LEGAL Supreme Court Hands Down Biggest Second Amendment Victory Since Heller

EMICT

Veteran Member
Biden "Deeply Disappointed" In SCOTUS Ruling On Open Carry
BY TYLER DURDEN
WEDNESDAY, JUN 22, 2022 - 11:11 PM

Update (1211ET): An hour after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a New York state law requiring people to show a special need (such as a business owner handling cash) to carry a handgun outside the home in public, the White House released a statement from President Biden saying he was "deeply disappointed" with the ruling that "contradicts both common sense and the Constitution, and should deeply trouble us all."

Here's the president's statement:

I am deeply disappointed by the Supreme Court's ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. Since 1911, the State of New York has required individuals who would like to carry a concealed weapon in public to show a need to do so for the purpose of self-defense and to acquire a license. More than a century later, the United States Supreme Court has chosen to strike down New York's long-established authority to protect its citizens. This ruling contradicts both common sense and the Constitution, and should deeply trouble us all.

In the wake of the horrific attacks in Buffalo and Uvalde, as well as the daily acts of gun violence that do not make national headlines, we must do more as a society — not less — to protect our fellow Americans. I remain committed to doing everything in my power to reduce gun violence and make our communities safer. I have already taken more executive actions to reduce gun violence than any other President during their first year in office, and I will continue to do all that I can to protect Americans from gun violence.

I urge states to continue to enact and enforce commonsense laws to make their citizens and communities safer from gun violence. As the late Justice Scalia recognized, the Second Amendment is not absolute. For centuries, states have regulated who may purchase or possess weapons, the types of weapons they may use, and the places they may carry those weapons. And the courts have upheld these regulations.

I call on Americans across the country to make their voices heard on gun safety. Lives are on the line.
New York Governor Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, called the ruling "absolutely shocking."

New York City Mayor Eric Adams said officials will review licensing policies and how sensitive locations are defined, adding that "we cannot allow New York to become the Wild West."

Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the NRA, called the ruling "a watershed win" that resulted from a decades-long fight led by his organization.

* * *

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a New York state gun law that made it difficult for law-abiding citizens to obtain a handgun carry permit outside their home in public for self-defense.

In an opinion penned by Justice Clarence Thomas, the court ruled 6-3 to strike down the New York law.

"Because the State of New York issues public-carry licenses only when an applicant demonstrates a special need for self-defense, we conclude that the State's licensing regime violates the Constitution," Thomas wrote for the court's 6-3 majority.

Here are six justices who supported the majority opinion:
  • Clarence Thomas
  • Samuel Alito
  • John Roberts
  • Brett Kavanaugh
  • Neil Gorsuch
  • Amy Coney Barrett
... and the three justices who dissented:
  • Stephen Breyer
  • Sonia Sotomayor
  • Elena Kagan
Thomas writes that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments safeguard Americans' right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home. This is a major expansion of the Second Amendment right.

The court holds that New York's "proper cause" requirement to obtain a concealed-carry license violates the Constitution by preventing law-abiding citizens with self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to defend themselves in public.


“In keeping with Heller, we hold that when the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. To justify its regulation, the government may not simply posit that the regulation promotes an important interest. Rather, the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only if a firearm regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s ‘unqualified command,’” Thomas wrote, quoting Konigsberg v. State Bar of California (1961).

Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a dissenting opinion, which Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined.

“In 2020, 45,222 Americans were killed by firearms. Since the start of this year (2022), there have been 277 reported mass shootings—an average of more than one per day. Gun violence has now surpassed motor vehicle crashes as the leading cause of death among children and adolescents. Many States have tried to address some of the dangers of gun violence just described by passing laws that limit, in various ways, who may purchase, carry, or use firearms of different kinds. The Court today severely burdens States’ efforts to do so.”
Justice Alito was having none of it...

And Justice Thomas had an interesting perspective for liberals to argue with...

The decision will have an eventual impact on New York and six other states with a similar "proper cause" (or "May Issue") requirement on the concealed carry of guns in public.



So how does this ruling affect those living in "May Issue" states?

It gives gun groups in those seven states a precedent to challenge the "May Issue" to overturn. Then, the law-abiding citizen can apply for concealed carry without being denied.

SCOTUSblog responds to the ruling by saying: "What a great day for our Constitution!"
 

