New York State rifle SCOTUS case granted certiorari

[xwing]

Fantastic news. So soon the U.S. will be 26+ "Constitutional Carry" and the rest "Shall-Issue". But I agree that the 7 states will do all they can to make "shall issue" as burdensome for gun owners as they legally can. But even burdensome "shall issue" is a huge step above the "no issue unless you're politically connected" that takes place in HI, populous counties in CA, NJ & some counties in NY. I think NYC will have the biggest meltdown. lol

In reality, these 7 states will enact laws worse than Illinois or D.C. Those laws were both rooted in compromise and a plan by the states to not go to SCOTUS after appellate courts ruled against them, because they feared something like this. The 7 states likely will only issue to residents, will have no reciprocity, and will have large training requirements and fees. But still, it's a bombshell!

 

[MCgrease08]

Does anyone know of any MSM or leftist media sites that still host comments?

I'm thirsty for liberal tears today but I can't find lefty "news sites" that still allow commenting.

I really don't want to have to go to Twitter. **shudder**

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Part of Alito’s concurrence.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Skimming through the dissent it clearly is written from emotions and fear rather than using the law or precedent.

It’s embarrassing to read a Supreme Court justices writing that contains little to no support or citation.

You mean like Roe? Oops, sorry.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

No more federal judiciary two stepping.

 

[actaeon277]

So it effectively makes all states "shall issue" in theory. In practice, the red tape will be so onerous that no one will be issued a permit/license unless they're special.

Chicago also tried that.
Got slapped pretty hard and had to pay the NRA.

 

[actaeon277]

You wouldn't know this by reading or listening to the lib media. They're already out there saying this strikes down licensing requirements.

When all you have is lies on your side (libs), then you go with the lies.

 

[Mgderf]

 

[KG1]

Part of Alito’s concurrence.

View attachment 207582
View attachment 207583

Yeah according to Alito's concurrence it looks like this decision is meant to only address the right to carry for self defense outside the home and it finally affirms that there is a right to do so. It stops short of addressing laws regarding things like who may lawfully posses or buy a gun, nor does it address the kinds of weapons that people may posses.

It's setting those issues aside at least for now.

 

[KG1]

 

[JEBland]

Surety Rule on Pg. 47-51 seems like it would create a basis for undoing red flag laws?

Even before the Civil War commenced in 1861, this Court indirectly affirmed the importance of the right to keep and bear arms in public. Writing for the Court in Dred Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. 393 (1857), Chief Justice Taney offered what he thought was a parade of horribles that would result from recognizing that free blacks were citizens of the United States. If blacks were citizens, Taney fretted, they would be entitled to the privileges and immunities of citizens, including the right “to keep and carry arms wherever they went.” Id., at 417 (emphasis added). Thus, even Chief Justice Taney recognized (albeit unenthusiastically in the case of blacks) that public carry was a component of the right to keep and bear arms—a right free blacks were often denied in antebellum
America.

You mean Joy Behar was mistaken?

 

[Jaybird1980]

Suck it Canada

 

[Ark]

Surety Rule on Pg. 47-51 seems like it would create a basis for undoing red flag laws?


You mean Joy Behar was mistaken?

Thomas directly calling out gun control as racist and gun rights as rights that apply to everyone regardless of race.

I am radiating massive respect for him right now.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Yeah according to Alito's concurrence it looks like this decision is meant to only address the right to carry for self defense outside the home and it finally affirms that there is a right to do so. It stops short of addressing laws regarding things like who may lawfully posses or buy a gun, nor does it address the kinds of weapons that people may posses.

It's setting those issues aside at least for now.

Yes. Still great news but not as seeeping as I’d have liked it to be.

 

[Rookie]

Another gem...

 

[KG1]

Yes. Still great news but not as seeeping as I’d have liked it to be.

Yep there is more work to do in regard to those other issue which are separate in nature. I think the scope of this case is what they decided on and they stayed within those parameters and that is most likely the proper judicious thing to do as it relates to this specific case..

This decision is basically saying that States cannot deny law abiding citizens the right to carry for self defense outside of the home and that is finally great news.

 

[KG1]

Thomas directly calling out gun control as racist and gun rights as rights that apply to everyone regardless of race.

I am radiating massive respect for him right now.

Justice Thomas is an originalist Lion in defense of Constitutional rights for all. He embodies what the founders intended the Constitution to represent. I have always had a tremendous amount of respect for him. Wish he could live on forever.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

The government, with its F-15s and nukes, cannot even keep guns from docile, meek New Yorkers. It has no chance against us.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

 

[actaeon277]

Another gem...

View attachment 207594

I don't think she even knows what the Constitution is.

Just a word she's heard of.