NYSRPA v. Bruen, NY 2A Case Supreme Court case and decision

[CaliforniaOpenCarry]

but it sounds like some CC like to tread on my right to OC because of where they live ..

"Where they live" is just an opportunity for them to double down on their cowardice.

When I was a child, their kind marched with signs saying, "Better Red than Dead."

Today, they infest every so-called gun-rights forum I have ever run across.

It is like a lost episode of Monty Python's Flying Circus.

 

[Uninformed and Compliant]

What you call "ego" is self-respect and an unwillingness to do evil. Either your parents failed to teach you this, which is their fault, or you have chosen to reject it, which is your fault.

Interesting perspective.
I see it, but it sidesteps what I consider the largest part of the problem -
"
At what point does the State, or anyone for that matter, have any standing
to compel a woman of good character
to ADVERTISE the fact that she is unarmed?
"

You gloss right over that, along with the nuance and implications of women or frail people using CC.
I'd humbly ask that you answer it in a meaningful, convincing, comprehensive way so that I might fill in this void that's remaining.

Thanks,,
UAC.

 

[FrankenCub]

but it sounds like some CC like to tread on my right to OC because of where they live ..

More like some OC like to tread on my choice of how to carry in differing situations.
Most places I'd OC, some CC.
Some, there parents taught them to call names when others don't conform to their ideologies.

 

[Acer-m14]

i don't have a GOVT permission slip , so i'm not treading ... but i would like the choice between a privilege or a right ..

 

[CaliforniaOpenCarry]

You gloss right over that, along with the nuance and implications of women or frail people using CC.

If I "gloss" over it, it is because historically the record on women being prosecuted for concealed carry is almost non-existent.

There is, of course, no biological obstacle to a woman openly carrying a firearm.

Perhaps it is your presumption that women are incapable of openly carrying a firearm that you should reconsider.

And, of course, a woman of good moral character isn't going to skulk around town carrying a concealed weapon. That is something a prostitute would do.

 

[spat]

Moral Turpitude is...

“[M]oral turpitude is evidenced by an act of baseness, vileness or depravity in the private and social duties which according to the accepted standards of the time a man owes to his fellowman or to society in general.” US v. Zimmerman, 71 F. Supp. 534, 537 (E.D. Pa. 1947)

For over 400 years under American and English law before Independence, a man has a duty to inform his fellow man that he is armed.
From 1603 to 1825, English law had a simple remedy for a concealed carrier who killed someone, even in self-defense.

The concealed carrier was executed.

There was no possibility of a pardon or leniency of any kind (what was once known as "The Benefit of Clergy.").

Laws punishing concealed carry date back to at least ca 1260 in England where the punishment was life in prison.

On the plus side, one did not live for very long in an English prison in those days.

Despite nearly 800 years of American and English laws punishing concealed carry, some would have you believe that the framers of the 2nd and 14th Amendments and those who voted to enact those amendments into law believed that acts of moral turpitude, specifically concealed carry, are protected by those amendments.

"The policy underlying the prohibition against concealed weapons is based on the protection of those persons who may come into contact with a weapon bearer. If a weapon is not concealed, one may take notice of the weapon and its owner and govern oneself accordingly, but no such opportunity for cautious behavior or self-preservation exists for one encountering the bearer of a concealed weapon." People v. Mitchell, 209 Cal. App. 4th 1364 (2012) at 1371.

In what world does the average street criminal actively look for an armed person to attack?

Apparently in your perception of the world. That is reason enough for you not to be allowed to even possess a firearm, let alone carry one concealed in public.

They got lots of things wrong back then.

This was one of them.

Concealed carry is for self defense in a civilian environment.

Open carry is a political statement.

I don't disagree with the statement, and IMHO, it should be protected by the 1A for that reason as well as the 2A these days.

 

[Acer-m14]

still crossing my fingers ..

but i think NYSRPA and NRA screwed the pooch .. and didn't included that NYS 2A is a Civil Rights LAW ..

 

[Grimscale]

oh look. another member of the moral bankrupt brigade.

Can't make a valid argument so can only just insult people who do not agree with them.