TheSearcher

Are you sure about that?
Kyle Becker
@kylenabecker


This Supreme Court ruling is very good indeed. There is a passage in Justice Clarence Thomas' ruling that suggests the court would consider "red flag" laws to be unconstitutional.

"New York is not alone in requiring a permit to carry a handgun in public. But the vast majority of States—43 by our count—are 'shall issue' jurisdictions, where authorities must issue concealed-carry licenses..."
"... whenever applicants satisfy certain threshold requirements, without granting licensing officials discretion to deny licenses based on a perceived lack of need or suitability. Meanwhile, only six States and the District of Columbia have 'may issue' licensing laws..."

Thomas points out the "Proper cause" provision of such gun laws is unconstitutional. Critically, he bases his ruling not only on the 2A, but on the Fourteenth Amendment. It is inconceivable that "red flag" laws that may also violate the Fifth Amendment pass constitutoinal muster.
*This is the 'Proper Cause' that puts the onus on the petitioner to prove why he or she needs a firearm
10:11 AM · Jun 23, 2022·Twitter Web App
That man is so very smart. He just dropped a bear trap waiting for the gun legislation now in consideration. Very smooth move.
 

EMICT

Veteran Member
That man is so very smart. He just dropped a bear trap waiting for the gun legislation now in consideration. Very smooth move.
Rand Paul to Introduce Amendments to Senate Gun Bill
By Joseph Lord

June 23, 2022 Updated: June 23, 2022


Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) will put forward amendments to a Senate gun bill hammered out between Republicans and Democrats over weeks of closed-door negotiations.

The bill, coming in the wake of a school shooting in Uvalde, Texas that left 19 children and two adults dead, has received mixed reactions on Capitol Hill.

Some provisions have broad bipartisan support.

For example, the bill would allocate $15 billion to mental healthcare access and increasing school security, a measure that was particularly popular among Republicans. To offset these costs, the bill delays the implementation of a Medicare drug rebate program that proponents say will save the federal government $21 billion.

However, other measures, including measures to close the so-called “boyfriend loophole,” measures incentivizing states to adopt red-flag laws, and increasing background check requirements, have proven more controversial.

‘Concerned About Constitutional Deficiencies’

Paul excoriated the bill and announced his intention to put forward amendments in a June 22 tweet thread.

“No one wants to see guns in the hands of criminals, and no one wants to see tragedies like we saw recently in Texas,” Paul wrote. “I’m both a law-abiding gun owner, and a parent, and I want our schools and kids safe.

“While we have many laws in place to do that already, there should be things we can agree on as legislators to improve upon this. For example, I support legislation to include juvenile records of violent crimes to be included in background checks.

“Looking at the recent criminal past of anyone is a good idea before assessing gun ownership. However, that idea was paired with many questionable or bad ones in this legislation.

“I am concerned about constitutional deficiencies in many red flag laws,” Paul wrote.

Red flag laws, laws that enable courts to strip people of their constitutional rights to own a gun, have been a rallying cry for Second Amendment advocates for some time. The controversial laws have resulted in thousands of Americans being ordered not to possess guns because of concerns about their mental health.

Often, the accused are not given notification of an accusation or any chance to defend themselves against the charges until after their weapons have been confiscated.

“I cannot support any legislation that funds or encourages laws that allow ex parte gun confiscation without legal representation, or even sometimes without prior notification to the defendant of any accusation at all,” Paul wrote.

He continued: “I cannot support legislation that funds or encourages laws that allow gun confiscation with a standard lower than the constitutional criminal standard of ‘beyond a reasonable doubt.’ I cannot support legislation that funds or encourages gun confiscation predicated on anonymous accusations.”


Paul also called on other lawmakers to strip a provision of the compromise bill that would bar the use of funds to train and equip school personnel with firearms.

“I … think it unwise to prohibit the appropriated funds from being used for firearms or firearms training for any school personnel,” Paul said. “In fact, we should be doing the opposite, encouraging schools to train and arm proper personnel as desired and needed in their schools.”

“Unfortunately, this legislation was assembled as many are—in secret, absent well placed leaks to journalists,” Paul said, wrapping up the thread. “There doesn’t’ appear to be a willingness or time provided to read, understand, debate or amend this bill.”

