Temporary Restaining Order Issued For Concealed Carry Improvement Act (merged thread)

[Saltwater60]

Several random thoughts:

- We are witnessing the death throes of gun control. The gun grabbers will go out the same way they came in; with racist laws that are meant to take rights from disfavored groups in society. Watch them, as this current case moves forward, quote brutally racist laws from Reconstruction; hell, even the term 'of good moral character' is a dog whistle for late 19th and early 20th Century minorities who have learned to emulate and live within the expectations of the dominant cultural group.

- These death throes, as per the definition of the term, will be violent; not in actual violence perpetrated by the gun grabbers, but violent nonetheless. Disarming a law abiding citizen for no justified reason leaves that person open to actual, real violence that they may have been able to defend against if they chose to ignore/break the law. Then the consequences for breaking the law also become violent, as in men with guns sent to arrest the person who did nothing more than break an unjust law.

- If you carry during the days of the week and hours of the day that the 2nd District Appeals Supreme Court issues a Stay of an Appeal of an Injunction, (and the moon is full and the responding officer is feeling good/crummy because he just did/did not got laid) you can rest assured that you will eventually be vindicated, because, a) the law has been declared unconstitutional already by TWO courts, and, more importantly: b) YOU ARE NOT DOING ANYTHING WRONG. You are not harming anyone, and (in my case, for example) you have been carrying for FORTY YEARS without incident, and carrying today, and carrying tomorrow, are not the morally wrong things to do. OH, and then you WILL definitely have standing, which the state is terrified of...

- Why is this happening? It is not happening for public safety, you can be assured. It is all happening because the powers that be (state/federal/globalist)... have chosen New York and California as a battleground. NATO, Russia and to some extent China have chosen Ukraine as a proxy battleground for a kinetic war to determine world hegemony going forward, and powers of similar magnitude have chosen New York as a proxy battleground for a legal war to determine the future of the entire concept of an armed citizenry.

An armed American citizenry has bailed out the world before, and we can do it again. It is that which they are afraid of.

They are afraid of us.

And believe it or not, they are scared.

Of us.

It's going to be a rough ride, but we will win.

I agree with the why is this happening and after that.
Im not so optimistic on the other previous points in this post. I agree the way Bruen was decided that is what should happen but I do t trust that it will happen. I’m sorry I just don’t. I do agree with NYS and CA being chosen for a reason and that’s because they are Democratic super majorities with very liberal populous and politicians. The second circuit court has to be one of the worst there is.

 

[Dr. Evil]

I'm hopeful that this is similar to when a person on their death bed has a period of time where they actually appear to be well and almost rebound... right before they pass.

 

[Egret-II]

Since FUKH doesn't want you to carry guns in those so called "sensitive" places. Is she legally responsible if something happens to you or your family? Can you sue her? You could argue that it you had your gun on you. You could have prevented anybody from harming you.

 

[nortatoga]

2nd Circuit Court make-up..

66	Chief Judge	Debra Ann Livingston	New York, NY	1959	2007–present	2020–present	—	G.W. Bush
55	Circuit Judge	José A. Cabranes	New Haven, CT	1940	1994–present	—	—	Clinton
69	Circuit Judge	Raymond Lohier	New York, NY	1965	2010–present	—	—	Obama
72	Circuit Judge	Richard J. Sullivan	New York, NY	1964	2018–present	—	—	Trump
73	Circuit Judge	Joseph F. Bianco	Central Islip, NY	1966	2019–present	—	—	Trump
74	Circuit Judge	Michael Hun Park	New York, NY	1976	2019–present	—	—	Trump
75	Circuit Judge	William J. Nardini	New Haven, CT	1969	2019–present	—	—	Trump
76	Circuit Judge	Steven Menashi	New York, NY	1979	2019–present	—	—	Trump
77	Circuit Judge	Eunice C. Lee	New York, NY	1970	2021–present	—	—	Biden
78	Circuit Judge	Beth Robinson	Burlington, VT	1965	2021–present	—	—	Biden
79	Circuit Judge	Myrna Pérez	New York, NY	1974	2021–present	—	—	Biden
80	Circuit Judge	Alison Nathan	New York, NY	1972	2022–present	—	—	Biden
81	Circuit Judge	Sarah A. L. Merriam	Bridgeport, CT	1971	2022–present	—	—	Biden

 

[camper4lyfe]

2nd Circuit Court make-up..

