January 16, 2018, 11:42 AM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
Lost one in NY
http://www.guns.com/2018/01/15/new-y...mit-challenge/
A federal court turns back a reasonable challenge to NY's terrible gun laws. It also points out that the Heller decision has had little effect on practical matters in most antigun states. IL seemed to be a success but elsewhere - not much. The antigun lower court precedents keep building up after Heller, SCOTUS - pretty worthless after Heller and McD. Congress - ditto.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
January 16, 2018, 12:31 PM | #2 |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
That's a good one to appeal as it is solidly in the same area as Heller and McDonald. Assuming Gorsuch votes like Scalia, you've got five votes who have already overturned very similar regulations at SCOTUS right now.
|
January 16, 2018, 01:09 PM | #3 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,523
|
Quote:
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak |
|
January 16, 2018, 01:37 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
I understand that but wonder if the the 3 others haven't just decided to let the states' handle their own business. I'm so pessimistic.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
January 16, 2018, 02:27 PM | #5 |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
It will be an important case in that it will either further define the protections offered by the Second Amendment or signal very clearly that the Court is going to let the appeals courts take the lead in 2A jurisprudence.
|
January 16, 2018, 04:25 PM | #6 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 16, 2011
Location: Georgia
Posts: 1,599
|
Quote:
Like Glenn, I am pessimistic, also. |
|
January 16, 2018, 09:45 PM | #7 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,414
|
Quote:
|
|
January 19, 2018, 03:25 PM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 19, 2016
Posts: 186
|
This is only the opinion of a district court.
|
January 20, 2018, 09:34 AM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 10, 2012
Posts: 3,881
|
I live in NYS and see nothing being done or challenged with the safe act other than by the NYSRP association. I don't see the NRA or 2nd amendment foundation getting involved. They want your money but where are they ?
|
January 20, 2018, 11:56 AM | #10 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,414
|
Quote:
Around the time the SAFE Act was wending its way through the courts, I hired a firearms attorney to challenge an anti-gun ordinance in my home town. We ultimately didn't file the suit, because it was explained to me that suing and losing does more overall damage to the pro-2A side than sitting back and finding a different direction from which to attack. I wasn't happy about not getting my day in court, but I know how generally anti-gun the judges in my state are so the logic behind that was inescapable. So I'm still looking for the direction from which to mount a flanking attack. |
|
January 22, 2018, 12:01 PM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
Those are good points. It is arguable that Heller just led to a slew of jurisdictions coming up with precedents that various types of gun bans and restrictions are perfectly constitutional. Unattended consequence. Only in IL was there significant Heller based progress.
In any case, I repeat myself to say that at the national level there is no impetus for any proactive gun legislation.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
January 22, 2018, 12:27 PM | #12 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 2, 2013
Posts: 975
|
Quote:
If judges are going to rule in favor of anti-gun laws, then it does little good to waste your time and money fighting them. If you have a ton of money and decide to take your case to the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) instead of bribing, err contributing to the appropriate political campaigns, then you'll be sorely disappointed. It seems to the SCOTUS, so long as you are allowed to own one, single shot weapon on your property, which may have to be registered, microstamped and/or with smart gun technology along with you being able to keep a whopping 50 rounds or so of ammo, then your 2nd Amendment rights have been upheld. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|