New York State rifle SCOTUS case granted certiorari

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • defaultdotxbe

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 21, 2020
    259
    43
    Griffith
    Lots of excitement about this but am I the only one seeing this going very badly?

    Not to mention this won’t be taken up until the fall and that’s more than enough time for them to pack the bench.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Other than entrenching may-issue laws in the handful of states that still have them I don't see much bad coming from an adverse ruling. That may be part of the reason the court narrowed the question presented

    Also, beyond the elimination of said may-issue laws there isn't much change that will come from a good ruling either (and the may-issue laws will just be replaced with high fees and excessing training requirements anyway)



    There's a reason the purple states that pass gun control (CO, VA) haven't made it a point to do anything with shall-issue carry, its not a hill they want to die on
     

    DoggyDaddy

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    73   0   1
    Aug 18, 2011
    102,066
    77
    Southside Indy
    Other than entrenching may-issue laws in the handful of states that still have them I don't see much bad coming from an adverse ruling. That may be part of the reason the court narrowed the question presented

    Also, beyond the elimination of said may-issue laws there isn't much change that will come from a good ruling either (and the may-issue laws will just be replaced with high fees and excessing training requirements anyway)



    There's a reason the purple states that pass gun control (CO, VA) haven't made it a point to do anything with shall-issue carry, its not a hill they want to die on
    Constitutional carry issue aside, every state at the very minimum should be shall issue, full stop. Anything less is unacceptable. The 2A says "keep and bear arms", not "keep or bear arms".
     

    Ziggidy

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    May 7, 2018
    7,271
    113
    Ziggidyville
    My take.....

    The Supremes will vote a majority supporting carry. This will set us up for the dems to cry foul and have a strong push to now pack the court. They will cry to the people about how their lives are in jeopardy now because Trump packed the court in his favor so now they need to protect us all by packing the court to give a more realistic and modern interpretation that reflects our society. They will argue that the 2nd was written for "then" and not now, thus their need to update courts to reflect today.

    They will use fear and safety in order to get public support to pack it.
     

    Chewie

    Old, Tired, Grumpy, Skeptical
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Dec 28, 2012
    2,334
    113
    Martinsville
    Hopeful but not holding my breath. All we can do is wait and see (waiting will be painful). Will the left some how pressure SCOTUS to get their way?
     

    rooster

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Mar 4, 2010
    3,306
    113
    Indianapolis
    They will use fear and safety in order to get public support to pack it.
    They are already ahead of you

    “While Trump’s nod to white supremacism and incitement of far-right insurrection have already prompted some Black citizens to arm themselves in self-defense, continuing police antagonism on top of that could increase the likelihood that Black militias will emerge”

    I hate racist gun control motives. It’s rooted in racism and even in 2021 they don’t even attempt to hide the racist motives.
     

    KellyinAvon

    Blue-ID Mafia Consigliere
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Dec 22, 2012
    24,796
    150
    Avon
    My take.....

    The Supremes will vote a majority supporting carry. This will set us up for the dems to cry foul and have a strong push to now pack the court. They will cry to the people about how their lives are in jeopardy now because Trump packed the court in his favor so now they need to protect us all by packing the court to give a more realistic and modern interpretation that reflects our society. They will argue that the 2nd was written for "then" and not now, thus their need to update courts to reflect today.

    They will use fear and safety in order to get public support to pack it.
    Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

    The same people living in fear of felonious mobs and a lack of Police presence will vote for their own demise.
     

    KG1

    Forgotten Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    66   0   0
    Jan 20, 2009
    25,633
    149
    How can it be possible to interpret the right to "bear arms" as only to be confined to the home?

    Wasn't it determined as part of the Heller and McDonald rulings that the right of the people to keep and bear arms is an individual right and that right extends beyond the context of militia service to include self defense?

    If that's the case and an individual has the right to bear arms for self defense why should that right of self defense beyond the context of militia service while bearing arms not be allowed to extend past ones doorstep?

    Seems to me you should have that right no matter where you go.
     
    Last edited:

    KLB

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Sep 12, 2011
    23,010
    77
    Porter County
    How can it be possible to interpret the right to "bear arms" as only to be confined to the home?

    Wasn't it determined as part of the Heller and McDonald rulings that the right of the people to keep and bear arms is an individual right and that right extends beyond the context of militia service to include self defense?

    If that's the case and an individual has the right to bear arms for self defense why should that right of self defense not be allowed to extend past ones doorstep?

    Seems to me you should have that right no matter where you go.
    The circuit courts have fought hard to ignore the rulings in Heller and McDonald. I expect some scathing comments from a couple of the justices on this one.
     

    SwikLS

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Oct 26, 2015
    1,172
    113
    The Bunker
    wish we knew who the 4 justices were that wanted to hear it. In all likelyhood the may/shall issue is such a hot button issue that the ones voting for hearing the case probably wouldnt have unless they were pretty sure which way it was going to go. So if it was Kagan, Sotomeyer, Breyer, and Roberts that were the 4 then bad news. If it was any 4 of the others then probably goods news for us.
     

    KLB

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Sep 12, 2011
    23,010
    77
    Porter County
    wish we knew who the 4 justices were that wanted to hear it. In all likelyhood the may/shall issue is such a hot button issue that the ones voting for hearing the case probably wouldnt have unless they were pretty sure which way it was going to go. So if it was Kagan, Sotomeyer, Breyer, and Roberts that were the 4 then bad news. If it was any 4 of the others then probably goods news for us.
    I highly doubt the liberal justices voting to take this case. Thomas, Gorsuch, Alito, and at least one of the other two would be my guess.
     
    Top Bottom