SCOTUS Grants Cert. to NY "Premises License" Case

[fixer]

Honestly, I don't see this case as advancing firearms rights much because it is very limited in scope.

The whole NYC Premise permit is a confusing thing. It is something the average person can get, after spending over $400 in licensing fees and jumping through more hoops than any place else (more on that later). It allows you to keep the gun loaded at home and take the gun shooting to ranges within NYC's 5 boroughs. It must be transported in a locked box with a trigger lock and the ammo in a separate container.

You cannot take the gun out of state, and if you try to fly out of state and present the gun and your license at the airport you will be busted and lose your license and firearms. The not being able to take it to a range outside of NYC is what they are challenging.

This means that you can't take your guns to some nicer ranges that are just outside of NYC, since there are very few ranges in NYC and they tend to be a pain to get to logistically and with parking (assuming that you live in NYC and have a car).

When I lived in NYC decades ago, I lived on the Queens/Long Island border and would take my guns to an indoor range in Nassau County to shoot since that was the easiest range to drive to (about 30 min) and there was always plenty of parking. At that time NYC had a target permit, which allowed you to take the gun target shooting with no restrictions as to where; but you were required to keep the gun unloaded and locked up at home. If you wanted to keep a gun loaded at home you had to get a premise permit, which at that time allowed you to keep it loaded at home, but only allowed you to take it shooting twice a year after writing the licensing bureau. So they combined the two into a premise permit, but added the restriction that you could not take the gun to a range outside the city.

Just getting a this type of permit is more of a hassle than anyplace else in the US, and this should be challenged. First the application fee is over $400.

You are required to provide 3 letters of recommendation from people who have known you for at least 2 years who are not relatives: https://newyorkcityguns.com/function...nce_letter.pdf This is unreasonable because of the nature of our society you may not have three people who have known you at least 2 years who are willing to sign a notorized statement. If you have just moved there you are SOL, because I don't think they can be people from out of state. This alone should be challenged.

Also, you have to provide them a list of anything greater than a parking ticket that you received, along with the date and I believe court record. Even if you have only received a few speeding tickets in your life, it is an undue burden to have to remember the dates and get court records from different place where you may have lived.

I believe you may also have to provide dates and explanations for any time you took a painkiller or sedative. Do they really expect someone who is over 25 to remember all of the dates when they may have been prescribed tylenol 3 for dental work or other things?

Once you have submitted your application it can take a year or more for it to get approved.

I think a lot of the above requirements presents an undue burden and should be challenged.

The whole object of this is to get people to take a look at the information required and say fuck-it.

If you do get approved you get a license and a paper called a purchase document, both of which are needed to allow you to purchase a handgun. Once you buy the gun you have to bring it back to One Police Plaza in NYC within 72 hours after purchase so they can "inspect" it and enter the make and serial number onto your license. If you want to buy a second gun, you have to write them requesting a purchase document and specify some info about the gun that you want to buy. You then get a letter telling you that the purchase document has been approved and have to travel to One Police Plaza to pick up the purchase document. You can only get one purchase document every 90 days, and if you want to own more than 3-4 handguns you must buy a safe and show them a receipt for it and pictures of it.

Getting a carry permit is a whole different deal. You have to show that you have a business that makes large bank deposits and provide a tax return for the business six months of of bank deposit or withdrawal slips that show a large amount of cash. Even then, you will typically be limited to carrying the gun only at certain times--like when you would be making the deposits. You can get a premise permit for your business, but then you are not allowed to carry the gun outside of your business.

There are special Carry permits that famous people, celebrities, and people who can demonstrate some special may be able to get. Retired cops can get their permits comparatively easily as part of their retirement.

Mother.Of.God.

The entirety of that is a manifestly clear abridgement of 2A rights. To the point that even RBG would be like "WTF"?

[OlongJohnson]

Well, at least I now have some idea what Bloomberg considers to be "common sense gun laws," and hence, what anything he funds is working toward.

[RoyGBiv]

Mother.Of.God.

The entirety of that is a manifestly clear abridgement of 2A rights. To the point that even RBG would be like "WTF"?

Agreed, obviously.

Perhaps this case serves to take the temperature of the current SCOTUS regarding 2A cases, before moving on to something more broad? WWJRD?

[Glenn E. Meyer]

A antigun sky is falling analysis of the possible outcomes: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...ity-ny/581017/

Interesting predictions if the best outcome for us basically voids the bans on carry. Of course, states that are not shall issue will attempt all types of restrictions. I note that even with Heller emphasizing handguns at home for self-defense, buying on in NY and certainly NYS is a horror show.

Fingers crossed!

[LorenzoS]

The real end game for this case would be an affirmation by the Supremes that the 2nd Amendment applies outside the home. If that happens it would have tremendous impact in all the May-Issue jurisdictions that are really No-Issue such as NYC, NJ, etc.

