- Joined
- Jun 3, 2019
- Messages
- 420
- Likes
- 784
-
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
HARRYM
NES Member
It's all Liberal States. The Constitution is a Federal Document and under the jurisdiction of Federal Law. Leftist States and Leftist Judges actually understand this very clearly. In order to ignore it the Leftist States and Leftist Judges have ruled the 2A is not an Individual right and therefore Individual gun rights are controlled by the states....yes, I know, Heller stated it does apply to individuals but Leftist States and their courts just ignore it. How it changes will revolve around SCOTUS growing a spine.
It is about building a solid base of case law on low hanging 2A fruit before tackling larger 2A issues. Much easier to get judges to rule for 2A on small issues rather than taking on an entire shit bill some of these blue states have passed in recent years where a judge can use intermediate scrutiny to uphold what ever gun bans the state wants to enact.
If they weren’t also pursuing many other avenues around the country, I’d be concerned. But they are.
It is also a good time to tackle this one because of the 18-20 handgun restriction lawsuits going on in various circuits.
Yes, there are many pieces to Ch135 that need to be challenged. But they’ll unfortunately need to be tackled piece by piece.
It is not JUST "right to carry", implying handguns. This is also for all semi-autos, which affects hunting with .22's, shotguns, and other guns. Let alone the preposterous Constitutionality of it!
My girl could hardly wait to turn 21, and got her LTC class and license within a month, coming in just before the crazy new laws last year. MANY young people were left hanging out there.
What does a kid do if they are 17, and own a 10/22?
Nothing. The law doesn’t affect them, it only applies to those who get their FID after the law took effect
DarthRevan
NES Member
It’s one of the few things not delayed enforcement
OK. Semantics. So what about a kid who TURNS 16 or 17, and now wants a 10/22 or Savage A22?
You already know the answer to this. They can't have one.
Right. That is the answer for GaryS, who said "suing to give 18‐20 year olds the right to carry seems odd". Not odd at all.
pastera
NES Member
Once you look at the big picture it isn't.
Snope and Ocean State are up for Cert. Therefore exactly zero will happen with AWB or LCFD bans until those are adjudicated.
Red flag laws are 100% a losing issue in the 1st circuit - no need to waste money and expertise. In addition we don't want to close off any avenue of attack.
The 18-20 year old doesn't matter if we win or lose.
Win - awesome
Lose - clear circuit split with the 5th on a fundamental right and off to scotus.
The idea is to take on cases that allow you to progress win or lose.
pastera
NES Member
Show me where post Rahimi where an individual not adjudicated a danger to self or society does not enjoy an individual right to keep and bear arms.
SCOTUS has been very clear on this - the only contention is thr age at which a person gains access to those rights.
And history gives a very clear answer to this question.
pastera
NES Member
The same exact thing as before
Under 18 cannot purchase so it is up to the parents or guardians.
As far as possession, that's a future question after the 18-20 question is completed then we can answer the question for those who have not reached the age of majority.
pastera
NES Member
Nothing because at 17 they don't personally own that gun, their parent or guardian does since they haven't reached the age of majority.
While this seems to be a slam dunk win, we aren't even close to having the case law in place to win.
First step is to get 18-20 validated as solidly part of the body politic and therefore able to enjoy the full panoply of rights.
Once that is done, then we show that those under 18 also enjoy their civil rights as held by their parents or guardians.
Whoops. Forgot about purchase versus possess. Thank you.
Mark Smith (Four Boxes Diner) opines on the challenge to MA's 18-20 year old ban on buying guns.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3I27tTW124
America's main gun rights groups have just filed big 2A challenge to Massachusetts gun control laws. Mark Smith Four Boxes Diner discusses...
Side note: Really wish he'd loose the stupid "Breaking News" banner for things that are not breaking. He overuses it, putting it on many if not most of his videos, and is doing it just for clicks.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3I27tTW124
America's main gun rights groups have just filed big 2A challenge to Massachusetts gun control laws. Mark Smith Four Boxes Diner discusses...
Side note: Really wish he'd loose the stupid "Breaking News" banner for things that are not breaking. He overuses it, putting it on many if not most of his videos, and is doing it just for clicks.
aphextwin11
NES Member
- Joined
- May 21, 2022
- Messages
- 202
- Likes
- 531
I've been following mark for quite a while. I've seen him use stuff like this only more recently. If I were to guess, it's because he constantly wins awards and recognition for being the most influential/effective voice of the 2A but doesn't really have the subscriber base or views to show for it. I think this is a cheap way of grabbing eyeballs, but I agree - IMO it's cheesy and stupid and he doesn't need to do it.
The silver lining is the content though, he is always really good about explaining things in-depth (unlike for example, the armed scholar), and i have to credit him for most of the civics knowledge gains I've made on the topic. Washington gun law channel is also fantastic.
Similar threads
