise/invoke them! So this case would be better served if the complainant was arrested possessing a firearm "after" being denied a permit to do so (my opinion)! Lol... Of course, with his reason being denied the ability to do so by the court arbitrarily and with malice!

 

[Dr. Evil]

Richard Azzopardi, a spokesman for Gov. Andrew Cuomo, called the latest lawsuit “disturbing, but not surprising that the mini-NRA is once again seeking to waste taxpayer money on a frivolous lawsuit to make New York less safe.”

Hey DICK, can I call you that, you sure when talking about wasting taxpayer money you sure you aren't talking about your POS boss?

 

[Dr. Evil]

New York State's Gun Control Laws are Going Up in Smoke in 2018

 

[Devildog9999]

God I hate this state. If we were not held hostage by the wife's retirement fund we would be long gone. I honestly, truly and completely hate this place right now. The entire f*&^ing state is RED except for a few counties that decide what we can and cannot do. All the more reason NYC should become its own state.

 

[FrankenCub]

The judge can "write" anything he wants on your permit. He can write "I'm a little teapot" on there if he wants. That's all that was upheld. What was ALSO upheld is that they have no force of law.

While I agree, from what I've read in PL, that a CCL is just that, where was it upheld that the restrictions have no force of law? I haven't seen it yet. That stupid little line on the side of my permit hasn't stopped me from going about my business. For all that matters, I have yet to be asked to see my permit by LE. Even during hunting season when I open carry. I don't think most LEOs care all that much.

As for any law challenges here in New Yorkistan, they are a waste of time and money. It's already been shown that the courts will do everything they can to side step the Constitution and always choose to side with the State even if they have to rewrite the game as they go. It's a fuckin joke, a bad one at that.

 

[Darth]

While I agree, from what I've read in PL, that a CCL is just that, where was it upheld that the restrictions have no force of law? I haven't seen it yet. That stupid little line on the side of my permit hasn't stopped me from going about my business. For all that matters, I have yet to be asked to see my permit by LE. Even during hunting season when I open carry. I don't think most LEOs care all that much.

As for any law challenges here in New Yorkistan, they are a waste of time and money. It's already been shown that the courts will do everything they can to side step the Constitution and always choose to side with the State even if they have to rewrite the game as they go. It's a fuckin joke, a bad one at that.

It's not where they were upheld. Wrong question. It's where they exist in the law. They do not. Can't break a non existent law. Even the NYSP website states that restrictions have no force of law.

 

[ArmedCorgi]

It's not where they were upheld. Wrong question. It's where they exist in the law. They do not. Can't break a non existent law. Even the NYSP website states that restrictions have no force of law.

Yet somehow, these capricious "restrictions", are a vehicle to strip someone of their rights just for exercising those rights....and yet they are upheld. People do lose their permits and subsequently their handguns and perhaps even their long guns not for breaking the law, but for ignoring a judges unconstitutional restrictions placed on their civil rights. How that stands anywhere in the union is beyond me, yet here we are in the land of fuck all.

 

[Darth]

Yet somehow, these capricious "restrictions", are a vehicle to strip someone of their rights just for exercising those rights....and yet they are upheld. People do lose their permits and subsequently their handguns and perhaps even their long guns not for breaking the law, but for ignoring a judges unconstitutional restrictions placed on their civil rights. How that stands anywhere in the union is beyond me, yet here we are in the land of fuck all.

Ok, let's see the case where a permit was pulled for restrictions. Been waiting nearly 10 years for this.

 

[FrankenCub]

It's not where they were upheld. Wrong question. It's where they exist in the law. They do not. Can't break a non existent law. Even the NYSP website states that restrictions have no force of law.

Ok, so it wasn't actually "upheld" in court. I'll check the NYSP site out some more. I can see issues come up if you ended up using your gun in a defense situation though.

 

[kev74]

I thought this was challenging 'may issue' vs 'shall issue', which would take care of all the restrictions nonsense. A similar suit was just filed in New Jersey. If this makes it up to the circuit court and looses, it will conflict with the DC ruling - hopefully spurring the Supreme Court to take it up.