[GardoneVT]

A antigun sky is falling analysis of the possible outcomes: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...ity-ny/581017/

Interesting predictions if the best outcome for us basically voids the bans on carry. Of course, states that are not shall issue will attempt all types of restrictions. I note that even with Heller emphasizing handguns at home for self-defense, buying on in NY and certainly NYS is a horror show.

Fingers crossed!

This is why I’m intuiting that the courts intent will be to uphold the NYC restrictions.
The SCOTUS has had multiple chances in the past to expand the 2nd Amendment to outside of the home, and has steadfastly refused cert on every case of that nature. The narrative here will be that Heller guarantees the right to keep and bear arms on one’s property- but that such exercise is not an unregulated activity.

As such rather then repeal gun laws, I foresee the opposite outcome. With new SCOTUS precedent established that gun regulations can apply even to exercise of the right at home, anyone in liberal anti gun districts can kiss their right to bear arms goodbye.

[BillSWPA]

This is why I’m intuiting that the courts intent will be to uphold the NYC restrictions.
The SCOTUS has had multiple chances in the past to expand the 2nd Amendment to outside of the home, and has steadfastly refused cert on every case of that nature. The narrative here will be that Heller guarantees the right to keep and bear arms on one’s property- but that such exercise is not an unregulated activity.

As such rather then repeal gun laws, I foresee the opposite outcome. With new SCOTUS precedent established that gun regulations can apply even to exercise of the right at home, anyone in liberal anti gun districts can kiss their right to bear arms goodbye.

They could have upheld the NYC law by just letting the lower court ruling stand. I doubt they took this case simply to affirm.

The Supreme Court typically decides as little as possible when deciding a case, and I expect no different here. This case is about transporting firearms, not carrying them. A victory here does not automatically mean nationwide right to carry.

What would be more useful is defining the appropriate level of scrutiny for second amendment cases. I think at least Roberts may be hesitant here, because that standard of review could have far-reaching implications.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ed L]

It was late last night when I was wrote my previous post, which covers a very confusing topic--NYC handgun laws. I need to make some corrections and some clarifications.

First, In NY City and NY State you cannot own a handgun without a license. To apply for this license you typically need 3-4 people to write you notarized letters of recommendation as part of the application process. These people cannot be relatives, and have to be from the county that you reside in. They need to know you for at least a year or more, depending on the county. Again, in today's ever moving society and political atmosphere, it is hard to get 3-4 people who have known you for several years who may be willing to write you these letters of recommendation. Plus they will have to take time off from work to have these letters notarized unless they have a notary present at work. If you have just moved there you are out of luck because by definition you don't know anyone. In some other counties in NY, all you need to do is include the your reference s names addresses, and phone numbers with your application.

I know of one person whose permit application was rejected because one of the people who he submitted as a reference had some type of minor criminal record that the person submitting the application was not aware of. It may have even been DWI.

This requirement for references needs to be struck from the licensing requirements and should be challenged in court. There are also some things that I did not cover.
Under the Heller decision the right of the government to regulate and license firearms is upheld. Justice Antonin Scalia’s opinion stated that “nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”

However, I think if brought to court many aspects of NYC and NY State pistol laws would be ruled overly restrictive. There is plenty of ground for legal challenges because the laws make it overly difficult to own or possess a handgun that I suspect would be considered overly restrictive by the supreme court.

[Ed L]

When I lived in NYC decades ago, I lived on the Queens/Long Island borderline. I would take my guns to an indoor range in Nassau County to shoot since that was the easiest range to drive to (about 30 min) and there was always plenty of parking. At that time NYC had a target permit, which allowed you to take the gun target shooting with no restrictions as to where; but you were required to keep the gun unloaded and locked up at home. If you wanted to keep a gun loaded at home you had to get a premise permit, which at that time allowed you to keep it loaded at home, but only allowed you to take it shooting twice a year after writing the licensing bureau. They have now combined the two into a premise permit, but added the restriction that you can not take the gun to a range or residence outside the city. This is the reason for the supreme court case which is the subject of this thread/ At the time when I lived in NYC, I only had 4 handguns, but I had all of them listed on both my target and premise permit. That way I could take the guns shooting whenever I wanted to as well as keep them loaded in the house for home defense. This of course meant paying for two different permits.

In NY State you can buy longarms without a permit, but in NYC, you need a permit to possess and buy longarms. That is a whole different thread. It has gotten more restrictive over the years to the point where you are now prohibited from owning any longarm with a magazine capacity in excess of 5 rounds. That isn't the way the law was written, but that is the way it is applied.

Handgun licensing in NYC and NY State dates back to the passage of the Sullivan act in 1911.

The requirement for long arm licensing in NY City began in 1967, under then Mayor John Lindsey. I believe the licensing fee was set at $3.00 and City Councilman Theodore Weiss, sponsor of the bill, solemnly promised that the $3 fee would never be raised, but that the city would always bear the brunt of the real costs of administering the law. The licensing fee for longarms is now $140.00.


