NYSRPA v. Bruen Oral Argument

[karandom]

Massachusetts isn't (yet) as bad as NY, but isn't making it as easy as it should be. Our AG now says that any permit issued will be unrestricted. Historically many towns and cities like Boston would restrict your license so you couldn't actually carry a gun outside your home, but your need a LTC just to own a pistol of any kind so you still needed to jump through hoops only to get it restricted.

The AG has since clarified that although any new LTC will be unrestricted but, existing restrictions would need to be removed and reissued. I'm sure its not going to hold up to legal challenges, but I submitted to have my restrictions removed anyways. We will see how long it will be until I have an unrestricted LTC in my hands.

[Hot Sauce]

Massachusetts isn't (yet) as bad as NY, but isn't making it as easy as it should be. Our AG now says that any permit issued will be unrestricted. Historically many towns and cities like Boston would restrict your license so you couldn't actually carry a gun outside your home, but your need a LTC just to own a pistol of any kind so you still needed to jump through hoops only to get it restricted.

The AG has since clarified that although any new LTC will be unrestricted but, existing restrictions would need to be removed and reissued. I'm sure its not going to hold up to legal challenges, but I submitted to have my restrictions removed anyways. We will see how long it will be until I have an unrestricted LTC in my hands.

That's interesting, so they've both removed permit variations (no more restricted vs unrestricted) and reverse grandfathered the restricted ones.

[karandom]

That's interesting, so they've both removed permit variations (no more restricted vs unrestricted) and reverse grandfathered the restricted ones.

Exactly. They are just making it as hard as possible while they still can. At least Boston has already agreed to remove my restriction so I'm just waiting on the new license, but who know how long that will last. Some towns are still stonewalling.

I'd guess that if MA tried to enforce the carry restrictions they would lose the court case, but I'm not willing to be that test case. Court cases are likely in the works, but I think I'll get my unrestricted LTC in my hands before it gets worked out in the courts.

[AMC]

Talking with a friend who is going through the application process with a NorCal Sheriffs office (who he works for in a non-sworn capacity), and hearing from former coworkers about the shenanigans going on in both my former agency and our Sheriffs department, it looks very much like the authorities in most of California do not at all consider the Bruen decision to be an admonition to respect the Constitutional rights of their citizens, but a challenge to be more clever about how they deny those rights. I anticipate no change, other than increasing restrictions on where licensed parties may carry. They will NOT be issuing permits to citizens out here. The attitude is very much that the SCOTUS can go fuck themselves.

[jh9]

They will NOT be issuing permits to citizens out here. The attitude is very much that the SCOTUS can go fuck themselves.

aka "[Clarence Thomas] made his decision, now let him enforce it."

[HeavyDuty]

aka "[Clarence Thomas] made his decision, now let him enforce it."

Pipe dream - Section 1983 prosecutions of sheriffs who do not comply.

[Duces Tecum]

Talking with a friend who is going through the application process with a NorCal Sheriffs office (who he works for in a non-sworn capacity), and hearing from former coworkers about the shenanigans going on in both my former agency and our Sheriffs department, it looks very much like the authorities in most of California do not at all consider the Bruen decision to be an admonition to respect the Constitutional rights of their citizens, but a challenge to be more clever about how they deny those rights. I anticipate no change, other than increasing restrictions on where licensed parties may carry. They will NOT be issuing permits to citizens out here. The attitude is very much that the SCOTUS can go fuck themselves.

SCOTUS has options, for instance, like imbuing non-residential carry licenses with nationwide reciproprocity.


Duces

[AMC]

Pipe dream - Section 1983 prosecutions of sheriffs who do not comply.

There likely will eventually be Title 42 Sec. 1983 actions by some folks. It's actually a much higher bar than some folks realize. The Sheriff of San Francisco actually helped with that though by issuing a public statement that he would NOT be dropping the good cause requirement for issuing of a permit. If that's exactly what they do, and that gets to federal court (eventually), he may have engendered some personal liability for himself.

[45dotACP]

Talking with a friend who is going through the application process with a NorCal Sheriffs office (who he works for in a non-sworn capacity), and hearing from former coworkers about the shenanigans going on in both my former agency and our Sheriffs department, it looks very much like the authorities in most of California do not at all consider the Bruen decision to be an admonition to respect the Constitutional rights of their citizens, but a challenge to be more clever about how they deny those rights. I anticipate no change, other than increasing restrictions on where licensed parties may carry. They will NOT be issuing permits to citizens out here. The attitude is very much that the SCOTUS can go fuck themselves.

Here in liberal wonderland Illinois, the threat handed down to them was basically "develop a shall issue framework, or you're gonna get constitutional carry"

So now we have shall issue.

Sent from my SM-A326U using Tapatalk

[AMC]

SCOTUS has options, for instance, like imbuing non-residential carry licenses with nationwide reciproprocity.


Duces

Is there any case in the Federal Courts pipeline currently that is likely to get SCOTUS review on this issue? The Court acts on cases that make it before them. They just ruled on Bruen and remanded a bunch of other gun control cases back to lower courts in light of that decision. They are unlikely to take another gun control case anytime soon. I'm not sure even the SCOTUS justices are aware of how willing many progressive elected officials are to disregard rulings they don't like.

Bottom line, as long as these folks get to spend YOUR money to fight YOUR rights, they have no incentive to stop. The fight isn't even partly over, even with the Bruen ruling. Even just about public carry, which the ruling was specifically about. Most jurisdictions in California will simply make the process prohibitively expensive and intrusive, and will still create ways to arbitrarily deny the permit.