Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
What exactly does this mean?
Updates on Antonyuk v. Bruen
- Thread starter US RIFLE M1A
- Start date
US RIFLE M1A
.45 acp
See my post above. Bruen was expected to testify and did not. That's a good thing. I would not want to be a lawyer who is defending a witness (albeit in his professional capacity) who is a no-show. Sucks to be them.
Edit to add: It's also a good thing when terms such as 'subpeona' are used in reference to your legal adversary. Makes them look like they have a crappy case and/or are afraid of something.
I wonder if 'Bruen' is tired of knowing his name will be forever associated with a tyrannical NY state losing court case after court case.
Last edited:
Not to kill anyone's vibe but
If true
If true
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
Never granted injunctive relief in any case dealing with fundamental rights under the constitution? What, did he sleep in during the constitution class in law school?
Saltwater60
20×102mm Vulcan
Just a commie.Never granted injunctive relief in any case dealing with fundamental rights under the constitution? What, did he sleep in during the constitution class in law school?
spat
.950 JDJ
The other side of that question is:Never granted injunctive relief in any case dealing with fundamental rights under the constitution? What, did he sleep in during the constitution class in law school?
"How many times has he declined to grant injunctive relief for fundamental rights when given the opportunity".
Could be it's only been an option a couple times, and maybe it was the right call in those cases.
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
Guess we'll find out shortly.
Beerman
6.5 Creedmoor
I’m afraid if this ends up enjoined, all pistol permit processing will be halted by the petulant State, but if it’s NOT enjoined then the State will do everything it can to continue to curb stomp the Second Amendment until there’s nothing left. Who’s gonna stop em? We need judges big swingin’ brass and solid cases brought by lawyers with fury. Shock and awe, shock and awe.
spat
.950 JDJ
If they stop all processing, then the judge should say "if you're not processing them, then you can't require them and NYS is constitutional carry until further notice".
They would start processing them very quickly after that LOL.
If they stop processing them, then well they'd have plenty of other new lawsuits to deal with
Acer-m14
20×102mm Vulcan
all this law talk and written in Latin Law speak ..
and the 2A was written in old English a 8 yr old could read then ..
and the 2A was written in old English a 8 yr old could read then ..
livingston
20×102mm Vulcan
m1_ping
9mm
I made the Reddit post. This is the correct take. I recounted the events best I remember them but the exact details of the line of questioning Antonyuk responded to is lost to my memory. The exact details will determine what impact if any the responses have on the outcome. In addition, as this post points out, precedent set under Bruen likely makes the response irrelevant. At this point GOA's lawyer saying that the hearing went well is the best indicator we have.
I made a disclaimer on my Reddit post but the internet does what it does and got laser focused on this one bullet point. I will consider how and if I will provide updates from the courtroom in the future.
Steal2B
.700 Nitro Express
I offered much stronger candidates to GOA and FPC with much more compelling and urgent cases whose lives may likely well be endangered by the new carry prohibitions. Color me disillusioned.
Last edited:
Steal2B
.700 Nitro Express
US RIFLE M1A
.45 acp
Unfortunately the post started a firestorm which may go on for a while. Trying to remember two hours of testimony of a topic which we are all highly invested in is impossible. Analyzing the testimony would not even be much easier if we had the transcripts directly in front of us, because a high-stakes in-person hearing is a cross between a poker game and a gladiatorial arena. Some of what goes on can be taken on face value, and other parts are filled with deception and trickery.
Losing lawyers often resort to sentence-construction word games, and toss-out seemingly throwaway questions that they actually intend to make huge points with.
What the state is trying to do is to pass draconian legislation and then shrug it off as a minor inconvenience. "Would it really be that much of a burden to ask your local deli owner if you could carry there on your way home from work?" "Umm, no, I guess not." is supposed to justify cordoning off the entire Adirondack Park as a no-go zone.
Trickery, just trickery, and in the stress of the moment, a non-professional on the stand will fall for it.
If it did not happen that the witness got tricked, and the witness was as skilled and smooth as a judo expert, actually then we would be surprised. Nothing to worry about, not because we want it to happen, but because it happens. It just does.
If the judge is solid, he will see it coming a mile away. If he is a liberal activist, he will use it to his advantage.
It really all comes down to that.
Last edited:
This is why I tried to keep that portion of your post in the screen shot
Steal2B
.700 Nitro Express
I am disillusioned that the champions of 2A freedoms hitched wagons to a case that did not feature a passionate litigant who conceal carries in part to protect their lives from a documented threat unresolved by law enforcement.
US RIFLE M1A
.45 acp
I am disillusioned that the champions of 2A freedoms hitched wagons to a case that did not feature a passionate litigant who conceal carries in part to protect their lives from a documented threat unresolved by law enforcement.
