Supreme Court - NYSRPA v. Bruen - Megathread

Rating - 100%
39   0   0
Joined
Feb 17, 2008
Messages
5,024
Likes
6,095
Location
SE MA
Another gem from the State of New York trying to defend their law - they cite a law from the 1200's as basis for history of limiting carrying of arms:

"It provided that, with some exceptions, Englishmen could not “come before the King’s Justices, or other of the King’s Min- isters doing their office, with force and arms, nor bring no force in affray of the peace, nor to go nor ride armed by night nor by day, in Fairs, Markets, nor in the presence of the Justices or other Ministers, nor in no part elsewhere, upon pain to forfeit their Armour to the King, and their Bodies to Prison at the King’s pleasure.” 2 Edw. 3 c. 3 (1328).

Respondents argue that the prohibition on “rid[ing]” or “go[ing] . . . armed” was a sweeping restriction on public carry of self-defense weapons that would ultimately be adopted in Colonial America and justify onerous public- carry regulations. Notwithstanding the ink the parties spill over this provision, the Statute of Northampton—at least as it was understood during the Middle Ages—has little bearing on the Second Amendment adopted in 1791. The Statute of Northampton was enacted nearly 20 years before the Black Death, more than 200 years before the birth of Shakespeare, more than 350 years before the Salem Witch Trials, more than 450 years before the ratification of the Constitution, and nearly 550 years before the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment."

Ha!
Well, if they go far back enough, they'll find laws that stated slavery was legal and kings can sentence you to death on a whim.
 

Tartakovsky

NES Member
Rating - 100%
34   0   0
Joined
Mar 9, 2009
Messages
821
Likes
2,315
Location
MA, NH
"Most of the crowd at SCOTUS is celebrating the decision....they are blowing bubbles lol. No sign of any moonbat bulldog dykes yet."

I've seen a bunch of DB's with tape over their mouths saying, "I'm a 2nd class citizen" and DB's with Tshirts saying "I'm a Vagina Voter". I don't think these DB's would ever have the need for an abortion. Oops, all the Dem Congress critters are out walking around to stir up the crowd. They're good little apparatchiks. From what I understand MS didn't BAN abortion, just after 15 weeks. Am I correct?
Newt.gif
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Aug 2, 2019
Messages
2,245
Likes
2,763
Location
Central Ma.
The new Liberal battle cry seems to be it's a "Trump/McConnell" Court. Like I said, the ghost of Donald Trump will torture the Libs for years to come. If the Court decides in favor of the HS football coach and school prayer they'll totally lose their minds. Be prepared for a violent night tonight, keep your powder dry.
 

Tartakovsky

NES Member
Rating - 100%
34   0   0
Joined
Mar 9, 2009
Messages
821
Likes
2,315
Location
MA, NH
The new Liberal battle cry seems to be it's a "Trump/McConnell" Court. Like I said, the ghost of Donald Trump will torture the Libs for years to come. If the Court decides in favor of the HS football coach and school prayer they'll totally lose their minds. Be prepared for a violent night tonight, keep your powder dry.
Don't call them liberals. They are leftists. The leftists hate and want to destroy our country. Liberals love America and want to make it better for the people.
 

Bladerunner

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Messages
2,306
Likes
7,273
The new Liberal battle cry seems to be it's a "Trump/McConnell" Court. Like I said, the ghost of Donald Trump will torture the Libs for years to come. If the Court decides in favor of the HS football coach and school prayer they'll totally lose their minds. Be prepared for a violent night tonight, keep your powder dry.
It's the MAGA court. Gotta love the grasping at straws attempt at narrative control.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Aug 2, 2019
Messages
2,245
Likes
2,763
Location
Central Ma.
"Well, if they go far back enough, they'll find laws that stated slavery was legal and kings can sentence you to death on a whim."