66	Chief Judge	Debra Ann Livingston	New York, NY	1959	2007–present	2020–present	—	G.W. Bush
55	Circuit Judge	José A. Cabranes	New Haven, CT	1940	1994–present	—	—	Clinton
69	Circuit Judge	Raymond Lohier	New York, NY	1965	2010–present	—	—	Obama
72	Circuit Judge	Richard J. Sullivan	New York, NY	1964	2018–present	—	—	Trump
73	Circuit Judge	Joseph F. Bianco	Central Islip, NY	1966	2019–present	—	—	Trump
74	Circuit Judge	Michael Hun Park	New York, NY	1976	2019–present	—	—	Trump
75	Circuit Judge	William J. Nardini	New Haven, CT	1969	2019–present	—	—	Trump
76	Circuit Judge	Steven Menashi	New York, NY	1979	2019–present	—	—	Trump
77	Circuit Judge	Eunice C. Lee	New York, NY	1970	2021–present	—	—	Biden
78	Circuit Judge	Beth Robinson	Burlington, VT	1965	2021–present	—	—	Biden
79	Circuit Judge	Myrna Pérez	New York, NY	1974	2021–present	—	—	Biden
80	Circuit Judge	Alison Nathan	New York, NY	1972	2022–present	—	—	Biden
81	Circuit Judge	Sarah A. L. Merriam	Bridgeport, CT	1971	2022–present	—	—	Biden

That's a lot of NYshitty judges

 

[GTN]

Someone posted on another thread that we lost our TRO? Is that correct?

 

[Glock_USA]

Someone posted on another thread that we lost our TRO? Is that correct?

Yes. The entire CCIA is law and it is in full force.

 

[camper4lyfe]

Someone posted on another thread that we lost our TRO? Is that correct?

Yeah, the 2nd stayed the TRO

 

[That_FNG]

Yeah, the 2nd stayed the TRO

From how I read it the 2nd had not made a decision yet and extended the original deadline until they do make a decision or until the 25th

 

[Dr. Evil]

 

[camper4lyfe]

From how I read it the 2nd had not made a decision yet and extended the original deadline until they do make a decision or until the 25th

 

[That_FNG]

View attachment 176290

Yes they declined to make any decision at this time. The court did not rule that the TRO was valid and could take effect, nor did they rule the TRO was invalid and thus thrown out. Basically the court extended the original 3 day dead line to whenever the court decides.

 

[99cummins]

They just keep kicking the legal can down the road. I don’t have any good feelings about any of the lawsuits. Ny has gone rogue on gun laws without consequence and it will likely continue that way.

 

[US RIFLE M1A]

Just remember that what has happened up to now in the 2nd is just housekeeping. The judge who extended the stay is just keeping the situation as is until it can get to the panel. She has no authority to do anything else.

If/when the 3-judge panel rules on the stay, we will gain some insight as to the mindset. Until then we know nothing.

 

[Glock_USA]

Just filed:

More: https://assets.nationbuilder.com/fi...Motion_for_Stay_Pending_Appeal.pdf?1665674407

 

[camper4lyfe]

Just filed:
View attachment 176291View attachment 176292

I'm going to need an interpretation of this one. My brain hurts keeping track of appellees/appellents, etc.

 

[Glock_USA]

I'm going to need an interpretation of this one. My brain hurts keeping track of appellees/appellents, etc.

I'm not the person to give it to ya. I'm just trying to keep up with what's going on the best I can.

 

[m1_ping]

I'm going to need an interpretation of this one. My brain hurts keeping track of appellees/appellents, etc.

Antonyuk and other GOA members --> Plaintiff-Appellee

Hochul and other parties who are appealing --> Defendant-Appellant

Fitzpatrick and other parties who are not appealing --> Defendant

 

[Saltwater60]

I'm not the person to give it to ya. I'm just trying to keep up with what's going on the best I can.

The way I read it is they are adding context saying that the overturning of the TRO does not take into context the Bruen decision. Yes there is a lot of legal speak in there and back and forth but that’s what I took it to mean in the end.

 

[99cummins]

“And research confirms that the proliferation of guns in public spaces increases the likelihood of gun injuries and deaths. See Br. of Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence as Amicus Curiae”

I read the full document in the link and from my limited law knowledge, the decision fully supports the state and its restrictions on firearms. And if they can use an anti gun group as a reference in a court decision, we are done.

 

[Bigfoot]

And if they can use an anti gun group as a reference in a court decision, we are done.

Yeah really, WTF, that's bullshit.

 

[Hochulsucks1234]

As others have stated on here, I will state the same. I plan on carrying when necessary and that will be that. If I have to go to a walmart (I try to avoid) I will be sure to carry. I was carrying back when they had restrictions and will do so now without the restrictions but with the stupid CCIA shit in place. I conceal very well and no one knows I have a gun on me. I would only draw if I absolutely know my life is in danger. They wanna charge me for protectig my life then so be it. I won't go to "gun free zones" like schools of course. They cannot just frisk me everywhere I go. Bottom line is, I will do what is needed to protect myself.

 

[Truebeliever]

Which case is that?

