Supreme Court - NYSRPA v. Bruen - Megathread

I'm excited for the outcome but even if they gut May Issue, I would put money on shitbox towns fighting, kicking and screaming all the way and maintaining that licenses they issued are restricted as written. We expect a ruling in June of 2022. Just about the time I will need to renew my LTC, finally out of the grubby mitts of Medford.

Not for very long. Get sued in federal court. Ruled to knock it the F off.

If it goes Shall-issue, you could see the entire process to be handled on the state level. The sticking point is the prints. But those scanners could solve the problem anyhoo. Maybe they go to a "well, you've got it, so we don't need prints again because we're not as stupid as we used to be" system.

Nah. This is mASS. They'll work extra hard to F this up.
 
At what point in the eyes of the law does a person become a person and thus be entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness under the protection of the Constitution/Natural Law? (conception? heartbeat? ability to feel pain? consciousness? viability outside the womb?) That is the question the court has been reluctant to have to answer.
And that is the question that reasonable people discuss when talking about abortion.

Nearly nobody believes that abortion should be illegal in the form of a morning after pill.
Nearly everybody believes that abortion should be illegal at 8 months.

So now that we agree on the extremes, where do we actually draw the line. Its a difficult question.
Anyone who doesn't believe its a difficult question is either looking at things from a dogmatic religious perspective (even sperm are sacred), or doesn't actually understand the issues at hand.
 
Nah. This is mASS. They'll work extra hard to F this up.

Yeah. I could see them cooking up some nonsense like in the Caetano case where even after the ruling (as far as I remember), you couldn't get a stun gun until they made an accommodation in the law for them. My LTC expires coincident with my 30th birthday (in 12/2022) and given MA timetables I'll put in for renewal in June, right around when the ruling should come out. But it would be sweet to be able to carry before 14 months from now, especially to spite the fudds in charge of Medford.

Sigh...
 
And that is the question that reasonable people discuss when talking about abortion.

Nearly nobody believes that abortion should be illegal in the form of a morning after pill.
Nearly everybody believes that abortion should be illegal at 8 months.

So now that we agree on the extremes, where do we actually draw the line. Its a difficult question.
Anyone who doesn't believe its a difficult question is either looking at things from a dogmatic religious perspective (even sperm are sacred), or doesn't actually understand the issues at hand.
If killing sperm ever becomes a thing I’m done for
 
Scott is awesome. Also, kind of notable that he's commenting on a 2A topic; he often leaves them alone.
Well the blatant ignoring of clear cut SCotUS precedent to criminally prosecute people for something SCotUS has said is not a crime is something a criminal defense attorney would take note of.
 
Scott is awesome. Also, kind of notable that he's commenting on a 2A topic; he often leaves them alone.
he is correct in the notion that in the current political climate SCOTUS rulings are not enforceable, and all we will get would be same ignoring of their rulings plus a publicly expressed 'outrage' by the select politicians with an another demand to pack the court. municipalities do not anymore follow the rules. and nothing can be done about it.

the society moved on too far now to pay any respect to the way how the system of 3 branches was supposed to work, when the histeria and propaganda replaces the common sense - there is no more place for the law. you just follow hysteric karens of both genders and continue to play the tune the most of the population demands. and all they demand is to be whipped and punished more, to feel worthy.
 
Ha ha the gun grabbers are freaking out and know that the days of may issues are done so they are proposing a whole new set of regulations:



Of course it doesn't hurt that the author worked for Giffords in the past. Well it's archived so that the the article can be read without a paywall in the middle.
I doubt MA will do much. We are pretty much at "shall issue". With the exception of some sh*tholes like Brookline, Boston, and 2 or 3 other red cities, you can get an unrestricted class A without a lot of work.

Do Boston and Brookline deny new Class A or just add some BS restriction?
 
I doubt MA will do much. We are pretty much at "shall issue". With the exception of some sh*tholes like Brookline, Boston, and 2 or 3 other red cities, you can get an unrestricted class A without a lot of work.

Do Boston and Brookline deny new Class A or just add some BS restriction?
Boston restricts but does not generally downgrade, but unrestricted can sometimes be had.

