“The political is reducible to the existential distinction between friend and enemy. This distinction arises from the fact of human diversity: identities and practices, beliefs and way of life can, in principle, be in conflict with one another.”
-
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.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/Pioneer Valley Arms February Giveaway ***Smith & Wesson SD9VE 9MM***
Supreme Court - NYSRPA v. Bruen - Megathread
- Thread starter soloman02
- Start date
“The political is reducible to the existential distinction between friend and enemy. This distinction arises from the fact of human diversity: identities and practices, beliefs and way of life can, in principle, be in conflict with one another.”
VetteGirlMA
NES Member
So if I choose to check out and be apolitical the world is doomed? Because I think the 2 tribes are perfectly capable of annihilation without me cheering anyone on. Like so many people my life is nuanced. There are group things I like and individual things I like. Obviously I really like guns and what that means for individual freedom. I don't want to be part of a bee hive where my job is watching other bees making bees wax all day. Likewise I'm not sure I want to be the black widow spider, but since each tribe is an all or nothing proposition I'll take black widow for $200.
ReggieB9mm
NES Member
When you have exhausted all possibilities, remember, you haven’t.
Dennis in MA
NES Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2007
- Messages
- 40,810
- Likes
- 36,304
No. It isn't. It's completely depressing from start to finish. So bleak. I mean, I'd watch The Road to cheer myself up after watching the original Mad Max.
Then the quasi-homosexual undertones are just strange. I don't think that was intended. I think that Australia just has different. . . . dress codes in general. It colored the other movies making them a bit gay.
But damn. The leather. The head cop guy with his bald head, gay mustache and wandering around all the time bare-chested. WTF?????? Even Max's wife looks a bit mannish. LOL
SteelShooter
NES Member
That's funny, I always thought it was supposed to be an all male movie, if you know what I mean.
The singer Goose picks up at the bar.
Cap'n Mike
NES Member
To each his own.
I just watch the opening chase seen over and over.
View: https://youtu.be/EDRU935EqAU
Dennis in MA
NES Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2007
- Messages
- 40,810
- Likes
- 36,304
Oh no doubt. But as bleakness goes, it just cranks up from there. I also enjoy the opening minutes of the film. It's silly, but it's good action fun. The NR starting to cry b/c Max is chasing him. ROFL!!!! C'mon. That's what makes it so bad while being so good.
That whole movie is like that. Just some stuff that is so oddly overbearing. I'm not sure if it's Australian or just bad cinema. Like the entire soundtrack. It's like it's a riff on Planet of the Apes. It's not complimentary - it gets in the way all the time. And the costuming. THE FREAKING COSTUMING! And the bad B-movie dialog all over. Road Warrior, with a much much much much bigger budget (and even more homosexual overtones) was better written by far and I'm not really a fan of that one. LOL
At the end of the day, it's got 3 parts. The first chase. The middle which is meaningless. And his wife and baby are killed and he goes on a rampage. The middle is meaningless. The end sucks ass. So you get that first 10 min or so. And then you can shut it off.
Cap'n Mike
NES Member
Your not wrong.
I saw it and The Road Warrior as a teenager, so i was very impressionable. The bleakness of both movies certainly effected my outlook on life.
The making of Mad Max was fascinating. Shoestring budget and guerrilla filming on the roads around Melbourne. Thats actualy George Millers Van that gets wiped out in the opening chase. Up until the blair witch project, it held the record for least money spent on a film vs boxoffice gross.
I couldn’t stand him either. But the last couple years he has been spot on at predicting where things are going and what the outcomes will be on certain legislation. Scary good, in my opinion.
MaverickNH
NES Member
Litigation Highlight: Antonyuk v. Bruen | Duke Center for Firearms Law
“10 days after New York passed a set of revised licensing and gun laws post-Bruen (known colloquially as the Concealed Carry Improvement Act, or CCIA), those laws were challenged in federal court. The case is Antonyuk et al. v. Bruen, Docket No. 1:22-cv-00734 in the Northern District of New York. Chief Judge Glenn T. Suddaby is presiding over the case.
