Not to sound greedy, but WHT has been determined regarding the sensitive places portion of the law? Has that been included in the TRO?
2A Lawsuits and their progress we have here in NY
- Thread starter Edwardteach72
- Start date
Hmmmm for churches, (d) “any place of worship or religious observation” (as contained in paragraph “2(c)” of Section 4), EXCEPT for those persons who have been tasked with the duty to keep the peace at the place of worship or religious observation;
EXCEPTIONS, does that cover a non LEO who is on a safety team?
EXCEPTIONS, does that cover a non LEO who is on a safety team?
NVM. Found it, pg 43. This, if it holds, is awesome! Private businesses....here we go again
Egret-II
.40 S&W
Can somebody give me a resume of what just happened? And please dont answer with FUKH!! LOL
TJ12010
9mm
It's a step in the right direction BUT I still can't carry in church, dropping my kids off at school, or anywhere in NYC. I hope these other restrictions get struck down as well.
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
Appeal what? Appeal that they shit on the constitution?
CaliberPlus
.45 acp
I am taking down my sign, (not yet) that it is OK to carry in the shop.
I think this is a step in the right direction, I have to say I was wrong. GLAD to say it!
I have to wonder if the state appeals, what that means.
I think this is a step in the right direction, I have to say I was wrong. GLAD to say it!
I have to wonder if the state appeals, what that means.
m1_ping
9mm
I believe it does. I plan to have my pastor or elders write me a letter so I have evidence if it ever comes down to it.
There's no doubt the state will appeal, if for nothing more than to kick the can down the road. The question is will they do it with 3 days.
Actually, what constitutes 3 business days? Would that be Monday of Tuesday? ( if today counts as 1 of those days)
camper4lyfe
.308 Win
I'm only on page 25, but I currently have a bit of a man crush on this judge. Dude is laying the smack down on the state.
The writing was on the wall, the one HE put there before.
It was a masterful instruction manual.
camper4lyfe
.308 Win
Agreed.
Though I spoke too soon. He is allowing the requirement of character references still. That annoys me.
camper4lyfe
.308 Win
Ugh, and he's allowing the training requirement to stand as well.
At least he slapped down the social media bullshit
At least he slapped down the social media bullshit
This is an emergency restraining order to prevent persons from irreparable harm. Nobody is under risk of harm from references or training requirements. Calm down. This is not over. Just a temporary, emergency action.
camper4lyfe
.308 Win
Understood, but it also prevents me from applying for a permit
camper4lyfe
.308 Win
RDCV for those that don't want to read the whole thing:
ACCORDINGLY, it is
ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (Dkt. No. 6) is
GRANTED in part and DENIED in part in accordance with this Decision; and it is further
ORDERED that Defendants, as well as their officers, agents, servants, employees, and
attorneys (and any other persons who are in active concert or participation with them) are
TEMPORARILY RESTRAINED from enforcing the following provisions of the Concealed
Carry Improvement Act, 2022 N.Y. Sess. Laws ch. 371 (“CCIA”):
(1) the provisions contained in Section 1 of the CCIA requiring “good
moral character” EXCEPT to the extent it is construed to mean that a license
shall be issued or renewed except for an applicant who has been found, by a
preponderance of the evidence based on his or her conduct, to not have “good
moral character,” which is defined as “having the essential character,
temperament and judgment necessary . . . to use [the weapon entrusted to the
applicant] only in a manner that does not endanger oneself or others, other than
in self-defense”;
(2) the provision contained in Section 1 of the CCIA requiring that the
applicant “meet in person with the licensing officer for an interview”;
Case 1:22-cv-00986-GTS-CFH Document 27 Filed 10/06/22 Page 50 of 53
51
(3) the provision contained in Section 1 of the CCIA requiring the “names
and contact information for the applicant’s current spouse, or domestic partner,
any other adults residing in the applicant's home, including any adult children of
the applicant, and whether or not there are minors residing, full time or part time,
in the applicant’s home”;
(4) the provision contained in Section 1 of the CCIA requiring “a list of
former and current social media accounts of the applicant from the past three
years”; and
(5) the “sensitive locations” provision contained in Section 4 of the CCIA
EXCEPT with regard to the following sensitive locations (where the restrictions
remain):
(a) “any place owned or under the control of federal, state or local
government, for the purpose of government administration, including
courts” (as contained in paragraph “2(a)” of Section 4);
(b) “any location being used as a polling place” (as contained in
paragraph “2(q)” of Section 4);
(c) “any public sidewalk or other public area restricted from
general public access for a limited time or special event that has been
issued a permit for such time or event by a governmental entity, or subject
to specific, heightened law enforcement protection, or has otherwise had
such access restricted by a governmental entity, provided such location is
Case 1:22-cv-00986-GTS-CFH Document 27 Filed 10/06/22 Page 51 of 53
52
identified as such by clear and conspicuous signage” (as contained in
paragraph “2(r)” of Section 4);
(d) “any place of worship or religious observation” (as contained in
paragraph “2(c)” of Section 4), EXCEPT for those persons who have
been tasked with the duty to keep the peace at the place of worship or
religious observation;
(e) “nursery schools” and “preschools” (as contained in paragraph
“2(f)” of Section 4);
(f) “any building or grounds, owned or leased, of any educational
institutions, colleges and universities, licensed private career schools,
school districts, public schools, private schools licensed under article one
hundred one of the education law, charter schools, non-public schools,
