The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

Al Norris · January 31, 2012, 11:50 AM

Jim, those arguments would work if this case were about visitors from other States. This is not that case.

This is primarily about a part-time resident, not a visitor. This is about how the State of New York defines "residence" or "home" or "abode."

Heller did not make such distinctions, but NY State has. And it has the case law (controlling 2CCA precedent) to back it up. That must be corrected before "visitors" might have a shot at the 2A ferris wheel.

Equal Protection is the least of the worries and I highly doubt if the 2CCA will even go there. They will resolve it on the purely 2A "in the home" question.

January 31, 2012, 11:50 AM	#11
Al Norris Moderator Emeritus Join Date: June 29, 2000 Location: Rupert, Idaho Posts: 9,660	Jim, those arguments would work if this case were about visitors from other States. This is not that case. This is primarily about a part-time resident, not a visitor. This is about how the State of New York defines "residence" or "home" or "abode." Heller did not make such distinctions, but NY State has. And it has the case law (controlling 2CCA precedent) to back it up. That must be corrected before "visitors" might have a shot at the 2A ferris wheel. Equal Protection is the least of the worries and I highly doubt if the 2CCA will even go there. They will resolve it on the purely 2A "in the home" question.