In a 37-page complaint, the plaintiffs—Ivan Antonyuk (who lives in Schenectady County, NY), Gun Owners of America, Inc., Gun Owners Foundation, and Gun Owners of America New York, Inc.—challenged most aspects of New York’s revised gun laws, including: the “good moral character” requirement (which long pre-dates Bruen); the requirement that applicants attend an in-person interview and submit character references and a list of social media accounts; New York’s sensitive-places prohibition; New York’s default rule that guns are prohibited on private property unless explicitly allowed; and the time and cost of New York’s training requirements. The complaint asserts § 1983 claims under both the First and Second Amendments.
After filing their complaint on July 11, the plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction on July 20. The state subsequently requested additional time to respond to the PI motion. Judge Suddaby granted that motion in part and set the following briefing schedule, noting that the CCIA is set to take effect on September 1: defendant’s response was due on August 15, plaintiffs’ reply is due on August 22, and the preliminary injunction hearing is set for August 23. New York subsequently requested, and was granted, leave to file a response brief longer than the court’s default page limi… New York filed its 65-page response brief (attaching 54 exhibits) on August 15…
The briefs illustrate a fundamental disagreement over Bruen’s stance on shall-issue regimes that retain some discretionary elements.”
The same Court has not been a friend of RKBA, so it’ll be an uphill battle.
BREAKING: Federal Court Dismisses Challenge to New York’s Landmark Gun Industry Accountability Law
Everytown Filed an Amicus Brief in the Case with Other Local and National Gun Violence Prevention Groups NEW YORK – Today, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of …
www.everytown.org
SFC13557
NES Member
And so it begins.
California Declares The Supreme Court's Bruen Decision Has No Impact. Subjective good moral standards and character references.
View: https://youtu.be/RvqyZZSPP3A
View: https://youtu.be/RvqyZZSPP3A
Garys
NES Member
Emergency rule that provides guidance to gun licenses applicants
Emergency rule that provides guidance to gun licenses applicants.
www1.nyc.gov
There is a link there to download the entire notice.
Well Harry Reid made a similar mistake. Did anyone learn from it? The end result was entirely predictable too. I tend to agree that court packing is a bridge too far to happen.
rep308
NES Member
More madness to get a license in NYC:
www.nydailynews.com
The license fee is $340. The new state laws will require people seeking concealed carry permits to pass training courses, and bans guns in broadly-defined “sensitive locations” that essentially make possessing a firearm illegal in nearly every public place in the city.
NYPD issues ’emergency rules’ on concealed-carry gun licenses to obey Supreme Court ruling
New Yorkers whose bids for concealed-carry gun licenses were recently rejected by the NYPD will have a shot to apply again — but they’ll need to act by mid-October. People seeking licen…
www.nydailynews.com
The license fee is $340. The new state laws will require people seeking concealed carry permits to pass training courses, and bans guns in broadly-defined “sensitive locations” that essentially make possessing a firearm illegal in nearly every public place in the city.
headednorth
NES Member
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 28,940
- Likes
- 55,550
"Sorry White guys, nothing personal "- Biden administration
Rob Boudrie
NES Member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 48,972
- Likes
- 36,457
And binding signage is required granting permission to enter a private business open to the public armed, rendering upstate licensed that used to be pretty much "all but schools" nearly useless for everyday carry.More madness to get a license in NYC:
NYPD issues ’emergency rules’ on concealed-carry gun licenses to obey Supreme Court ruling
New Yorkers whose bids for concealed-carry gun licenses were recently rejected by the NYPD will have a shot to apply again — but they’ll need to act by mid-October. People seeking licen…
The license fee is $340. The new state laws will require people seeking concealed carry permits to pass training courses, and bans guns in broadly-defined “sensitive locations” that essentially make possessing a firearm illegal in nearly every public place in the city.
More madness to get a license in NYC:
NYPD issues ’emergency rules’ on concealed-carry gun licenses to obey Supreme Court ruling
New Yorkers whose bids for concealed-carry gun licenses were recently rejected by the NYPD will have a shot to apply again — but they’ll need to act by mid-October. People seeking licen…
The license fee is $340. The new state laws will require people seeking concealed carry permits to pass training courses, and bans guns in broadly-defined “sensitive locations” that essentially make possessing a firearm illegal in nearly every public place in the city.
Good! Keep it coming, NYC/NYS! The sooner the better! Let's keep this party rolling.