board of cooperative educational services, special act schools, preschool
special education programs, private residential or non-residential schools
for the education of students with disabilities, and any state-operated or
state-supported schools” (as contained in paragraph “2(m)” of Section 4);
(g) “any gathering of individuals to collectively express their
constitutional rights to protest or assemble” (as contained in paragraph
“2(s)” of Section 4); and
(6) the “restricted locations” provision contained in Section 5 of the CCIA
EXCEPT for fenced-in farmland owned by another or fenced-in hunting ground
owned by another (where the restriction stands); and it is further
Case 1:22-cv-00986-GTS-CFH Document 27 Filed 10/06/22 Page 52 of 53
53
ORDERED that Plaintiffs are EXCUSED from giving security; and it is further
ORDERED that this Temporary Restraining Order shall REMAIN IN EFFECT
pending a hearing and ruling on Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction (Dkt. No. 6); and
it is further
ORDERED that this Temporary Restraining Order is STAYED for THREE (3)
BUSINESS DAYS, from the date of this Decision, to allow Defendants to seek emergency relief
in the Second Circuit; and it is further
ORDERED that counsel for Plaintiffs shall promptly and personally serve this Decision
and Temporary Restraining Order on Defendant Soares (who has not yet appeared through
counsel in this action).
Dated: October 6, 2022
ACCORDINGLY, it is
ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (Dkt. No. 6) is
GRANTED in part and DENIED in part in accordance with this Decision; and it is further
ORDERED that Defendants, as well as their officers, agents, servants, employees, and
attorneys (and any other persons who are in active concert or participation with them) are
TEMPORARILY RESTRAINED from enforcing the following provisions of the Concealed
Carry Improvement Act, 2022 N.Y. Sess. Laws ch. 371 (“CCIA”):
(1) the provisions contained in Section 1 of the CCIA requiring “good
moral character” EXCEPT to the extent it is construed to mean that a license
shall be issued or renewed except for an applicant who has been found, by a
preponderance of the evidence based on his or her conduct, to not have “good
moral character,” which is defined as “having the essential character,
temperament and judgment necessary . . . to use [the weapon entrusted to the
applicant] only in a manner that does not endanger oneself or others, other than
in self-defense”;
(2) the provision contained in Section 1 of the CCIA requiring that the
applicant “meet in person with the licensing officer for an interview”;
Case 1:22-cv-00986-GTS-CFH Document 27 Filed 10/06/22 Page 50 of 53
51
(3) the provision contained in Section 1 of the CCIA requiring the “names
and contact information for the applicant’s current spouse, or domestic partner,
any other adults residing in the applicant's home, including any adult children of
the applicant, and whether or not there are minors residing, full time or part time,
in the applicant’s home”;
(4) the provision contained in Section 1 of the CCIA requiring “a list of
former and current social media accounts of the applicant from the past three
years”; and
(5) the “sensitive locations” provision contained in Section 4 of the CCIA
EXCEPT with regard to the following sensitive locations (where the restrictions
remain):
(a) “any place owned or under the control of federal, state or local
government, for the purpose of government administration, including
courts” (as contained in paragraph “2(a)” of Section 4);
(b) “any location being used as a polling place” (as contained in
paragraph “2(q)” of Section 4);
(c) “any public sidewalk or other public area restricted from
general public access for a limited time or special event that has been
issued a permit for such time or event by a governmental entity, or subject
to specific, heightened law enforcement protection, or has otherwise had
such access restricted by a governmental entity, provided such location is
Case 1:22-cv-00986-GTS-CFH Document 27 Filed 10/06/22 Page 51 of 53
52
identified as such by clear and conspicuous signage” (as contained in
paragraph “2(r)” of Section 4);
(d) “any place of worship or religious observation” (as contained in
paragraph “2(c)” of Section 4), EXCEPT for those persons who have
been tasked with the duty to keep the peace at the place of worship or
religious observation;
(e) “nursery schools” and “preschools” (as contained in paragraph
“2(f)” of Section 4);
(f) “any building or grounds, owned or leased, of any educational
institutions, colleges and universities, licensed private career schools,
school districts, public schools, private schools licensed under article one
hundred one of the education law, charter schools, non-public schools,
board of cooperative educational services, special act schools, preschool
special education programs, private residential or non-residential schools
for the education of students with disabilities, and any state-operated or
state-supported schools” (as contained in paragraph “2(m)” of Section 4);
(g) “any gathering of individuals to collectively express their
constitutional rights to protest or assemble” (as contained in paragraph
“2(s)” of Section 4); and
(6) the “restricted locations” provision contained in Section 5 of the CCIA
EXCEPT for fenced-in farmland owned by another or fenced-in hunting ground
owned by another (where the restriction stands); and it is further
Case 1:22-cv-00986-GTS-CFH Document 27 Filed 10/06/22 Page 52 of 53
53
ORDERED that Plaintiffs are EXCUSED from giving security; and it is further
ORDERED that this Temporary Restraining Order shall REMAIN IN EFFECT
pending a hearing and ruling on Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction (Dkt. No. 6); and
it is further
ORDERED that this Temporary Restraining Order is STAYED for THREE (3)
BUSINESS DAYS, from the date of this Decision, to allow Defendants to seek emergency relief
in the Second Circuit; and it is further
ORDERED that counsel for Plaintiffs shall promptly and personally serve this Decision
and Temporary Restraining Order on Defendant Soares (who has not yet appeared through
counsel in this action).