The original case

SCOTUS Holds Community Caretaking Does Not Allow for Warrantless Search

The Supreme Court does not expand the “community caretaking” exception to the Fourth Amendment to allow for a warrantless search of a person’s home in Caniglia v. Strom.

www.americanbar.org

The 2nd circuit case.

 

[livingston]

New Jersey has taken notes from NY. .. A new bill has been introduced ..... We do need a win in this case ...

Gun Control Frankenstein proposed... All the worst parts have been made into one MONSTROSITY...​

In today's episode of the Bullet Points, we dive into a new monstrosity of a Gun Control bill that was just proposed in New Jersey. They have taken the worst parts of all National Gun infringements and molded it into a Frankenstein of Gun Control..

Hoping to Carry a Gun in New Jersey? You Might Need Insurance First. (Published 2022)

Legislative leaders are promoting some of the strictest firearms rules in the country, a response to the Supreme Court ruling that overturned a New York law barring most people from carrying guns in public.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Saltwater60]

The original case

SCOTUS Holds Community Caretaking Does Not Allow for Warrantless Search

The Supreme Court does not expand the “community caretaking” exception to the Fourth Amendment to allow for a warrantless search of a person’s home in Caniglia v. Strom.

www.americanbar.org

The 2nd circuit case.

My town is or was doing this as well as the other towns around me. Any domestic call regardless of arrest or crime they were or are taking any guns from the house.

 

[Grimscale]

I'm going to need an interpretation of this one. My brain hurts keeping track of appellees/appellents, etc.

I'll try to take a stab at translating State gobbel-speak to English:

The State is saying:
1) Bruen did not make injuctive relief automatic to 2nd Amendment challenges.
2) GOA, etc., claim the TRO is not appealable. The State responds "it's appealable in everything but name". Not sure what that means, sounds like they are saying it isn't appealable but yet it is?
3) GOA, etc., claim the TRO won't cause irreparable harm, but we claim it will result in many additional guns being carried with an increase in the risk of gun-related injuries and death. We don't have any actual evidence or data, and, after all, fuck the data, we don't need it. But we'll provide biased and unscientific "data" made up from whole cloth by our anti-gun friends anyway, just to muddle the waters.
4) GOA, etc., claim the CCIA is constitutionally flawed so the TRO should weigh more heavily than a stay of that TRO.
5) GOA, etc., are not entitled to injunctive relief or a TRO just because they made a 2nd Amendment challenge, especially as the State has not had time to defend their bullshit make up more bullshit to sway the biased judges of the court.
6) the TRO is "riddled with errors on the merits", claiming an improper application of Bruen, and an analysis of claims for which no plaintiff has standing. in other words "we claim the TRO is wrong and the people suing us don't have the right to sue us."

And, finally:

7) If this is not stayed in its entirety, then limit it to only these six people so we can continue to fuck the entire rest of New York State (not counting our gestapo, our friends, us, and anyone else WE deem worthy).

 

[That_FNG]

I'll try to take a stab at translating State gobbel-speak to English:

The State is saying:
1) Bruen did not make injuctive relief automatic to 2nd Amendment challenges.
2) GOA, etc., claim the TRO is not appealable. The State responds "it's appealable in everything but name". Not sure what that means, sounds like they are saying it isn't appealable but yet it is?
3) GOA, etc., claim the TRO won't cause irreparable harm, but we claim it will result in many additional guns being carried with an increase in the risk of gun-related injuries and death. We don't have any actual evidence or data, and, after all, fuck the data, we don't need it. But we'll provide biased and unscientific "data" made up from whole cloth by our anti-gun friends anyway, just to muddle the waters.
4) GOA, etc., claim the CCIA is constitutionally flawed so the TRO should weigh more heavily than a stay of that TRO.
5) GOA, etc., are not entitled to injunctive relief or a TRO just because they made a 2nd Amendment challenge, especially as the State has not had time to defend their bullshit make up more bullshit to sway the biased judges of the court.
6) the TRO is "riddled with errors on the merits", claiming an improper application of Bruen, and an analysis of claims for which no plaintiff has standing. in other words "we claim the TRO is wrong and the people suing us don't have the right to sue us."

And, finally:

7) If this is not stayed in its entirety, then limit it to only these six people so we can continue to fuck the entire rest of New York State (not counting our gestapo, our friends, us, and anyone else WE deem worthy).

 

[Apeman]

It's probably good that NJ is also going full retard. I know a lot of people have given up hope, but if more states persecute gun owners then scotus might step in sooner. At this point its all we've got

 

[Saltwater60]

It's probably good that NJ is also going full retard. I know a lot of people have given up hope, but if more states persecute gun owners then scotus might step in sooner. At this point its all we've got

I’m sure the citizens of Germany said the same

 

[Darth]

Yeah really, WTF, that's bullshit.

They used Mother Jones (basically a leftist Dilbert) for SAFE.