Thanks for being here, and for being there, Josh.
Thanks for being here, and for being there, Josh.
Ignore Alien Orders
Thank you for your insight @joshs !
my prediction: NY loses the case (yay), but turns right around and imposes all sorts of expensive requirements and fees (lots of training, lots of forms, lots of money to the .gov), and also designates all sorts of places as "gun free". private places will hop to and follow suit, and you'll be back where you are today: an average, law abiding person cannot legally carry around a loaded firearm and conduct normal business and commerce without running into all manner of "no guns here" signs, with the threat of fines and imprisonments if caught. but i guess that is another case for another day.
If NY is forced into a Shall-Issue regime, I expect it will likely look like DC, except that in non-NYC places, normal folks will be able to get permits and carry much like the rest of us, and as that percolates they stand some chance of restrictions being eased. DC is, I think, a good example of what permitting would look like in NY State if NYSRPA wins the day here. Not necessarily in terms of restricted places, just the permit process.
Next step would be to work on mandatory reciprocity.
I'd be happy to sign up for lead plaintiff against NY. "Plaintiff desires to visit family in NY State and still enjoy his 2A right to self protection."
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776
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. Depends on who is the new governor. 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.
Well, after reading some of the oral argument I am hoping for two things. First, some sort of recognition of and identification of what "bear arms" means outside the home. Second, and perhaps as important, that the court employs a strict scrutiny test for 2nd Amendment cases rather than intermediate scrutiny.
"Rich," the Old Man said dreamily, "is a little whiskey to drink and some food to eat and a roof over your head and a fish pole and a boat and a gun and a dollar for a box of shells." Robert Ruark