Calling someone a coward, making incorrect definitive statements that someone who believes in maintaining their privacy should not be allowed near firearms...

this is the kind of person who should not be allowed near a firearm. They have no respect for others, their Rights, or anything else except their own opinion. It is an obvious and glaring statement to the level of sociopathy they exist in.

 

[nortatoga]

Even the shithole of Binghamton NY has many groups of thugs around that wouldn't think twice about gang assaulting someone open carrying. I'm sure bigger cities have much more.
They do it for cell phones, you think they'll not eye your gun?

Your right this happens to armored truck drivers all the time!

 

[Phazer]

Forty years ago, there was no shortage of cowards and depraved degenerates but back then they knew what they were and didn't pretend to be anything other than what they were.

It seems that today's generation either does not know what they are or they simply don't care.

Dude! Enough already!

 

[Phazer]

Memo to concealed carriers and concealed carry wannabes:

Demonstrating that you should not be allowed anywhere near any firearm or weapon is not the same thing as proving that you have a right to carry a concealed weapon that is protected by the Second Amendment.

WTF?

 

[Darth]

I like tacos, ergo steak should be illegal.

 

[FrankenCub]

Your right this happens to armored truck drivers all the time!
View attachment 130956

Apples, meet Blueburries.

 

[Celt]

That must be why soldiers carry their battle rifles in a purse when they are in the field seeking out the enemy.

If you are afraid of somebody taking your gun away from you then you really shouldn't oughta be carrying a gun in the first place.

We are not on a battlefield with teammates and comms to back us up. We are talking about lone citizens in the real world. Thats an apples to oranges comparison, but to each his own. Its already established by experts that concealed is the best way to carry for citizens in society from a tactical standpoint.

 

[FrankenCub]

We are not on a battlefield with teammates and comms to back us up. We are talking about lone citizens in the real world. Thats an apples to oranges comparison, but to each his own. Its already established by experts that concealed is the best way to carry for citizens in society from a tactical standpoint.

We've been replying to an armchair attorney wanna be who's case has been dead for 10 years. His replies read like he's stuck in a Old English Royalty bubble.
I'm not going to bother feeding him anymore.

 

[@thewheels]

 

[nortatoga]

Apples, meet Blueburries.

I see the thugs only go after someone who is open carrying and may have a cell phone? Not the guy who is open carrying with a lot of money gotcha !!

 

[nortatoga]

We are not on a battlefield with teammates and comms to back us up. We are talking about lone citizens in the real world. Thats an apples to oranges comparison, but to each his own. Its already established by experts that concealed is the best way to carry for citizens in society from a tactical standpoint.

You are correct! That is just the reason concealed was outlawed in just about every state for 200+ years, because it was the the out laws that were carrying concealed against honest people who open carried.

the history is online if you want to find the truth!!

Here is a good place to start!

The History of Concealed Carry in the United States - USA Carry

Trusted concealed carry news, firearm laws, training tips, and self-defense education for responsible gun owners across America.

www.usacarry.com

 

[FrankenCub]

I see the thugs only go after someone who is open carrying and may have a cell phone? Not the guy who is open carrying with a lot of money gotcha !!

Not my point, you know it. You're looking for an intellectually dishonest debate.

 

[nortatoga]

Not my point, you know it. You're looking for an intellectually dishonest debate.

No and your point is that only a armed open carrier would be a target before a unarmed person?

 

[Celt]

No and your point is that only a armed open carrier would be a target before a unarmed person?

The biggest debate about oc vs cc is that by oc'ing you lose tactical advantage against a criminal that is intent on commiting a crime.

That is in a world where there is still rule of law. In wrol it makes even more sense to be the gray man and cc unless you have a large team with you where a show of force would be a deterrent.

But to each his own, both should be legal without a permit.

 

[nortatoga]

The biggest debate about oc vs cc is that by oc'ing you lose tactical advantage against a criminal that is intent on commiting a crime.

That is in a world where there is still rule of law. In wrol it makes even more sense to be the gray man and cc unless you have a large team with you where a show of force would be a deterrent.

But to each his own, both should be legal without a permit.

Yes maybe you should reply to my post to you!!

 

[Uninformed and Compliant]

The biggest debate about oc vs cc is that by oc'ing you lose tactical advantage against a criminal that is intent on commiting a crime.

