Search results

What were the charges ? You say non violent but aren’t specific

He might be from a good family etc etc It doesn’t mean that much in the scheme of things. What was he accused of? Did the other side produce witnesses ( truthful or not ) to the incident . Without knowing what was said and by whom, you can not blame the police for arresting him. Think about it...

Typical half the story . Now tell what the other party claimed.

It’s temporary.

I have a little more faith in the 2nd circuit that they will strike down parts of the law like social media . It’s the sensitive and restricted places I’m worried about.

Sometimes it’s necessary. Sometimes a road can’t be diverted. The only questions that should be seen is what is actual fair market value and is the project truly needed.

Or raise taxes, right? The idea is less about what the government wants as opposed to needs. What if it was a hospital that they needed to build because there wasn’t any close by and in their jurisdiction, like the nearest one was over an hour away by helicopter. The cost should be how many...

Often they really need to and have trouble getting the budget to do it properly with or without the cost overruns. As I pointed out before, a lawyer who specializes in this can bring the price up, Msybe high enough that they will go with one of the other options.

By that standard, the government could never build or widen a road again.

It was an expansion of that eminent domain that was the problem. Before Souters’s decision on the SCOTUS case ( I don’t know if he was the one who wrote the opinion but he widely gets the blame), it was only used for actual government projects like roads or a government building . That seems to...

This is why he needs a lawyer who specializes in this area of law. The village undervalued the property and probably did do in its cost analysis. If his lawyer can drive the fair market value price enough, the village might be forced to go to a plan B

Fair market value is the standard. The question is , what is the actual fair market value and cost. A business property next to a police station might be worth more than a general property in the area. Just small things can raise a value more than the average in the area. This is no different...

And what does that have to with a particular company not wanting the legal battle that they might lose for a very little profit in sales . The fault is with NYS and not the business.

If they were based in NY , you point would be well taken. But selling items that haven’t been put on the naughty list ( either by law or lawsuit ) from a location already outside NYS, doesn’t add much cost if they stay out of the grey areas. And they can make money even if it’s less than what...

It might eventually come to that. To stop selling anything in NY , CA, etc. But that is not the company’s fault but NY ‘s fault. You ask them to fight it. They should choose the correct battlefield. Their lawyers might have decided that threaded barrels was a loser because the non gun friendly...

It’s cost vs benefit. How many threaded barrels are going to be sold without such a ban? These restrictions aren’t new to the legal system. Cost of litigation has probably been calculated. It might not be worth it for threaded barrels.

Ron Desantis doesn’t have that anti-trump feeling yet but they are already attempting to smear him. Desantis could win and that’s why the democrats are scared of him.

Get real. It’s a company trying to do business the best they can. Some things are less problematic than others . When NYS goes after trigger mods then they will stop that too. There are companies that will not ship anything to NY. Are we better off as a result ?

Yep. So can we totally blame a company for not wanting to deal with this stuff?

Okay . The car anology. Let me show you a scary case: It’s not the company ‘s fault that NYS sues them to stop and often get a court injunction to do so.

I am just telling the reality of the situation. I don’t have to agree with it. Companies can and have been successfully sued for being nuisance by shipping it to places like NYC even before the SAFE act.

They do and have sued successfully other companies . For example, companies would not ship ammo to a NYC address even if the recipient had a permit. They would get sued . Go see the terms and conditions on a lot of the ammo companies have on shipping ammo.

Sure, what kind of barrel. There are already under scrutiny by the the AG’s office. They probably already got a cease and desist letter. All of the big companies got targeted by the AG office . It’s the smaller companies who weren’t directly contacted that might still listen. Some companies just...

You legally can’t use a threaded barrel on a semi auto in NYS correct? Shipping such a product where it is likely to be illegally used opens them up to liability. They are already facing liability in lawsuits with the AG and new York local government lawsuits .

Threaded barrels too?

Midway wasn’t wrong to do that . They offered to send it to somewhere it was legal . Blame the law in NY, not midway ,

Nope. They tried that with the SAFE act. It didn’t work .

If the NRA wanted to get back in the hood graces of many gun owners, they could send instructors to NY and train guys for the cost of the range time

Yes for most people. Some exemptions . That old law is still in effect

An easy way is to have the AG throw the case and have the federal judge do it.

Getting denied for whom the 4 references and getting denied for whatever is said/seen at a in person interview is subjective but not the requirement to appear or have 4 names. It’s just a pain to do. And that reason might be why it should be discontinued.

Different law. That licensing system is likely okay if the handgun licensing is ruled constitutional .

Public streets aren’t school property

No one was asking for an injunction against the NYC restriction. 4 references. People at GOA or some members would sign off as reference. Not a big deal. If you want to carry in NYC, you can ask for the special permit or help start a new lawsuit . I would send money to GOA for that purpose.

Not that much. Training requirement but the majority of it is gone.

Section 5 is the entire restricted location part of the law. It’s in section 5 of the law

Summary from ARFCOM: This may be easier to read from today's opinion: ACCORDINGLY, it is ORDERED that Defendant Hochul is DISMISSED from this action as a party; and it is further ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ motion for a Preliminary Injunction (Dkt. No. 6) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part in...

Yeah, but we retirees thought we had two things on our side on that one. One, we had court precedent on our side that the court already ruled they would have to sell government property before they could reduce pensions . Secondly, that the decision would effect the judge ‘s retirement plans...

We thought it was in the state constitution but a court ruling later said -nope. Pensions are, but not healthcare. But nyc retirees won a lawsuit earlier. Maybe stars retirees will too. County retirees are safe for the moment but it’s coming.

Joe Rogan in a podcast compared what is going to happen in this election . I was laughing.

It was written in the terms of taking the job. In fact , it’s written in civil service law as well. Can it be changed? Apparently so just like the military were also promised healthcare for life but that promise seems not to being kept. My uncle took a low paying civil service job despite an...

It’s okay. Do what the democrats do. Say it’s not for a Posse Comitatus Act violation but some other violation -lol

Agreed. Then the lawyer should concede the case on that point.

Yep. If enforcement was selected to someone already involved in criminal activity, the possible constitutional violation might slip under the radar as an additional charge. I talk to cops who do the random bag screenings at the trains. They see a ton of illegal things ( highly suspect them but...

They tried but the legal system doesn’t work that way in these cases. Had they written an exemption in the law like allowing carry with permission of the church involved, the court might have allowed it.

The pastor lawsuit worked. The entire church section of the law is blocked by the federal courts, not just for the individual plaintiffs. Yes the state could change the law but they would have start the entire legislative process over from the beginning.

They did that when it came to issuing a permit— not where a permit holder can carry unless they make a separate law. They don’t do that in a court settlement.

He isn’t asking for special exceptions. Thsts the legislature’s job but because they didn’t give him an exemption, that whole part of the law should be thrown out.

Exactly. How many times has SCOTUS questioned one side hard but only to find out that SCOTUS decided in their favor. We have to wait for the decision to know.

Don’t panic yet. Judges don’t base their opinions just on the courtroom performance but on the briefs. Why? Because that is what the appeals courts will focus on rather than the hearing transcripts.