“I will try anyway,” Paul concluded. “To this end, I will introduce amendments to correct the constitutional deficiencies of this bill and hope my colleagues and the Senate leadership will do the same.”

50 Democrats, 14 Republicans

On June 21, all 50 Democrats in the upper chamber were joined by 14 Republicans in advancing the bill, setting it up for a final vote later this week. The vote came only an hour or so after the final text of the bill was made public and available to lawmakers.

Paul is not the only lawmaker to criticize the haste to push the bill forward.

In a June 21 tweet, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) also blasted the dizzying turnaround time between the release and advancement of the bill.

“Here we are voting to move on a bill negotiated entirely behind closed doors, released only an hour ago, that no one has had time to fully read, that ignores the national crime wave & chips away instead at the fundamental rights of law abiding citizens. NO,” Hawley wrote.

Still, the bill seems all but certain to pass and has at least the 10 Republicans needed to overcome the 60-vote filibuster threshold pledged to support the bill.

Paul, who has often broken with party leadership over civil liberties and constitutional rights issues, has in the past made similar efforts to slow or stall progress on bills that he considers unconstitutional or ill-advised.

However, many of these efforts have floundered in bipartisan votes rejecting Paul’s amendments or proposals, as seems likely to happen with any amendment he offers to the gun bill.

 

Old Greek

Veteran Member
Biden "Deeply Disappointed" In SCOTUS Ruling On Open Carry
BY TYLER DURDEN
WEDNESDAY, JUN 22, 2022 - 11:11 PM

Update (1211ET): An hour after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a New York state law requiring people to show a special need (such as a business owner handling cash) to carry a handgun outside the home in public, the White House released a statement from President Biden saying he was "deeply disappointed" with the ruling that "contradicts both common sense and the Constitution, and should deeply trouble us all."

Here's the president's statement:



New York Governor Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, called the ruling "absolutely shocking."

New York City Mayor Eric Adams said officials will review licensing policies and how sensitive locations are defined, adding that "we cannot allow New York to become the Wild West."

Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the NRA, called the ruling "a watershed win" that resulted from a decades-long fight led by his organization.

* * *

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a New York state gun law that made it difficult for law-abiding citizens to obtain a handgun carry permit outside their home in public for self-defense.

In an opinion penned by Justice Clarence Thomas, the court ruled 6-3 to strike down the New York law.

"Because the State of New York issues public-carry licenses only when an applicant demonstrates a special need for self-defense, we conclude that the State's licensing regime violates the Constitution," Thomas wrote for the court's 6-3 majority.

Here are six justices who supported the majority opinion:
  • Clarence Thomas
  • Samuel Alito
  • John Roberts
  • Brett Kavanaugh
  • Neil Gorsuch
  • Amy Coney Barrett
... and the three justices who dissented:
  • Stephen Breyer
  • Sonia Sotomayor
  • Elena Kagan
Thomas writes that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments safeguard Americans' right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home. This is a major expansion of the Second Amendment right.

The court holds that New York's "proper cause" requirement to obtain a concealed-carry license violates the Constitution by preventing law-abiding citizens with self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to defend themselves in public.


“In keeping with Heller, we hold that when the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. To justify its regulation, the government may not simply posit that the regulation promotes an important interest. Rather, the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only if a firearm regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s ‘unqualified command,’” Thomas wrote, quoting Konigsberg v. State Bar of California (1961).

Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a dissenting opinion, which Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined.



Justice Alito was having none of it...

And Justice Thomas had an interesting perspective for liberals to argue with...

The decision will have an eventual impact on New York and six other states with a similar "proper cause" (or "May Issue") requirement on the concealed carry of guns in public.



So how does this ruling affect those living in "May Issue" states?

It gives gun groups in those seven states a precedent to challenge the "May Issue" to overturn. Then, the law-abiding citizen can apply for concealed carry without being denied.

SCOTUSblog responds to the ruling by saying: "What a great day for our Constitution!"
FJB
 

Milkweed Host

Veteran Member
Is that a rifle in your pants, or are you just glad to see me? :D
That can create some awkward situations.

When I was in my mid 30's, my wife and I ran into one of my female high school teachers, who
I also worked for as a teen. She was a very formal, educated lady. She wanted a group photo taken
of the four of us, her husband included (Also a great person).