That is in a world where there is still rule of law. In wrol it makes even more sense to be the gray man and cc unless you have a large team with you where a show of force would be a deterrent.

But to each his own, both should be legal without a permit.

Nobody can be compelled to confirm to a well-planned unlawful attacker what the attacker's advantages are. The concept is utter nonsense, and only facilitates the unlawful attacker.

Then again, that's probably the goal.

 

[@thewheels]

View attachment 130989

Nobody can be compelled to confirm to a well-planned unlawful attacker what the attacker's advantages are. The concept is utter nonsense, and only facilitates the unlawful attacker.

Then again, that's probably the goal.

C'mon man, Cooper wasn't advocating for CC there. He was promoting scout rifles.

 

[Celt]

Yes maybe you should reply to my post to you!!

The one where you said I was correct? I havent followed this thread too closely so Im not sure if that was sarcasm or genuine. What is your stance on oc vs cc?

 

[nortatoga]

The one where you said I was correct? I havent followed this thread too closely so Im not sure if that was sarcasm or genuine. What is your stance on oc vs cc?

CCW is not a 2nd amendment right.

As per - FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions.

Thus, the freedom of speech and of the press ( article 1) does not permit the publication of libels, blasphemous or indecent articles, or other publications injurious to public morals or private reputation; the right of the people [165 U.S. 275, 282] to keep and bear arms (article 2) is not infringed by laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons; the provision that no person shall be twice put in jeopardy (article 5) does not prevent a second trial, if upon the first trial the jury failed to agree, or if the verdict was set aside upon the defendant's motion

Not at all being sarcastic, But Scalia mentions this in his opinion, as per my signature.

You can't win a Court case by denying pervious Court cases even if they are over 100 years old.

The 2nd Amendment did not apply to the States until FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions. from 2010!

 

[Celt]

View attachment 130989

Nobody can be compelled to confirm to a well-planned unlawful attacker what the attacker's advantages are. The concept is utter nonsense, and only facilitates the unlawful attacker.

Then again, that's probably the goal.

So, Im standing in a deli while oc'ing when the bad guy comes in to rob the place. His watchman came in a few minutes before him and is watching me from a concealed position. This makes me the first target when things go south.

If i wasnt advertising i was armed they wouldnt be the wiser and that gives me a tactical advatage to decide if i need to stay off the radar or dedend myself.

Some will argue that oc'ing will deter a criminal, and that may be true in some circumstances, but imo, not when dealing with irrational individuals or groups of people.

 

[Celt]

CCW is not a 2nd amendment right.

As per - FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions.

Thus, the freedom of speech and of the press ( article 1) does not permit the publication of libels, blasphemous or indecent articles, or other publications injurious to public morals or private reputation; the right of the people [165 U.S. 275, 282] to keep and bear arms (article 2) is not infringed by laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons; the provision that no person shall be twice put in jeopardy (article 5) does not prevent a second trial, if upon the first trial the jury failed to agree, or if the verdict was set aside upon the defendant's motion

Not at all being sarcastic, But Scalia mentions this in his opinion, as per my signature.

You can't win a Court case by denying pervious Court cases even if they are over 100 years old.

The 2nd Amendment did not apply to the States until FindLaw's United States Supreme Court case and opinions. from 2010!

I gotcha, my statements werent from a legal standpoint, but a real world position of what most experts agree is a better way to be armed in public.

 

[nortatoga]

I gotcha, my statements werent from a legal standpoint, but a real world position of what most experts agree is a better way to be armed in public.

I don’t disagree!

 

[dsdmmat]

Is this thread Covid related? I mean the CC v OC posts in this thread sound like the arguments the Covidians make, “the vaccine I got doesn’t work because You didn’t get one.”
CC is no more cowardly than open carry is manly this isn’t the 1600s. Until Open carry is legal in every state people who chose to be armed in CC only states will have to carry concealed or go unarmed. There is no moral equivalent to be had here. There are some pretty high horses in this thread, I hope those who are on them are wearing helmets.

Please take note of this warning; cool it with the name calling or you will be banned from the thread for personal attacks or trolling.