NYC bans all longarms that have a magazine that holds more than 5 rounds. They do this by deliberately misinterpreting an admin code and have gone as far as to send letters to people who have leverguns in the city with 6 round magazines telling them that they must either dispose of the gun or have it modified by a gunsmith so it holds no more than 5 rounds.

Here is the admin code:

§ 10-306 Disposition, purchase and possession of ammunition and ammunition feeding devices.

b. No person may possess an ammunition feeding device which is designed for use in a rifle or shotgun and which is capable of holding more than five rounds of rifle or shotgun ammunition, unless such person is exempt from subdivision a of section 10-303.1 pursuant to section 10-305, provided that a dealer in rifles and shotguns may possess such ammunition feeding devices for the purpose of disposition authorized pursuant to subdivision a of this section.

The definition of "ammunition feeding device" for purposes of these rules can be found in § 10-301 paragraph 17 of the NYC Admin code:

17. "Ammunition feeding device." Magazines, belts, feedstrips, drums or clips capable of being attached to or utilized with firearms, rifles, shotguns or assault weapons."

The key words are "Capable of being attached to or utilized with." It suggests a separate device. However they are not interpreting it as such.

The law banned separate magazines or feeding devices like detachable magazines for long arms that held in excess of 5 rounds and semiauto longarms that held in excess of 5 rounds.

This is not the same as banning all longarms that had magazine capacities in excess of 5 rounds. However, it is now being interpreted by the NYPD licensing division to mean any longarm with a magazine capacity with an excess of 5 rounds. This is them putting their own draconian spin on it.

Someone with deep pockets needs to sue them to get clarification.

[Ed L]

It turns out that I was incorrect when I previously wrote: "I believe you may also have to provide dates and explanations for any time you took a painkiller or sedative." I had read that somewhere online, but I found a recent version of an NYC handgun application and did not see any question along these lines. Here is a link to it: http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloa...msComplete.pdf

But latest version of the NYC pistol permit application is online and in order to access it and apply you need to register by email and create an account and you fill out the application by typing into a form. Paper applications are no longer accepted. This raises the question of does it deny access to people who for whatever reason do not have the internet or are not online savy. This could apply to some older people, and would deny them their ability to exercise their second amendment rights. Here is a link to the webpage: https://licensing.nypdonline.org/new-app-instruction/

One thing that I did find in the most recent pdf of the NY Pistol permit application is that it asks if you have "ever suffered from any disability or condition that may affect your ability to safely possess or use a handgun?: This includes: Epilepsy, Diabetes, Fainting Spells, Blackouts, Temporary Loss of Memory or any Nervous Disorder. It demands that you list your doctor's Name, Address, Phone #, in explanation."

I have heard from someone who previously worked in the NYC pistol licensing section that they will deny you a pistol license if you have diabetes.

Further, if you look in the online handbook for pistol permits for Nassau County, NY, which is just over the border from NYC on Long Island, they will suspend or revoke you pistol permit for "The presence or occurrence of a disability or condition that may affect the licensee’s handling of a firearm, including but not limited to epilepsy, diabetes, fainting spells, blackouts, temporary loss of memory or nervous disorder." This is listed on p. 21 of the Nassau County Police Dept Pistol license handbook: https://www.pdcn.org/DocumentCenter/View/113

Prohibiting people who have Diabetes from getting or maintaining a pistol permit is discrimination. It is grossly outdated nonsense that needs to be challenged under the Americans With Disabilities Act. According to the CDC, almost 1/3 of the US population has diabetes or pre-diabetes. Over 10% of the US population has diabetes. Most diabetes is controllable, and if you feel your blood sugar is dropping you can simply consume some fast acting carbs like a glass of non-diet soda or orange juice, or consume some candy or glucose tablets that can be easily carried with you, or is easily available everywhere. Somehow I would not be surprised if someone posts a snide comment about this.

Someone with diabetes needs to apply for a NY city or NY State permit and be denied, and then legally challenge it. Or someone with a permit who has had their permit revoked because they have come down with diabetes and challenge the decision as discriminatory against someone who has a disability. Honestly, the police don't have access to the general public's medical records, so some people could hide some disqualifying medical conditions. But if the police ever did find out in some unexpected way, you would have your license revoked for withholding information.

My bottom line is that if the physical condition does not disqualify someone from having a driver's license, it should not stop them from having a handgun license. Even still, many people who may be unable to drive from whatever reason can still safely manage firearms.

Anyway, my point is that there is a lot of unfair, arbitrary restrictions to getting a pistol permit in NYC and NY State that need to be challenged. As much as I dislike the rabid anti-gun governor governor Cuomo, all of this existed before he became governor. I am not in any way defending Coumo, as he is as antigun as they come and added the SAFE act.