Anyway, without warning my high school teacher pulled me in to her, thigh to thigh.
I felt my pocket gun push hard up against my thigh and wondered what was going through her mind
because she would have felt the same hardness?

I quickly pulled away, speechless. I could only think of two remarks, neither would have been appropriate.

Neither of us said a word about it.

A concealed carry surprise could be around next corner.
 

RB Martin

Veteran Member
Governor Kathy Hochul
@GovKathyHochul

26m

It is outrageous that at a moment of national reckoning on gun violence, the Supreme Court has recklessly struck down a New York law that limits those who can carry concealed weapons.
In response to this ruling, we are closely reviewing our options – including calling a special session of the legislature. Just as we swiftly passed nation-leading gun reform legislation, I will continue to do everything in my power to keep New Yorkers safe from gun violence.
What was this tyrant elected to? That's right NOTHING! She was appointed! :fgr:
 

eens

Nuns with Guns

“Nothing Changes Today” – Lawless NYC Mayor Eric Adams Promises to Ignore Supreme Court Ruling on Concealed Gun Laws
By Jim Hoft
Published June 23, 2022 at 1:05pm


The Supreme Court released its ruling on Thursday against New York’s law that includes strict rules for concealed carry in the state. Prior to this ruling, the state could decide who it wanted to have this right and who it didn’t. The Gateway Pundit reported on this case moments ago:
New York requires its residents to obtain a license for lawful possession of a firearm, regardless of whether they plan to keep it at home or take it outside. To obtain a license, a licensing officer must determine whether the applicant is of good moral character, lacks a history of crime or mental illness, and that “no good cause exists for the denial of the license.”
Applicants must also have “proper cause” to lawfully conceal carry a handgun—openly carrying a handgun is entirely banned. New York law leaves “proper cause” undefined, but courts have clarified that this standard means one must “demonstrate a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community or of persons engaged in the same profession.”
Merely having the “generalized desire” to conceal carry, according to the courts, “does not constitute ‘proper cause.’”
ABC 7 New York reported on the verdict:

The justices’ 6-3 decision is expected to ultimately allow more people to legally carry guns on the streets of the nation’s largest cities – including New York, Los Angeles and Boston – and elsewhere. About a quarter of the U.S. population lives in states expected to be affected by the ruling, the high court’s first major gun decision in more than a decade.

The ruling comes as Congress is actively working on gun legislation following recent mass shootings in Texas,New York and California.

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the majority that the Constitution protects “an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home.”

In their decision, the justices struck down a New York law requiring people to demonstrate a particular need for carrying a gun in order to get a license to carry one in public. The justices said the requirement violates the Second Amendment right to “keep and bear arms.”
Tyrannical and lawless New York City Mayor Eric Adams made an announcement following the release of the ruling.

Adams told New Yorkers, “Nothing changes today… It ignores the presence (sp) and it endangers our future.”
 

Macgyver

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Um,, why the emphasis on handguns? "Arms" includes rifles, shotguns, bows and arrows, knives, swords, etc.
Because he is referring to the NY case and I don't think NY allows cc of anything other than a handgun.
 

Raggedyman

Res ipsa loquitur
Adams told New Yorkers, “Nothing changes today… It ignores the presence (sp) and it endangers our future.”
this is but one example of a COMUNIST FVK that thinks of YOUR CONSTITUTION as a worthless scrap of paper. ROL is DEAD in AMERIKA. you and I and other conservatives are the ONLY ONES who continue to "play by the rules".
 

cyberiot

Workin' the plan.
This is a big win for freedom.

But a few years from now the Supreme Court could revisit this issue and change their ruling.
The new crop of judges appointed by the last administration is pretty young . . .

Gorsuch 54
Kavanagh 57
Coney-Barrett 50

I'm hoping the conservatives will hold the majority for a good while longer.

