Posted on 03/26/2021 5:11:59 PM PDT by familyop
The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday will discuss taking up a major new gun rights case involving a National Rifle Association-backed challenge to a New York state law that restricts the ability of residents to carry concealed handguns in public...Two gun owners and the New York affiliate of the NRA, an influential gun rights group closely aligned with Republicans, are asking the justices to hear an appeal of a lower court ruling throwing out their challenge to a policy that requires a state resident to show "proper cause" to obtain a permit to carry a concealed handgun outside the home.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Re: “The NRA, an influential gun rights group...”
Is that the same influential NRA gun rights group that declared bankruptcy a couple months ago?
<<>>
After many years of membership in the NRA, I lapsed it
because I don’t want to support LaPierre’s lavish
lifestyle.
That’s why many of us are supporting the NRA more than before. ;)
I have zero faith in our new “originalist” court. Fortunately, most of my guns are old enough, or 80%’ers and can’t be traced.
“ Is that the same influential NRA gun rights group that declared bankruptcy a couple months ago? “
They filed bankruptcy so they could get the hell out of New York.
Wactha gonna do Lefty? (my nickname for the [dis]honorable Chief Justice John Roberts of the United States Supreme Court of AmeriKa.
Scumbag traitors allowed them to steal an election
p
Back the blue...until the blue come after you...and your firearms.
The 9’th Circuit Court of Appeals already ruled this week that there is no constitutional right to carry a firearm either openly or concealed. They ruled that you can not bear arms in public. They just ruled there is no second amendment right. In their minds you can purchase a gun and store it at home and in California it must be locked up in a safe and not ready for use. These people are nuts and if the SCOTUS does not get this right and end this nonsense a lot of people are going to die.
This appears to be no different than Peruta V San Diego, and SCOTUS denied certiori, with ONLY Thomas and Gorsuch dissenting. Apparently Roberts and Alito were OK with refusing to hear the case. There are two ways of looking at this:
1. Roberts and Alito support restricting the right to bear arms to only those with a reason acceptable to local authorities.
2. Roberts and Alito (and Thomas and Gorsuch) knew the court would side 5-4 with the 9th Circus, so they refused the case to avoid a dangerous precedent permanently restricting 2A rights.
So, watch Roberts and Alito.
If they vote to hear the case, the dems will go insane. Protests, drama, speeches by Schumer, Pelosi, Biden and Harris, crying. Basically a repeat of the Kavanaugh false outrage and maybe throw in another mass shooting or two.
So, in the end, if all 6 "conservative" Justices vote to hear the case, I expect it to be overturned, but Roberts will write the opinion in such a way as to limit the reach of the decision.
With those massive disappointments named Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh sitting on the USSC, you're damn' right it's not going to end well.
BAM! goes reuters' credibility. The NRA is a group closely aligned with the Constitution! Neither Britain or Europe has a Constitution; cannot think of a reason to have a constitution... much too confining on those destined to rule.
Britain and Europe have a lot of Republican look-alikes, Januses with faces looking both forward and backwards.
True! Many Democrats are also members. There are NRA members in other countries, too. Cheers to them!
Thanks, ETCM! Good information.
True! Excellent! Europe doesn't understand the Constitution. There it is our team vs their team.
I wonder how different is this from Hawaii’s issue?
Still seems like SCOTUS dealt with this in McDonald
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald_v._City_of_Chicago
why do the states keep coming back with this stuff?
If you get a chance look up the 1982 Senate Report on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. I have a paper copy from 1982. It is no longer in print and is highly suppressed.
Here is a good copy I have found on line. Look at the court cases from the 1800s near the end of it.
https://guncite.com/journals/senrpt/senrpt.html
This appears to be no different than Peruta V San Diego, and SCOTUS denied certiori, with ONLY Thomas and Gorsuch dissenting
————————————
That case was before we had Kavanaugh and Barrett. They replaced Kennedy, a squish, and Ginsburg, an anti gun justice. This may be the case they take.
That was pretty much my point...
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.