Dated: October 6, 2022
I don't need character references to Vote...
I don't need Civic training to Vote...
I don't need permission to Vote...
I don't see how this Fed Judge, although partially addressing the plaintiffs charge, he is obviously not understanding the SCOTUS ruling much either!
2 tier hurdles emplaced to create defacto denial of exercising 2A Rights is unconstitutional! NY fails to follow those other 43 States that have Shall Issue and that is the problem. Show me those which are shall Issue and have ANY of these ridiculous rules. They don't because they're inconsistent with Shall Issue standards whereas the State MUST demonstrate why the applicant must be denied their 2A RIGHT!!! Not quite STRICT Scrutiny, but it's close!
Edit to add:. The acknowledgement that a place of worship, the basis of freedom upon which this country was founded, cannot be a sensitive place of denial by automation... Ridiculous! This is a serious and grossly malfeasant encroachment into practicing religion! What next? That the State can tell you what scripture is acceptable? Hmmmmm....
Fuck NY, concealed is concealed and that's it!
I don't need Civic training to Vote...
I don't need permission to Vote...
I don't see how this Fed Judge, although partially addressing the plaintiffs charge, he is obviously not understanding the SCOTUS ruling much either!
2 tier hurdles emplaced to create defacto denial of exercising 2A Rights is unconstitutional! NY fails to follow those other 43 States that have Shall Issue and that is the problem. Show me those which are shall Issue and have ANY of these ridiculous rules. They don't because they're inconsistent with Shall Issue standards whereas the State MUST demonstrate why the applicant must be denied their 2A RIGHT!!! Not quite STRICT Scrutiny, but it's close!
Edit to add:. The acknowledgement that a place of worship, the basis of freedom upon which this country was founded, cannot be a sensitive place of denial by automation... Ridiculous! This is a serious and grossly malfeasant encroachment into practicing religion! What next? That the State can tell you what scripture is acceptable? Hmmmmm....
Fuck NY, concealed is concealed and that's it!
Federal judge halts key parts of NY's gun law
A federal judge has halted key provisions of NY’s gun rules that restrict where people can carry weapons & require applicants to hand over social media accounts.
www.wgrz.com
Saltwater60
20×102mm Vulcan
This is what I will do. I’m on an official church safety team so if they say I’m on it and tasked with keeping the peace I think I’m GTG.
Saltwater60
20×102mm Vulcan
GOA Victory: Federal Judge Grants TRO Against Most of New York Concealed Carry Law | GOA
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE October 6, 2022 Washington, D.C. – Today, Gun Owners of America (GOA) and Gun Owners Foundation (GOF) secured a temporary restraining order in federal court against the poorly named New York “Concealed Carry Improvement Act.” This follows GOA and GOF re-filing their lawsuit...
www.gunowners.org
spat
.700 Nitro Express
In the very least the "full faith and credit" clause should apply to your home state permit (essentually granting universal reciprocity).
Your drivers license and marriage license are required to be recognized in every state. That's not a state by state agreement, it's a constitutional requirement.
It will be interesting to see what happens with the new suit that challenges "open carry". Where are they going to find historical context of open carry being banned? How did people conceal their flintlock pistols in 1790? As far a I know the only people who hid their weapons were criminals. The open carry ban cannot stand as far as I can see.
Depick
.308 Win
I’m happy we are getting some relief but I still worry what that heinous bitch and her cohorts are scheming up in response.
Historically, thieves and those of I'll repute were those who carried concealed and were viewed as such. It was respectable and even honorable to open carry. They will be hard pressed to find otherwise.
TJ12010
9mm
I'm curious that if they did "allow" open carry, would they try to ban or further regulate concealed carry?
Hochulsucks1234
.44 mag
If this stuck as written today I would bet the unhinged liberals would force more training. The judge didn't throw out the training requirement and current PP holders are exempt from it. Who is to say they don't force training on all of us with an expiration where we would have to take it again. I don't trust those scumbags.
Saltwater60
20×102mm Vulcan
I don’t think the training was on the docket.
Phazer
.450/400 Nitro Ex
BINGO!
One of the first pistols I like to have new shooters try is a 1911 22LR. Minimal, if any, recoil in a full-sized easy-to-control pistol. But, the best that I can do here in New York is let them try a 10-22 or a 22LR MSR.
With the current laws, can we legally let someone without a "semiautomatic rifle permit" use a rifle at the range?
That_FNG
.308 Win
I was thinking, for each of these lawsuits that succeeds I should buy a new gun.