Brookline downgrades, and looks for ANY excuse to reject, but will issue restricted if absolutely no dirt and unrestricted only to special people. The department is on record as having stated it takes pride in their position on gun control and licensing.
 
I doubt MA will do much. We are pretty much at "shall issue". With the exception of some sh*tholes like Brookline, Boston, and 2 or 3 other red cities, you can get an unrestricted class A without a lot of work.

Do Boston and Brookline deny new Class A or just add some BS restriction?
Meanwhile, I have limited info, but a guy I've been messaging with just got denied (in a green town) for a decade+ old trespass charge related to legitimate protests.
 
Meanwhile, I have limited info, but a guy I've been messaging with just got denied (in a green town) for a decade+ old trespass charge related to legitimate protests.
While I dont agree with getting denied for that.

I have to ask ... would "shall issue" change that?
 
What exactly do you mean by "Expunged" in this case? Expungement in MA is highly unusual, and it is important to know EXACTLY what that means.
The charge was not in MA. I don't know exact details, only what he told me.
I tried to have him get in touch with y'all, but it sounds (reinforced by the recent @Comm2A post) like you're swamped over there, which is a good thing.
 
It is in writing. I haven't seen it. He is working with someone to craft a defense, so I'm trying to not pry, but am hoping he prevails.

One does not "craft a defense" but "prepares an appeal". I hope that person who he is working with is a qualified gun attorney like Langer, Guida, or Tassel (with apologies to those I forgot to include). The first step is getting all the actual records of the case (criminal record from the state; certified court records of the case; case transcript if available; document showing precise disposition; etc.). If he can track these down it will reduce his legal fees.

Many times the attorney will negotiate with the licensing authority and work things out.

But, remember, the deck is stacked. The state courts have consistently held that charges that were dropped or for which one is found not guilty; offenses for which a full pardon has been received; heresay; a history of being abducted by aliens; and even exercising one's right to remain silent when questioned are all valid reasons for denying or revoking an LTC, and that the only issue is "did the issuing authority have a reason, any reason, that is not totally arbitrary" and the role of the court is not to re-evaluate or second guess that decision.
 
Last edited:
One does not "craft a defense" but "prepares an appeal". I hope that person who he is working with is a qualified gun attorney like Langer, Guida, or Tassel (with apologies to those I forgot to include). The first step is getting all the actual records of the case (criminal record from the state; certified court records of the case; case transcript if available; document showing precise disposition; etc.). If he can track these down it will reduce his legal fees.

Many times the attorney will negotiate with the licensing authority and work things out.

But, remember, the deck is stacked. The state courts have consistently held that charges that were dropped or for which one is found not guilty; heresay; a history of being abducted by aliens; and even exercising one's right to remain silent when questioned are all valid reasons for denying or revoking an LTC, and that the only issue is "did the issuing authority have a reason, any reason, that is not totally arbitrary" and the role of the court is not to re-evaluate or second guess that decision.
Thank you for the clarified wording.

He is working with a legal professional. I tried to point him at Jason or Neil. I don't think he's gone that route.

I'm hoping it works out for him, but as I have seen what you're describing (often from tracking your posts) I know I'm not qualified to do much more than what I've already done.
 
He is working with a legal professional. I tried to point him at Jason or Neil. I don't think he's gone that route.
I hope this means "attorney" and not "paralegal' as the later cannot actually do in court representation.

Going without an attorney only makes sense if one would rather lose than pay a legal fee. This is often the case, for example, in routine traffic citations.
 
I hope this means "attorney" and not "paralegal' as the later cannot actually do in court representation.

Going without an attorney only makes sense if one would rather lose than pay a legal fee. This is often the case, for example, in routine traffic citations.
I can't say that I know the exact path the person has taken, but I would share your concern. Again, not my place to pry. If you want, I can try to get you in touch with him.
 
I can't say that I know the exact path the person has taken, but I would share your concern. Again, not my place to pry. If you want, I can try to get you in touch with him.
No need, though he's welcome to contact me if I may be of assistance. Chances are anything I could to do help has already been said here though.
 
Back
Top Bottom