you start to understand here why the fecking communism lasted 70 years. it all crawls into life gradually, but once it is here - it is never going away.
names of regimes differ, the factual matter of the tyranny does not.
-
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.
Supreme Court - NYSRPA v. Bruen - Megathread
- Thread starter soloman02
- Start date
names of regimes differ, the factual matter of the tyranny does not.
Like the 9th, the 1st ignores SCOTUS and always finds a state gun control law constitutional. That’s whynSCOTUS needs to take up more cases and not allow lower courts to go rogue
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,528
- Likes
- 33,551
They use the any bizarre excuse they can find.
Like ruling "appellant did not apply for the minimal license to exercise Heller/McDonald rights" since a Permit to Purchase (no record of one ever being issued) and FID allow possession of a handgun in the home. The FID claim was a blatant mis-statement of the law but, the court accepted it as valid, after all the AG is the expert in MA law.
Last edited:
SCOTUS cannot let any of this crap continue. The 9th is 50 for 50 in finding gun control constitutional. If the 3 judge panel strikes it down, the liberals on the court take it en banc and they reverse the 3 judge panel. Some brutally bad jurisprudence too. The peruta carry case in the 9th, the AWB case in the 4th and the AWB case in the 1st. The decisions were jokes.
BigGreen2000
NES Member
Ed Peruta is a real patriot!
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2014
- Messages
- 639
- Likes
- 808
There is a real test here of the court's backbone. In this present environment of the Texas school shooting so close to the Roe fiasco, they might be inclined to soft pedal other conservative issues before them. I hope not and in a perfect world they would be minimizing their political pander but to deliver the Roe defeat and then top it with a solid far reaching Pro2A decision in this case means Mr Trump did more to set the country back on course than anyone else I can remember.
Dennis in MA
NES Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2007
- Messages
- 38,252
- Likes
- 33,162
I'm gonna say with 99% certainty that the whole thing is already done and signed. Maybe a few minor changes, but I can't see them re-deliberating on the whole thing with 2 weeks to go. And especially deciding a constitutional issue on FEELINGS. I'm thinking this court isn't too concerned with feelings. Well, most of it anyhow.
The NYSRPA case has no relation to what happened in Uvalde in any way.
The case was heard in November and the vote and decision on the case was done within weeks of the arguments. The draft opinion was probably written by the end of January and they’ve been fine tuning it since. Any justice can change their vote until the opinion is issued but that won’t happen. These are decisions based on long held judicial philosophies by serious person, they’re not going to reverse themselves over current events.
And as I mentioned prior in this thread, any shooting bolsters the case to overturn the subjective may issue license schemes. May issue laws create victims because we all know criminals don’t care about carry laws.
Lank
NES Member
What are the accountability mechanisms, impeachment for lower court judges going rogue?
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2014
- Messages
- 639
- Likes
- 808
Not in legal terms and that is the point. The present circumstances are emotional and political and just the reason we have a court which is intended to be neither. Emotionally how do you think the snowflakes will respond when handed a reversed Roe and then a gutting of the "may issue" permitting system on top of their latest hysteria about assault weapons. The court will prove their metal if they are able to continue to hand down conservative hard line decisions.
SCOTUS needs to take the case and reverse it.
I honestly don’t think 70% of the population pay attention to court decisions. SCOTUS already is hearing 2 college admission affirmative action cases next term, that will really get the race hustlers like sharpton going nuts.
I was underwhelmed by the “protests” after the leaked Dobbs draft. Dems moved on to race stuff so obviously it wasn’t polling well for them and they saw the small crowds.
mettle?
met·tle
/ˈmedl/
Learn to pronounce
noun
a person's ability to cope well with difficulties or to face a demanding situation in a spirited and resilient way.
"the team showed their true mettle in the second half"
CatSnoutSoup
NES Member
unnecessary (adjective)
un·nec·es·sary | \ ˌən-ˈne-sə-ˌser-ē \
Definition of unnecessary
: not necessary
Schadenfreude
scha·den·freu·de
/ˈSHädənˌfroidə/
noun
My mood in a few weeks when the NYSRPA vs Bruen opinion is released
scha·den·freu·de
/ˈSHädənˌfroidə/
noun
My mood in a few weeks when the NYSRPA vs Bruen opinion is released
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,528
- Likes
- 33,551
There is an interesting split in gun law inertia. The AR/HiCap law momentum is against us - even traditionally pro-gun rights places like Colorado have been taken over my a majority of big city "The government that governs most governs best" types. And even a recall of the proponents representing pro-rights districts is not enough to get was it lost back. A recent bill to allow competitive shooter to bring >10 rounds into CO failed in committee 7:4.
But, the intertia has worked the other ways on unimportant people carrying. There have been MANY wins, and even IL, is now "shall issue". Chicago went from "cannot own a handgun not registered in Chicago before 1983ish to shall issue". Many other states that were no-issue or may-issue are now shall issue. Unlike so called AW and mag bans, there are virtually no crimes where the post incident clamor is "this was caused by legal civilian carry". A favorable SCOTUS decision would continue an existing trend.