JusticeDate of BirthAppointed bySworn in
Clarence Thomas23 Jun 1948
Age: 74 yr 0 mo
George H. W. Bush23 Oct 1991
Served: 30 yr 8 mo
Ketanji Brown Jackson14 Sep 1970
Age: 51 yr 9 mo
Joseph Robinette "Joe" Biden, Jr.Confirmed on 7 April 2022, 53-47. Succeeds Stephen Breyer when he retires circa July 2022
John G. Roberts27 Jan 1955
Age: 67 yr 4 mo
George W. Bush29 Sep 2005
Served: 16 yr 8 mo
Samuel A. Alito, Jr.1 Apr 1950
Age: 72 yr 2 mo
George W. Bush31 Jan 2006
Served: 16 yr 4 mo
Sonia Sotomayor25 Jun 1954
Age: 67 yr 11 mo
Barack Obama8 Aug 2009
Served: 12 yr 10 mo
Elena Kagan28 Apr 1960
Age: 62 yr 1 mo
Barack Obama7 Aug 2010
Served: 11 yr 10 mo
Neil McGill Gorsuch29 Aug 1967
Age: 54 yr 9 mo
Donald John Trump10 Apr 2017
Served: 5 yr 2 mo
Brett Michael Kavanaugh12 Feb 1965
Age: 57 yr 4 mo
Donald John Trump6 Oct 2018
Served: 3 yr 8 mo
Amy Coney Barrett28 Jan 1972
Age: 50 yr 4 mo
Donald John Trump27 Oct 2020
Served: 1 yr 7 mo
 
Last edited:

Intestinal Fortitude

encouraging others
LOL!


Hollywood Celebrities Freak After SCOTUS Delivers Second Amendment Victory: ‘Truly Disgraceful Ruling’
5
Alberto E. Rodriguez; Jonathan Brady; Jamie McCarthy/Getty Images
Alberto E. Rodriguez; Jonathan Brady; Jamie McCarthy/Getty Images
David Ng23 Jun 202241

2:51


Hollywood celebrities are freaking out over the Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision on New York’s proper cause requirement for concealed carry permits, ruling that the state’s law is unconstitutional.

Stars including Julianne Moore, Barbra Streisand, Bette Midler, Whoopi Goldberg, George Takei, and Albert Brooks erupted in fury at the high court following Thursday’s announcement.

SCOTUS “has put the desires of the gun extremists over the safety of our children,” Julianne Moore said on Instagram.

The ruling represents “a middle finger to New York,” Whoopi Goldberg said on ABC’s The View.
“Truly a disgraceful ruling,” Barbra Streisand tweeted.

On Thursday, the Supreme Court struck down New York’s law requiring gun applicants to demonstrate “proper cause” to obtain a permit to carry a concealed handgun outside the home.

In a majority opinion written by Justice Clarence Thomas, the court said New York’s law was inconsistent with the Second Amendment. “We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need,” Justice Thomas wrote.

Thomas suggested other states with similar laws could be impacted by the court’s ruling.

“In 43 States, the government issues licenses to carry based on objective criteria,” he wrote. “But in six states, including New York, the government further conditions issuance of a license to carry on a citizen’s showing of some additional special need.”

New York-resident Julianne Moore, who is one of the entertainment industry’s biggest gun control activists, accused the high court of prioritizing “gun extremists” over children.

Fellow New Yorker Bette Midler tweeted “shame, shame, SHAME” on the “conservative” justices. She also called the high court “ridiculous” and “laughable.”


Brooklyn native but longtime Malibu resident Barbra Streisand called the ruling truly “disgraceful.”


Star Trek star George Takei also expressed his exasperation.


Rob Reiner accused the Supreme Court of making “death by firearms more convenient.”


Broadcast News star Albert Brooks suggested that the Supreme Court is out of touch with popular sentiment.


Bravo’s Top Chef host Padma Lakshmi demanded to know “how man people need to die?”


NBC’s The West Wing star Joshua Malina called the court’s ruling “sickening.”


MGM’s No Time to Die star Jeffrey Wright was also clearly unhappy with the ruling.


HBO’s The Wire star Wendell Pierce predicted New York will devolve in the Wild West.
 

NoDandy

Has No Life - Lives on TB
The left politicos want restrictions, and ultimately confiscation badly !!!

They want civilian possession abolished badly, because they have bad plans for us !!!
 

thompson

Certa Bonum Certamen
Cernovich
@Cernovich



DOJ does not issue statements like these disagreeing with Supreme Court rulings. It doesn’t happen. It has no lawful basis. This can only be seen as a direct threat against the judiciary by Stasi agents.