You are correct, selective history.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Aug 2, 2019
Messages
2,245
Likes
2,763
Location
Central Ma.
"Don't call them liberals. They are leftists. The leftists hate and want to destroy our country. Liberals love America and want to make it better for the people."

You are correct but they call themselves Liberals.
 

Mesatchornug

Instructor
NES Member
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Dec 11, 2011
Messages
7,330
Likes
12,913
Location
People's Republik
"Don't call them liberals. They are leftists. The leftists hate and want to destroy our country. Liberals love America and want to make it better for the people."

You are correct but they call themselves Liberals.
So don't let them. Remind them that liberals love liberty.
 

Bladerunner

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Messages
2,306
Likes
7,273
Can we give this man a big posthumous round of applause for changing the fillibuster rules, thus unleashing a cascading series of events that has culminated with one of the most glorious, pro-freedom SCOTUS rulings in recent memory?

Come on, give it up for Harry "Pinky" Reid ladies and gentleman:

1656087065396.png
 

Picton

NES Member
Rating - 100%
35   0   0
Joined
Sep 17, 2012
Messages
23,401
Likes
39,430
Location
MA
The new Liberal battle cry seems to be it's a "Trump/McConnell" Court. Like I said, the ghost of Donald Trump will torture the Libs for years to come. If the Court decides in favor of the HS football coach and school prayer they'll totally lose their minds. Be prepared for a violent night tonight, keep your powder dry.

I think of it as the Trump Court too. Because that's why I voted for him: two Justices. We got three, and I'm overjoyed about it.
 

Tartakovsky

NES Member
Rating - 100%
34   0   0
Joined
Mar 9, 2009
Messages
821
Likes
2,315
Location
MA, NH
"Don't call them liberals. They are leftists. The leftists hate and want to destroy our country. Liberals love America and want to make it better for the people."

You are correct but they call themselves Liberals.
That's because they're morons. They are too dumb and too ignorant to know what they are. Case in point - they support government overreach and corporatism from companies like Apple and Starbucks. What kind of f***ing liberal supports those? These kind of morons, that's who. They're all ignorant, tone deaf morons with zero self-awareness. Can you actually imagine 60s and 70s liberals going along with federal mandates for a vaccine? f*** no. Some how the party of "my body my choice" became the party of "do what the government and big pharma tell you".
 

Waher

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 2, 2014
Messages
24,991
Likes
49,800
Location
☦️ Boston Gun & Rifle and Braintree Rifle & Pistol
The next few weeks will be interesting. There were mag limit cases pending cert at SCOTUS from NJ and CA (3rd and 9th circuit ), an open carry license case from Hawaii (young, the 9th) and an AWB case from MD (4th circuit).

Does SCOTUS take one of them, deny cert allowing the lower court decision to stand or return to the lower court with instructions based on the NYSRPA case?

That will tell us a lot.
I'm wondering if NY and other scumbag states flipping the bird at SCotUS might encourage the court to take up some of these other cases to reinforce WE MEANT WHAT WE JUST SAID
 

Tartakovsky

NES Member
Rating - 100%
34   0   0
Joined
Mar 9, 2009
Messages
821
Likes
2,315
Location
MA, NH
Can we give this man a big posthumous round of applause for changing the fillibuster rules, thus unleashing a cascading series of events that has culminated with one of the most glorious, pro-freedom SCOTUS rulings in recent memory?

Come on, give it up for Harry "Pinky" Reid ladies and gentleman:

View attachment 630078
Holy shit, Harry Reid died last year? Totally missed that one. (Missed the news, not him)
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Aug 2, 2019
Messages
2,245
Likes
2,763
Location
Central Ma.
"So don't let them. Remind them that liberals love liberty."

I try not to talk to them because they're brainwashed zealots who don't know shit about anything.

