• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Last Brief Filed In SCOTUS, NY Carry Case Is A Thing Of Beauty

Rockrivr1

Rockrivr1

NES Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2005
Messages
20,928
Likes
21,233
Location
South Central Mass
Feedback: 66 / 0 / 0
From reading the article it seem NY may have a hard time defending it's strict anti 2A stance at the Supreme Court

In less than a month the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case known as New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen; the legal challenge to New York’s carry permitting laws that seeks to have them tossed out as a violation of the Second Amendment. Over the course of the summer, we’ve seen dozens of amicus briefs filed in support and opposition of the NYSPRA’s lawsuit, but now the final brief has been submitted to the court, and it comes from the NYSPRA itself (the NRA is also providing support for the lawsuit, but is not a named plaintiff).

The petitioner’s reply brief is a chance to answer the defendant’s argument in writing, which means in this case former Solicitor General Paul Clement is pushing back on New York’s claim that by granting plaintiffs Robert Nash and Brandon Koch “restricted” carry permits that allow them to carry their guns while hunting or target shooting, they’ve satisfied the pair’s right to bear arms. Clement begins his thorough takedown of New York’s defense by noting that the state has in essence conceded that a right to bear arms outside the home exists, and now they’re just arguing over how much the state can intrude on that right.
Click to expand...

bearingarms.com

Last Brief Filed In SCOTUS Carry Case Is A Thing Of Beauty

bearingarms.com bearingarms.com
 
bigbravehog said:
how incredibly sad these cases are even argued in SCOTUS. The 2A is crystal clear - "Shall not be infringed".
How far have we come from no gun control to near annihilation of the 2A in these short years. :(
Click to expand...

True, but if NY goes down it's a great thing for the rest of us.
 
bigbravehog said:
how incredibly sad these cases are even argued in SCOTUS. The 2A is crystal clear - "Shall not be infringed".
How far have we come from no gun control to near annihilation of the 2A in these short years. :(
Click to expand...

The establishment left who takes Bloomberg money will just keep going. "Well okay the right to carry exists outside the home but what about on February 29 on a leap year?". "What about between the hours of 10pm and 7am?". "What if we tell people yes you can carry outside the home but the gun cannot contain ammo?". It will just go on and on and on. There's too much money involved now. Which is really sad.
 
VetteGirlMA said:
The establishment left who takes Bloomberg money will just keep going. "Well okay the right to carry exists outside the home but what about on February 29 on a leap year?". "What about between the hours of 10pm and 7am?". "What if we tell people yes you can carry outside the home but the gun cannot contain ammo?". It will just go on and on and on. There's too much money involved now. Which is really sad.
Click to expand...
there is plenty of money on the right as well since its supposed to be a collection of bankers, lawyers, tycoons, ultra-capitalist wealthy entrepreneurs. Isn't that what the left complains about the GOP all the time ? That Republicans only care about wealthy elites.
They just haven't stood up for conservative causes like the left has.
 
bigbravehog said:
there is plenty of money on the right as well since its supposed to be a collection of bankers, lawyers, tycoons, ultra-capitalist wealthy entrepreneurs. Isn't that what the left complains about the GOP all the time ? That Republicans only care about wealthy elites.
They just haven't stood up for conservative causes like the left has.
Click to expand...

My point isn't just the money it's the left won't give up because even if Bloomberg vapor locks tonight and makes his long afterlife journey to the infernal regions he'll leave the gun grabbers with enough money so that they can keep going for many years until they finally run out of cash to spend. Our only luck is that barring we get super unlucky in the next 20 years we still have courts that maybe, kinda sort of back civil rights and someday we might unfortunately find scotus packed with left wing extremists and then the people we elect into office won't have our backs, in other words spineless republicans. It's easy for them to turn their backs on gun owners even though we're a sizable population because it doesn't pay the re-election bills like big corporate money does. Beside solving all of the gun laws even with absolute concrete scotus rulings isn't going to stop these people. They can't help themselves any longer.
 
VetteGirlMA said:
My point isn't just the money it's the left won't give up because even if Bloomberg vapor locks tonight and makes his long afterlife journey to the infernal regions he'll leave the gun grabbers with enough money so that they can keep going for many years until they finally run out of cash to spend. Our only luck is that barring we get super unlucky in the next 20 years and find scotus packed with left wing extremists the people we elect into office don't have our backs, on other words spineless republicans. It's easy for them to turn their backs on gun owners even though we're a sizable population because it doesn't pay the re-election bills like big corporate money does. Beside solving all of the gun laws even with absolute concrete scotus rulings isn't going to stop these people. They can't help themselves any longer.
Click to expand...
Bloomberg AND Soros
 
Wildcard said:
If Im reading the docket correctly, tomorrow should be interesting.
Click to expand...
What are you reading? I'm missing it.

So the SC gets 15 minutes of the respondent's time. That's good, split them up. However, with the new format, oral arguments this term are going way over the allotted time. You can expect this argument to go long. It'll be streamed live. Tune in and we should have a running thread that morning.
 
bigbravehog said:
there is plenty of money on the right as well since its supposed to be a collection of bankers, lawyers, tycoons, ultra-capitalist wealthy entrepreneurs. Isn't that what the left complains about the GOP all the time ? That Republicans only care about wealthy elites.
They just haven't stood up for conservative causes like the left has.
Click to expand...

