Posted on 07/26/2021 7:42:08 PM PDT by DoodleBob
Today, only eight states including New York are “may issue” for gun carry permits — meaning government officials “may issue” permits to applicants but are not required to (and hardly ever) do so. Litigation over what the Second Amendment means and requires is mostly limited to those states who are ruled by mega-cities. A law-abiding citizen who passes a background check in those states is still subject to a discretionary and random government decision about whether that person has “proper cause” to carry a firearm for self-defense.
That means New Yorkers must distinguish themselves from their fellow citizens and be rationed a constitutional right by bureaucrats. In New York, gun licenses are restricted, expensive and the process is riddled with politics and bribery, making licenses inaccessible to most. This led to the judicial saga now before the U.S. Supreme Court of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (NYSRPA) v. Corlett and a fundamental question for the Court to answer — is the Second Amendment a right of the people, or a privilege of the elite?
...
In NYSRPA v. Corlett, Second Amendment opponents fear the court might expound on the standard of review in Second Amendment cases, instead of the seeming rubber-stamp approach of lower courts upholding most useless firearms restrictions that primarily impact law-abiding persons. The ruling could also confirm that the right to bear arms extends outside of the home, which should be a no-brainer. The other freedoms in the Bill of Rights — speech, religion, etc. — do not end at a citizen’s front door, nor should the Second Amendment.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
It’s the Roberts court.
Don’t get your hopes up.
Bttt
From Federalist #29 (Alexander Hamilton):
``The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious, if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice...Hamilton clearly expected the militia to be assembled outdoors to practice their proficiency with their arms.To attempt a thing which would abridge the mass of labor and industry to so considerable an extent, would be unwise: and the experiment, if made, could not succeed, because it would not long be endured.
Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year.
...it will be possible to have an excellent body of well-trained militia, ready to take the field whenever the defense of the State shall require it.
Where in the name of common-sense, are our fears to end if we may not trust our sons, our brothers, our neighbors, our fellow-citizens? What shadow of danger can there be from men who are daily mingling with the rest of their countrymen and who participate with them in the same feelings, sentiments, habits and interests?
This is not the behavior of a right that was intended to be limited to inside the home.
-PJ
I still believe that...yes it is criminal what happens to the good people of NY et al, but if this case gets a 5-4 Roberts turncoat opinion, all those hard-won rights in other states are in peril.
It's not worth it IMHO.
Bkmk
>>if this case gets a 5-4 Roberts turncoat opinion, all those hard-won rights in other states are in peril.
Roberts voted with the majority in the Heller decision.
I agree. The majority of the voters in antigun states elected the representatives who deprived them of their 2nd amendment rights so f… ‘em. New Yorkers don’t deserve rights.
Bite me.
Loser.
You must be one of those New Yorkers who vote for assholes who want to deprive the rest of the country of their rights. Well I can see they truly represent their electorate. That means you. New Yorkers don’t want rights. Therefore they don’t deserve rights.
The momentum is definitely in our favor on this one. Be good to kill “ may issue” with a single blow.
Or, as his profile shows, he’s from California, and is a victim of Sacramento’s tyranny
It will be 6-3 or better for the 2nd Amendment. Kagan will join the majority. She may not be a roçk-solid conservative, but she knows how to read.
“Roberts voted with the majority in the Heller decision.”
Heller left crazy gun regulations wide open. I suspect that’s the only reason he voted for it.
One of his MO’s is to take a victory that would be a constitutional victory and write such a narrow opinion that it has almost no precedential value.
What he did in the Masterpiece Bakery case is unforgivable. A truly important constitutional decision could have been made. Instead, he forced such a narrow ruling that Jack Phillips immediately got sued again on the same issue and this time, the Colorado EEOC and Courts will rule against him but not be so stupid as to publicly admit their animosity.
Roberts is not a friend of the Constitution. His only interest appears to be not making any controversial conservative rulings. (He’s good with controversial leftist rulings).
Not a whole lot of difference between Kalifornistan and NY these days. NY has been a liberal sh!thole as long as I can remember. Kalifornistan came to it recently with Democrat organized demographic shifts.
California has counties which are de facto shall issue, and some which are, in effect, no issue. The latter are also facing increasing crime. Take away the lib’s ability to disarm victims. It’s their own doing. Their soft-on-crime attitudes have led to this. Take advantage of it to roll back restrictions.
Are you willing to bet on the outcome?
Why would Kagan join the majority before Roberts does, especially since Roberts voted for the 2nd Amendment in Heller and McDonald?
Kennedy wrote Masterpiece Cakeshop.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.