Mesatchornug
NES Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2011
- Messages
- 13,248
- Likes
- 27,606
Last edited:
MaverickNH
NES Member
Ninth Circuit Sends the Hawaii Concealed Carry Challenge Back Down to District Court
The en banc panel majority (seven judges) ordered today, in Young v. Hawaii: The Supreme Court vacated the judgment of this Court, 992 F.3d 765, and has
reason.com
Federal Footdragging…
"Like all such schemes, Hawaii's "may-issue" permitting law, section 134-9, infringes the right of Young, a law-abiding responsible citizen, to carry a handgun in public for the purpose of self-defense. Young has indeed stated a claim that section 134-9 violates the Fourteenth Amendment by depriving him of the right protected by the Second Amendment.
Our Court should say so. We are bound, now, by Bruen, so there is no good reason why we could not issue a narrow, unanimous opinion in this case. The traditional justifications for remand are absent here. The issue before us is purely legal, and not one that requires further factual development. The majority does not explain, nor can it justify, its decision to remand this case to the district court without any guidance. Yet in its terse order and unwritten opinion, the majority seems to reveal a hidden rule in our Circuit: Second Amendment claims are not to be taken seriously. I would prefer to apply the binding decisions of the Supreme Court to the case at hand."
inkdesigner
NES Member
I don't think its foot dragging. By remanding to the district court, they are giving them the opportunity to change the ruling in such a way that will only be binding in that state, NOT the entire Circuit, thereby forcing folks in individual states to have to sue for their constitutional rights
And this is a problem. It takes money to fight these things, more if you can't rely on a good precedent. What they are doing is keeping those who can't pay from exercising their rights.
Yeah.
That's why it's "foot-dragging:" because it results in a longer and more obstructive process. I'd say that's the very definition of foot-dragging, in that it takes an outcome everyone knows is inevitable and deliberately delays it out of spite or ideology.
Ninth Circuit Sends the Hawaii Concealed Carry Challenge Back Down to District Court
The en banc panel majority (seven judges) ordered today, in Young v. Hawaii: The Supreme Court vacated the judgment of this Court, 992 F.3d 765, and has
Federal Footdragging…
"Like all such schemes, Hawaii's "may-issue" permitting law, section 134-9, infringes the right of Young, a law-abiding responsible citizen, to carry a handgun in public for the purpose of self-defense. Young has indeed stated a claim that section 134-9 violates the Fourteenth Amendment by depriving him of the right protected by the Second Amendment.
Our Court should say so. We are bound, now, by Bruen, so there is no good reason why we could not issue a narrow, unanimous opinion in this case. The traditional justifications for remand are absent here. The issue before us is purely legal, and not one that requires further factual development. The majority does not explain, nor can it justify, its decision to remand this case to the district court without any guidance. Yet in its terse order and unwritten opinion, the majority seems to reveal a hidden rule in our Circuit: Second Amendment claims are not to be taken seriously. I would prefer to apply the binding decisions of the Supreme Court to the case at hand."
View: https://youtu.be/oqoClZPWtFk
Supreme Court's 6-3 Decision Creates An End To California Ammo Ban
View: https://youtu.be/YbbWkfGbhnY
View: https://youtu.be/YbbWkfGbhnY
Dennis in MA
NES Member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2007
- Messages
- 40,810
- Likes
- 36,304
More madness to get a license in NYC:
NYPD issues ’emergency rules’ on concealed-carry gun licenses to obey Supreme Court ruling
New Yorkers whose bids for concealed-carry gun licenses were recently rejected by the NYPD will have a shot to apply again — but they’ll need to act by mid-October. People seeking licen…
The license fee is $340. The new state laws will require people seeking concealed carry permits to pass training courses, and bans guns in broadly-defined “sensitive locations” that essentially make possessing a firearm illegal in nearly every public place in the city.
They just don't get it. I guess this is how Alabama was in the early 60's. "We're not gonna do it. We're JUST NOT GONNA DO IT!" Ummmmm, it's now settled law, you dufii. (Plural of dufus.) Reversing this one is impossible as it rests on other settled law. So these states are mega-screwed and this will only lead to FURTHER iron-clad clarifications and possible Con-Carry sooner than later.
Similar threads