You are viewing this from a position that they aren't all on the same team. The R's don't want us plebs having any weapons either. They just pump rhetoric our way that says otherwise.
 
bigbravehog said:
how incredibly sad these cases are even argued in SCOTUS. The 2A is crystal clear - "Shall not be infringed".
How far have we come from no gun control to near annihilation of the 2A in these short years. :(
Click to expand...

It took until 1865 for "all men" to mean all men. It took until the 60's for "equal" to really mean equal. Since we've only really been pushing this since. . . maybe GCA68, I'd say we're making excellent progress.
 
VetteGirlMA said:
The establishment left who takes Bloomberg money will just keep going. "Well okay the right to carry exists outside the home but what about on February 29 on a leap year?". "What about between the hours of 10pm and 7am?". "What if we tell people yes you can carry outside the home but the gun cannot contain ammo?". It will just go on and on and on. There's too much money involved now. Which is really sad.
Click to expand...
eventually there will be vaccine passports, and you can't apply for your "shall-issue" permit without one
 
VetteGirlMA said:
The establishment left who takes Bloomberg money will just keep going. "Well okay the right to carry exists outside the home but what about on February 29 on a leap year?". "What about between the hours of 10pm and 7am?". "What if we tell people yes you can carry outside the home but the gun cannot contain ammo?". It will just go on and on and on. There's too much money involved now. Which is really sad.
Click to expand...

This will be a death of a thousand cuts. Whether a law is overturned by SCOTUS or not the anti 2A groups will continue to push for more. If it is upheld, the screws will be tightened. If it is overturned, they’ll try a different approach.
 
StevieP said:
Has anyone (other than the Judges) read any of the ' brief amici curiea' submitted by ostensibly interested parties?

Some of the anti-gun groups' must be pretty comical
Click to expand...
I've skimmed some so far, but there are 45 of them and a thorough reading is a lot of work. On the anti-Heller side the number of technical legal arguments I've hit is pretty low, but there are many many people arguing about 18th century language and what it means. The intro to Schumer et al's brief is an annoyingly evidence-free appeal to emotion and congressional authority with a side of heaping bullshit. I think they've reached the "if the law and the facts are against you pound the table and yell like hell" part.

The only stuff I've giggled at so far is that one of the references that comes up is 'The Hidden History of the Second Amendment' by Carl Bogus (yes, I'm laughing at the name, I'm apparently 12) and that one of the petitioners (one of the two "et al" after NYSRPA) is named Brandon.
 
Howboutno! Any restriction is an infringement. You should, at worst(and I disagree with it), fill out a form, pay a modest sum, get some prints and move the F on. It should be no more complicated than having a fishing or hunting license. No shooting. No letters. No squinchy-eye from the Chief. Form, process, issue. Period.
 
bigbravehog said:
how incredibly sad these cases are even argued in SCOTUS. The 2A is crystal clear - "Shall not be infringed".
How far have we come from no gun control to near annihilation of the 2A in these short years. :(
Click to expand...
Well ... if SCOTUS stopped being a bunch of scared b*tches, they could easily put an end to all this by taking on 2 or 3 cases and making very clear statements.

But they don't.
 
Broccoli Iglesias said:
Well ... if SCOTUS stopped being a bunch of scared b*tches, they could easily put an end to all this by taking on 2 or 3 cases and making very clear statements.

But they don't.
Click to expand...

This. The problem is no dems are getting their dicks stomped on with scotus cases opening them up to civil rights lawsuits.
 
StevieP said:
I thought MA is graduated to "shall issue" in so much as everyone who applies now gets the license UNLESS there's an actual disqualifier, which the licensing officer HAS TO document?
Click to expand...
In practical effect no, the courts still go by the outdated standard and the petitioner is the one required to appeal the denial rather than the PD having to go to court to enforce their decision from the get go. MA actually changed Shall Issues FIDS to May Issue AFTER Heller as deliberate disrespect and insubordination.
 
Somebody sent me this and makes sense.
The Second Amendment does not apply to semi-automatic rifles, nor does it apply to bolt-action rifles, shotguns, pistols or revolvers. The 2nd Amendment RESTRICTS GOVERNMENT. The technology of the firearm is irrelevant. The restrictions on government remain the same. The Second Amendment was not written to grant permission for citizens to own and bear firearms. It forbids government interference in the right to keep and bear arms, period. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

This also applies to the other “Rights”. they are not granted, they stipulate inherent rights that the government may not prohibit.
 
Last edited:
Alex Cannella said:
Somebody sent me this and makes sense.
The Second Amendment does not apply to semi-automati9c rifles, nor does it apply to bolt-action rifles, shotguns, pistols or revolvers. The 2nd Amendment RESTRICTS GOVERNMENT. The technology of the firearm is irrelevant. The restrictions on government remain the same. The Second Amendment was not written to grant permission for citizens to own and bear firearms. It forbids government interference in the right to keep and bear arms, period. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

This also applies to the other “Rights”. they are not granted, they stipulate inherent rights that the government may not prohibit.
Click to expand...
someone needs to send that to the attorneys arguing our side!
 

Similar threads

Carry in Post Office
2
Replies
49
Views
1K
LTCRN
LTCRN
Is there a reason.......
2 3
Replies
66
Views
2K
CMEBoston
CMEBoston
Tyrant NY judge says Second Amendment doesn't exist in her court room
2
Replies
46
Views
1K
Chevy 2 65
Chevy 2 65
Groton is next in line
2
Replies
37
Views
1K
Asaltweapon
Asaltweapon
Pennsylvania Court Upholds Right of Young People to Carry Guns in Public
Replies
6
Views
206
Coyote33
Coyote33
Back
Top Bottom