Wow, Dementia Joe just stated the MAGA court just took away a Constitutional right for woman to have an abortion but yesterday claimed citizens don't have a right to carry a concealed weapon. 🤬 What a moron!
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Aug 2, 2019
Messages
2,245
Likes
2,763
Location
Central Ma.
That's because they're morons. They are too dumb and too ignorant to know what they are. Case in point - they support government overreach and corporatism from companies like Apple and Starbucks. What kind of f***ing liberal supports those? These kind of morons, that's who. They're all ignorant, tone deaf morons with zero self-awareness. Can you actually imagine 60s and 70s liberals going along with federal mandates for a vaccine? f*** no. Some how the party of "my body my choice" became the party of "do what the government and big pharma tell you".
Only when they're in power.
 

Mesatchornug

Instructor
NES Member
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Dec 11, 2011
Messages
7,330
Likes
12,913
Location
People's Republik
Actually now that I think about it, wouldn't the first thing that happens is that FIDs go away since a permit is now a License To Carry arms period?
Would be nice.

If we recognize there's a license requirement for long guns, and that under 21s can legally purchase such, it seems there's a legitimate argument for their continuation...
 

beaker

NES Member
Rating - 100%
25   0   0
Joined
Jun 30, 2009
Messages
11,611
Likes
8,564
Location
LV-426
Get it out of your head - they are NOT going to take the House and Senate back. It's going to be a Donk romp... in furtherance of both The Great Reset and the humiliation of the American electorate.

Many - even Ann Coulter etc and NESers like @Hoover - have put forth the proposition that the 2020 election was NOT stolen via cheating, but Cuz Trump. There will be no such excuse in 2022. They're going to steal it, and they're going to rub your noses in it.
I dont think there is enough ways to cheat in the mid terms due to the number of voters that hate Brandon more than Trump, and how many people who are former hate Trump because news says so are now aware that all of that was a lie and want $2.00 gas again. So dems will lose both the house and senate by wide margins in November. I just hope enough Patriots are in office to take control away from the RINOs. Coulter got smacked by Trump and has hated him ever since. Like Ben Shapiro they use their platforms to diminish Trump at every turn because they dont want him in office. So dismiss any criticism of any of these conservative talking heads that have lost their objectivity
 

Talon3

NES Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Sep 3, 2006
Messages
654
Likes
287
Location
Inside the State
How about hunting restrictions?

In MA you can’t carry a handgun while deer hunting. You surrender that right while hunting.

I never understood how they can say you can’t have a handgun while in the woods just because you’re hunting deer. But then again it is MA.

Interesting thought, that is a wildlife conservation law. While it only applies to hunters, as an anti poacher measure. If not hunting then it should not apply. Similar how cdl laws apply to cdl holders with driving a cmv. Only while engaged in that activity is thw person subject to the condition. This means by agreeing to the hunter ed, purchasing a hunting license you voluntarily agree to the rules and regulations on file.
Like the implied consent law when obtaining a license. By accepting a license you give consent to a field sobriety test and breath chemical test if requested by law enforcement. If the consent is refused the license is suspended. You agree to those terms legally. Your choice is to not apply for accept and obtain a license. Same as choice is to not accept a hunting license.
Obtain the document means agreeing to the rules and stipulations spelled out.
 

Rob Boudrie

NES Member
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
42,907
Likes
24,544
Like the implied consent law when obtaining a license. By accepting a license you give consent to a field sobriety test and breath chemical test if requested by law enforcement. If the consent is refused the license is suspended.
I believe MA implied consent does not apply to field tests, only to the evidence quality BAC test (generally a breath test back at the station). You license will be pulled for refusing the later, but not the former.
 
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Jan 22, 2013
Messages
13,326
Likes
6,629
Get it out of your head - they are NOT going to take the House and Senate back. It's going to be a Donk romp... in furtherance of both The Great Reset and the humiliation of the American electorate.

Many - even Ann Coulter etc and NESers like @Hoover - have put forth the proposition that the 2020 election was NOT stolen via cheating, but Cuz Trump. There will be no such excuse in 2022. They're going to steal it, and they're going to rub your noses in it.

