NYSRPA v. Bruen Oral Argument

[Ed L]

Since the current may issue permits have no unreasonable training or locations bans (unless you are absolutist), legislation to institute such would be fiercely resisted and if passed, immediately challenged in court.

That didn't stop them from passing the SAFE act.

A big issue that I have with New York pistol permits that's not even being addressed by the law suit is the requirement to provide 3-4 personal references. These people cannot be relatives. In some counties these people have to fill out a short recommendation form and get it notarized. Think of the complications in that. 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 serve as a reference for you wanting to buy a handgun, especially if it involves having to sign a form or letter of recommendation and take the trouble to get it notarized. 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. The most likely source of people who know you for a while would be work; but you might want to keep your firearms interest private — especially if it's in New York State and you're wanting to buy a handgun.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's great that they are moving forward with this. But like some people in the thread, I would expect New York State to take other measures if they have to issue carry permits on demand-- such as banning complete carry and lots of places. This could be something that individual cities and counties might implement. Another important fact about New York State pistol permits is that you are strictly forbidden to leave a handgun unattended in a car — be it locked in a trunk or locked in a safe. If the gun gets stolen or the car gets stolen with the gun your handgun permit will be immediately revoked and any handguns that you own will be confiscated. Also, I can swear that there is a clause in the NY state SAFE act that states if you get a handgun permit revoked all of your firearms will be confiscated. This would include any long arms that you own that you don't currently require or permit to buy or possess unless you live in New York City.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Darn it, I wrote a big reply to Ed's reasonable post and then I skipped to another page before posting and it's gone. Basically, I agreed with his analysis of the problems of NYS permits. The ease or difficulty on references depends on county, township, etc. That's wrong. I was lucky to be in an easier area. I suggested that giving recent electoral results, more restrictions might not seem a good idea for the Democrats if moderates have sense and they might face tougher court challenges if seen as blocking an expanded right.

I opined against sensitive restrictions and property rights that ban carry in businesses open to the public. Only technically supported bans are acceptable to me (for various reasons I won't go over yet again). Bah, it was brilliant.

Anyway, here's an analysis suggesting that AWBs and mag bans might go. They are a failed strategy that do little and other strategies to control crime might be a better idea - which is true, depending on what they are. The idea that gun violence is primarily a creature of socio-economic conditions and not law abiding gun owners is gaining ground. What might sell are the enhanced background checks on private sales and forcing things like the Polymer 80s to go through FFLs. We will see.

https://www.newsweek.com/scotus-seco...l-laws-1645988

[joshs]

I opined against sensitive restrictions and property rights that ban carry in businesses open to the public. Only technically supported bans are acceptable to me (for various reasons I won't go over yet again). Bah, it was brilliant.

We might be able to win policy arguments in a legislature to limit the ability of certain private property owners to ban firearms, but that's not going to work constitutionally. For a constitutional violation, you need government action. If a private property owner chooses to prohibit carry, there's no government action. (And, the Court hasn't shown any interest in expanding on Shelley v. Kraemer).

[Stephanie B]

Hochul is from Western NY and was gun friendly until moving up. She knows that outside of NYC and surrounding areas the populace is not anti and she probably wouldn't want to run with that burden. Now if the AG is the candidate - well we know what she thinks and does DeBlasio. This is a case where the primary will be important.

A note of caution: Gillibrand was pro-2A when she was a congresswoman. She turned her coat when she became a senator.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

That is quite true. She had to bow to Schumer. I'm hoping that the current election results and maybe the NYSPRA decision (if good) will moderate a move to more draconian laws. Turn out is the new process for all to consider and new gun laws that are unreasonably strict may key that.

Now the ghost gun bill did get put in place but moderate but progun folks might not see attempts to beat NICS as that annoying.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Hochul is on record as opposing the suit: https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/sta...gun-safety-law

Maybe I'm being to polyannish but the sun might come up tomorrow.

[Shotgun]

We might be able to win policy arguments in a legislature to limit the ability of certain private property owners to ban firearms, but that's not going to work constitutionally. For a constitutional violation, you need government action. If a private property owner chooses to prohibit carry, there's no government action. (And, the Court hasn't shown any interest in expanding on Shelley v. Kraemer).

Could be an interesting topic. The US is very much founded on private property rights. Even places open to the public for business, take a grocery store for example, do not have to allow free speech. Seems the same would be true with regard to firearms. If a property owner does not want guns on the premises, I don't know what you do about that. Seems like the private property right in that instance would trump the guest's right to bear arms. And, in that instance, I don't have to do business with the property owner who does not want a firearm on the premises.

[Shotgun]

Hochul is on record as opposing the suit: https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/sta...gun-safety-law

Maybe I'm being to polyannish but the sun might come up tomorrow.

Gov. Hochul is likely to be very disappointed come June 2022, or whenever new opinions come out.

[joshs]

Could be an interesting topic. The US is very much founded on private property rights. Even places open to the public for business, take a grocery store for example, do not have to allow free speech. Seems the same would be true with regard to firearms. If a property owner does not want guns on the premises, I don't know what you do about that. Seems like the private property right in that instance would trump the guest's right to bear arms. And, in that instance, I don't have to do business with the property owner who does not want a firearm on the premises.

A state can probably require businesses open to the public to allow carry (many states currently have laws that require private businesses to allow guns in employer parking lots), but that would be a matter of state statute, not a constitutional right to carry on private property.

[AlwaysLearning]

We might be able to win policy arguments in a legislature to limit the ability of certain private property owners to ban firearms, but that's not going to work constitutionally. For a constitutional violation, you need government action. If a private property owner chooses to prohibit carry, there's no government action. (And, the Court hasn't shown any interest in expanding on Shelley v. Kraemer).

Josh,
I think that in states like NY or CA it could be fruitful to push the legislature to adopt a standard where the shop owner/manager must first warn the concealed carrier to leave (if guns are banned on premise) and then only if the person refuses is it a trespass (licensee/guest status on the property revoked for failure to comply with rules). I think NY and CA will try to make it a felony to ccw if the business has banned carry. The argument against that is of course that such a law will be used by "Karens" to harass Black and Latino persons in stores and other privately-owned (but publicly accessible) businesses.