View attachment 346301
Very much agree with Cernovich. Also, this (snipped from post #155 on the big opinion day thread):

"It isn’t up to the DOJ to disagree — it’s supposed to be an objective, non-political entity enforcing the law. They’re not supposed to be making political comment."

--
By now, no one should doubt the DOJ has been politically weaponized.
 

jward

passin' thru
I guess the good news is now EVERYONE with eyes can see how deep the rot goes, eh?
now, will we condemn the building or continue to endanger everyone's lives by letting it continue to stand??
 

L.A.B.

Has No Life - Lives on TB
I'm not entirely sure the courts look at it that way. Otherwise, we could all carry shoulder-launched nukes.

View attachment 346290
No! Recall the challenge was to the “permit to hide a gun.”

Gonna take some Jedi mind tricks to hide a Remington bolt gun, EBR carbine.

The 2A is all about bearing arms. It doesn’t specify bearing as open or concealed carry.

Only punked uP lefty ‘incorporated states lawyers carrying an incorporated mindset’ that their subjects are perpetually involved in a commerce doctrine that disallows LAW OF THE LAND.
 

thompson

Certa Bonum Certamen

The Supreme Court Hands Down Major Gun Rights Victory

June 23, 2022
Jonathan Turley

As predicted, the Supreme Court handed down a momentous opinion in favor of Second Amendment rights today in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. In what will likely prove one of the most important decisions in his illustrious career as a conservative jurist, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a 6-3 majority opinion that brought greater clarity to this and future challenges under the Second Amendment.

In 2008, the Supreme Court recognized the right to bear arms as an individual right in District of Columbia v. Heller. Two years after Heller, in McDonald v. City of Chicago, the court ruled that this right applied against the states.

This case concerned concealed-carry restrictions under N.Y. Penal Law § 400.00(2)(f) that require a showing of “proper cause.” Lower courts upheld the New York law, but there were ample constitutional concerns over its vague standard, such as showing that you are “of good moral character.” New York wanted to exercise discretion in deciding who needs to carry guns in public while gun owners believe that the law flips the constitutional presumption in favor of such a right.

Thomas rejected the two-part analysis used by lower courts and held that the presumption must be in favor of the individual right to possess a handgun in public like other rights in the Bill of Rights. The Court held “consistent with Heller and McDonald, that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home.” Accordingly, “because the State of New York issues public-carry licenses only when an applicant demonstrates a special need for self-defense, we conclude that the State’s licensing regime violates the Constitution.”

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul immediately declared “Shocking, absolutely shocking that they have taken away our right to have reasonable restrictions.” The Claude Rain moment aside, it was shocking that Hochul would be shocked. Many of us were predicting a major loss for over a year and New York, as usual, litigated a bad case and made more bad law for gun control advocates.

Gov. Hochul added “This is New York. We don’t back down.” That may be welcomed news for gun rights advocates given the record in cases like this one in reinforcing Second Amendment rights. As previously discussed, New York has proven a fount of cases strengthening gun rights. [My note: The article he has linked is quite interesting and worth a read, IMO.]
 

Secamp32

Veteran Member
I'm so tired of these lying leftists. All this does is bring 5 states that restrict law abiding citizens from carrying into alignment with the 45 states that do. Do they think that the streets run red in every other state? All this BS is so tiring.
 

Ractivist

Pride comes before the fall.....Pride month ended.
I think an addendum with the truths behind the need to be armed to stop government tyranny would of been space well served. We need to make sure the law recognizes the 2A is as much about defending the nation from enemies within, as one's home, as they are both one and the same. High capacity rifles are an important part of defending our nation from enemies, foreign or domestic......this needs to be addressed from the roof tops.
 

vector7

Veteran Member
An armed robber confronted a Dollar Store clerk with gun. The clerk shot him dead. The armed robbers siblings say that the CLERK shouldn’t have brought a gun to work.

Whenever you see stories like this, you feel a twinge of sympathy for the family that lost someone, but after you listen to them, you also realize that way of thinking is what led to their family member becoming a violent criminal in the first place.
RT 1:25secs
View: https://twitter.com/johnhawkinsrwn/status/1540056828993740809?s=20&t=fiLJA5q-PkjzpDKo34ro1g
 
Top