Democrats controlled Virginia completely in 2021. If they could rig votes, they would have rigged VA.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Aug 2, 2019
Messages
2,245
Likes
2,763
Location
Central Ma.

The Supreme Court Vindicates the Second Amendment​

A 6-3 majority recognizes a right to carry guns in public for self-defense.​

Editorial from today's WSJ.

"The Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling Thursday on gun rights boils down to this: The Second Amendment doesn’t disappear when you walk out your front door. Stated that way, it sounds obvious, but many appeals judges have disagreed. For a frustrating decade, the Supreme Court was too gun-shy to set them straight, but Justice Clarence Thomas’s majority opinion was worth the wait.

***​

New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen challenged the Empire State’s regulations on carrying a firearm in public. Open carry in New York is banned. With certain exceptions, such as for judges, getting a permit to carry a handgun that’s concealed requires demonstrating “proper cause.” That has been interpreted to mean “a special need” for self-defense, beyond that of “the general community or of persons engaged in the same profession.”

In other words, shopkeepers who must carry cash through high-crime neighborhoods are out of luck. But as Justice Thomas points out, the Constitution protects a right not only to “keep” but also to “bear” arms. “Most gun owners do not wear a holstered pistol at their hip in their bedroom or while sitting at the dinner table,” he writes. “To confine the right to ‘bear’ arms to the home would nullify half of the Second Amendment’s operative protections.”

This does not mean urban America will soon resemble the Wild West. Forty-three states, Justice Thomas says, already have “shall issue” regimes, meaning carry permits are available to everyone who meets objective criteria. That process can be rigorous and might include fingerprinting, firearms training, background checks, and so forth. A concurring opinion by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, stresses that the Court is not calling such rules into question.

What’s unconstitutional is that six states—New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Massachusetts, California and Hawaii—offer residents no clear path to carry a gun to defend themselves. As Justice Thomas says: “The Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home.” Those states can still regulate carry permits, but they can’t deny such permits to law-abiding citizens.

This is a landmark holding. In Heller (2008) the Court recognized the Second Amendment as an individual right. Then for a decade it stood by as appeals courts upheld gun restrictions that eroded Heller. Lower-court judges, Justice Thomas says, err when they try to balance state interests in gun laws against the burden on the Second Amendment. This forces judges to make empirical judgments, and he says it’s “inconsistent with Heller’s historical approach and its rejection of means-end scrutiny.”

To uphold a gun restriction, Justice Thomas says, the government must show that it is “consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.” He then surveys the history of gun limitations before and after the Founding. “None of these historical limitations on the right to bear arms approach New York’s proper-cause requirement,” Justice Thomas concludes, “because none operated to prevent law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from carrying arms in public for that purpose.”

He acknowledges a few counterexamples but says the weight of the evidence is against New York. This is the right originalist analysis: What did the Second Amendment mean to the people who passed it?

This rejection of a balancing test for regulations that trespass on the “core” of a constitutional right ought to discipline lower-court judges. And it has implications for other rights, not least campaign-finance restrictions that run afoul of the First Amendment.

Dissenting for the three liberals, Justice Stephen Breyer recounts grim statistics. “In 2020, 45,222 Americans were killed by firearms,” he says. In his view, the majority “refuses to consider the government interests that justify a challenged gun regulation, regardless of how compelling.” Yet officials are far from shackled. They can strengthen background checks, as the U.S. Senate is poised to do. States can add red-flag laws. Prosecutors can make the effort to go after straw purchasers.

How high can the regulatory bar be raised for a carry permit? The Supreme Court might need to clarify if states like New York respond to Bruen by demanding a $5,000 fee and 1,000 hours of training. For now it’s enough that six Justices agree: States can’t tell Americans who fear for their safety that there’s no legal way they can carry a weapon for defense."
 
Top Bottom