The only losses I can think of is the addition of some "permit not valid" places when MI when from may to shall issue, and when PA got rid of reciprocity for non-resident permits from other states because the system was mad they could not prosecute a few black guys who lived in PA and had FL permits.
But, the intertia has worked the other ways on unimportant people carrying. There have been MANY wins, and even IL, is now "shall issue". Chicago went from "cannot own a handgun not registered in Chicago before 1983ish to shall issue". Many other states that were no-issue or may-issue are now shall issue. Unlike so called AW and mag bans, there are virtually no crimes where the post incident clamor is "this was caused by legal civilian carry". A favorable SCOTUS decision would continue an existing trend.
The only losses I can think of is the addition of some "permit not valid" places when MI when from may to shall issue, and when PA got rid of reciprocity for non-resident permits from other states because the system was mad they could not prosecute a few black guys who lived in PA and had FL permits.
Parker Schreiber
NES Member
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2020
- Messages
- 1,739
- Likes
- 2,527
The 9th circuit ruled that people in that district have neither a right to open nor concealed carry. I'd call those serious losses:
They also upheld California's ban on standard capacity magazines:
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,528
- Likes
- 33,551
Unlike the NY case, the CA case did not make a central the granting of the people equal treatment under the law. The NYSRPA not only did this, but the justices' questions indicated they understood that that meant.
And you are right, those were losses.
BigGreen2000
NES Member
Was that Ed Peruta’s case?
Parker Schreiber
NES Member
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2020
- Messages
- 1,739
- Likes
- 2,527
The first link, yes.
The mag case (Duncan v Bonta) in the 9th is pending cert at SCOTUS right now, it’s on hold pending the NYSRPA case. The conceal carry case, Peruta and baker, and the open carry case, Young, will be dealt with with a new suit after the NYSRPA case. The open carry case from Hawaii, Young, like Duncan is pending cert at SCOTUS now pending the Ny case.
The 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 9th have issued terrible rulings. The 2nd and 3rd have a different composition now and the 9th is 16-13 dem to gop now, it was 21-8 in 2016
I believe the Colorado law is written in a way where retailers can’t sell complete mags. So they sell repair kits. Repair kit 1 has the some parts, repair kit 2 has the others. So the law is pointless beyond other mag laws.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,528
- Likes
- 33,551
Your belief is accurate that dealer cannot sell complete mags, but incomplete in the implication that possession of full cap >10 round mags is otherwise legal. But, your statement is technically accurate regardless of the veracity of its content.
Possession by someone who did not have the high-cap mag prior to the ban is a $750 fine / possible jail time no one gets and classified as a misdemeanor. Personal possession is required, so you cannot buy you way into legality by scrounging up pre-ban mags, so if you are a 21 year old competitor bringing full cap mags to a match, you just have to convince the system you personally possessed the mags since you were 12.
Trivial in CO, but a bar to carry permits in some states and lifetime PP status in MA since it is a "crime involving guns for which a jail or prison sentence may be imposed", so be careful if you are visiting.
Is that the word for blowing our once a decade 2A load on this complete waste of time NYC case?
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,528
- Likes
- 33,551
Our side did not get to choose which case of many SCOTUS granted cert to.
This case has a stonger possibility of winning that an "AW ban" or "mag ban" case, and will fundamentally change carry law/polities in the US if SCOTUS decides favorably.
I think scotus took it simply because its the least controversial 2A case they had access to.
Im sad that the good guys fed them this out.
It was really the only one in the que after Ginsberg died. There are an open carry case from Hawaii (young), a mag limit from NJ and CA and an AWB case from MD SCOTUS is holding pending this decision. We’ll see the wording and breath of the NYSRPA case and what SCOTUS does with those pending cases in a few weeks.
If NYSRPA definitively states there is a right to carry outside the home, that’s a big deal. I know you’re in FL now but in places like NY, NJ, CA, MD, HI, MA you have have zero chance to carry legally. Near NYC, basically all NJ and HI and many coastal counties in CA, you will never get a carry license. Opening those areas to CCW people will gradually affect those areas politically too.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,528
- Likes
- 33,551
Untrue with respect to MA, but there are still abuses in the system. Last I checked, 92% of the persons licensed to possess a handgun we licensed to carry (in the English, not MA legal, definition of the word, the later being broader and encompassing things not commonly though of as carry)
for the sake of conflict of interest I've been shitting on this case since before I moved, if I remember correctly.
SCOTUS doesnt want to give out solid 2A rulings. Just look at Heller. The states said f*** you straight to SCOTUS. So then we had to have McDonald so the states had to use it at their level. And then they continued to ignore it.
@Rob Boudrie mentioned that he doesnt think an AWB case has as good of chance. I'll take his word for it. that said, Heller clear as day says you can't ban common use firearms. AR-15's are the de facto American rifle. They arent common use. They are ubiquitous. Hell, even in ban states they are. Yet here they are still in some weird limbo gray areas. SCOTUS doesnt care which is why they wont take it. They don't want the heat from that one.