Everyone should also keep in mind that a judge will appreciate honesty. A plaintiff/witness who is being forthright when he answers questions such as "asking one deli owner to carry in his shop is not burdensome" will also become more believable when the big questions are asked. Having a nervous, occasionally stumbling, honest witness is more effective than a smooth talker who has a canned answer for everything.
Especially where 2A is concerned. A 'documented threat' makes the gun owner a special case, similar to the old Sullivan Law which was found NoGo. What was needed was a regular guy who just carried because it is his right, just like the rest of us do. We got that and have to see what happens.
Remember, we already won, but for some reason a sadistic government official wants us to play the same game over again just for kicks.
Everyone should also keep in mind that a judge will appreciate honesty. A plaintiff/witness who is being forthright when he answers questions such as "asking one deli owner to carry in his shop is not burdensome" will also become more believable when the big questions are asked. Having a nervous, occasionally stumbling, honest witness is more effective than a smooth talker who has a canned answer for everything.
Especially where 2A is concerned. A 'documented threat' makes the gun owner a special case, similar to the old Sullivan Law which was found NoGo. What was needed was a regular guy who just carried because it is his right, just like the rest of us do. We got that and have to see what happens.
Remember, we already won, but for some reason a sadistic government official wants us to play the same game over again just for kicks.
Last edited:
Steal2B
.700 Nitro Express
I agree but that element is not lost with a litigant who conceal carries and passionately understands their second amendment right is their path to shed victim status. Much better litigants were available.
US RIFLE M1A
.45 acp
Go in the shop, come back out, holster-up right on Main Street* and go back in the shop.
*In plain view of dozens of witnesses, all with cell-phones and cameras.
The lawyers did a phenomenal job of pointing out how insane this all is. Shopping, the Adirondacks, transportation, etc.
If the judge is solid, we will win this round. If not, we were never destined to win it anyway, even if we had a witness sent directly by either God or Clarence Thomas.
Steal2B
.700 Nitro Express
That is a major point of urgency lost in this case. The new restrictions strip all those who were granted a concealed carry permit in part to protect their lives from the second amendment ability to protect their lives. The second amendment is not just for Fudds.
US RIFLE M1A
.45 acp
No witness is ideal. Even the best get tripped up, and we don't have any idea how it really went, because our in-house court watcher admits to being overwhelmed with details.
There are many would-be victims and high-risk professionals who could use the protection they will be denied if this goes through as passed. DAs, judges, couriers, business owners, security personnel, etc. will all be affected by this.
And each of has their own peculiar circumstance, from going shopping on the way home from the range to a security guard taking public transit to work to a resident driving through the Adirondacks.
Steal2B
.700 Nitro Express
I call bullshit. The right litigant could likely force a liberal activist judge to pick their poison that supports the second amendment cause in spite of a personal bias. That would not happen with most Fudds as a litigant.
Saltwater60
20×102mm Vulcan
Remember if the private business ban is kept intact and not being challenged we lost. That’s the biggest deal to me and almost every other CCW holder. Making everything a sensitive place guys out CCW permits and invalidates them with the exception of a walk around the block or the Sunday drive.
Steal2B
.700 Nitro Express
Actual victims were available as litigants, but a Fudd was chosen as a litigant instead of grandmothers, wives, neighbors, sisters and daughters with real death threats who need to carry to shed a victim's hell. They would also fit a better litigant profile. The "champions" of the second amendment missed better opportunities.
Saltwater60
20×102mm Vulcan
You can’t reason with liberals. I tried and you’ll fail every time. They put their opinion in and disregard all facts. You will ask for facts and data to back up their claims and they avoid it or disappear. You can concede they are right on some points like the USA has a high murder rate and then they will disappear or just dwell on that.
Steal2B
.700 Nitro Express
I was not talking about changing a liberal mind at a cocktail party or reunion.
I was talking about pressuring a liberal politician or judge to abandon their own personal bias and do the right thing in part because of competing liberal biases.
US RIFLE M1A
.45 acp
This.
A case like this does not hinge on finding a perfect litigant, it hinges on avoiding being assigned to a liberal activist judge. Antonyuk has standing in NDNY, which, presumably, is somewhat less liberal than the downstate cesspools. There, we don't stand a chance, even with the theoretical ideal plaintiff.
I disagree that a liberal judge can be persuaded into a pro 2A decision with an ideal plaintiff. Besides, we don't know how it really went because we were not there.
We are dwelling on reported word-fuckery, not facts or law, which a judge will see coming from a distance. A liberal judge will use it to trash the case, a conservative judge will consider it along with all the rest.
Last edited: