Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Horseman

Supreme Court strikes down New York gun law restricting concealed carry

Recommended Posts

Good. It should be the state's burden to show why a person shouldn't be allowed to carry rather than for the person to show they should be allowed.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Horseman said:

:thumbsup:

🔫🔫🔫

Abortion ruling not happening today.  

Gotta make sure the law abiding have time to strap up before the violent lefties start burning down cities again.   :thumbsup:

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New York is a great battleground right now. Corrupt Governor and Corrupt Mayor, each with no idea how to wield power. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve seen liberals saying how horrible this is but the idiots don’t realize the ppl conceal carrying ain’t the ones you need to worry about 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Biden reacts to Supreme Court gun decision: 'Deeply disappointed'

President Biden is "deeply disappointed" with a Supreme Court gun decision that struck down a New York law restricting access to concealed carry permits Thursday.

Biden released the statement hours after the Supreme Court released its decision. The New York law had required permit applicants to provide specific reasons for needing a firearm. 

"Since 1911, the State of New York has required individuals who would like to carry a concealed weapon in public to show a need to do so for the purpose of self-defense and to acquire a license," Biden wrote. "More than a century later, the United States Supreme Court has chosen to strike down New York’s long-established authority to protect its citizens."

"I urge states to continue to enact and enforce commonsense laws to make their citizens and communities safer from gun violence," he added.

...

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-reacts-supreme-court-gun-decision-deeply-disappointed

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eric Adams says he’s not going to let NYC turn into the Wild West. Little late, E. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

 

Biden reacts to Supreme Court gun decision: 'Deeply disappointed'

President Biden is "deeply disappointed" with a Supreme Court gun decision that struck down a New York law restricting access to concealed carry permits Thursday.

Biden released the statement hours after the Supreme Court released its decision. The New York law had required permit applicants to provide specific reasons for needing a firearm. 

"Since 1911, the State of New York has required individuals who would like to carry a concealed weapon in public to show a need to do so for the purpose of self-defense and to acquire a license," Biden wrote. "More than a century later, the United States Supreme Court has chosen to strike down New York’s long-established authority to protect its citizens."

Nobody is more pro-gun RESTRICTION than me.  But Biden's reaction is perplexing... the Supreme Court doesn't make laws, they decide if laws are Constitutional. Apparently New York's gun law isn't.  Did Biden expect them to say "well we think it's unconstitutional, but we'll let the law stand anyway"  ???

Seems like people expect the Supreme Court to make laws.  If it's not in the Constitution (like abortion), then citizens should ask legislators put it in. Don't blame the Court.

As for concealed-carry and gun violence.... meh. It probably doesn't help, but it probably doesn't make that big of difference. Open carry seems a lot more dangerous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, GobbleDog said:

Nobody is more pro-gun RESTRICTION than me.  But Biden's reaction is perplexing... the Supreme Court doesn't make laws, they decide if laws are Constitutional. Apparently New York's gun law isn't.  Did Biden expect them to say "well we think it's unconstitutional, but we'll let the law stand anyway"  ???

Seems like people expect the Supreme Court to make laws.  If it's not in the Constitution (like abortion), then citizens should ask legislators put it in. Don't blame the Court.

As for concealed-carry and gun violence.... meh. It probably doesn't help, but it probably doesn't make that big of difference. Open carry seems a lot more dangerous.

Democrats have been like this for years.  That's why they put activist judges on the bench and in the Supreme Court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, GobbleDog said:

Seems like people expect the Supreme Court to make laws.

That's pretty much the thinking. The SC's job is not to decide if laws are good ideas or bad ideas. Their job is to determine constitutional/unconstitutional. There are plenty of stupid laws that are constitutional. And there are good laws that are constitutional if enacted by states, but unconstitutional if enacted by the federal government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's so bad about concealed carry?  The people we all need to worry about are not the ones who are carrying legally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Utilit99 said:

 

Biden reacts to Supreme Court gun decision: 'Deeply disappointed'

President Biden is "deeply disappointed" with a Supreme Court gun decision that struck down a New York law restricting access to concealed carry permits Thursday.

Biden released the statement hours after the Supreme Court released its decision. The New York law had required permit applicants to provide specific reasons for needing a firearm. 

"Since 1911, the State of New York has required individuals who would like to carry a concealed weapon in public to show a need to do so for the purpose of self-defense and to acquire a license," Biden wrote. "More than a century later, the United States Supreme Court has chosen to strike down New York’s long-established authority to protect its citizens."

"I urge states to continue to enact and enforce commonsense laws to make their citizens and communities safer from gun violence," he added.

...

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-reacts-supreme-court-gun-decision-deeply-disappointed

 

Huh is this treason? Using the Liberal Trump standard it sure seems like it. We best have a commission and vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Vikings4ever said:

That's pretty much the thinking. The SC's job is not to decide if laws are good ideas or bad ideas. Their job is to determine constitutional/unconstitutional. There are plenty of stupid laws that are constitutional. And there are good laws that are constitutional if enacted by states, but unconstitutional if enacted by the federal government.

What's a woman?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We had a nice scandal in the NYPD over pistol licenses. Some idiots chucked it all away for a fast Buck. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Cdub100 said:

What's a woman?

:dunno:  I 'm not a biologist. But I should get to rule on women's issues as they relate to the constitution. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Democrats have been like this for years.  That's why they put activist judges on the bench and in the Supreme Court.

Both sides have always done this.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GobbleDog said:

Nobody is more pro-gun RESTRICTION than me.  But Biden's reaction is perplexing... the Supreme Court doesn't make laws, they decide if laws are Constitutional. Apparently New York's gun law isn't.  Did Biden expect them to say "well we think it's unconstitutional, but we'll let the law stand anyway"  ???

Seems like people expect the Supreme Court to make laws.  If it's not in the Constitution (like abortion), then citizens should ask legislators put it in. Don't blame the Court.

As for concealed-carry and gun violence.... meh. It probably doesn't help, but it probably doesn't make that big of difference. Open carry seems a lot more dangerous.

Ppl like MDCuck and the other retarded liberals here are upset. Of course, if I had a small d1ck I’d prob be pissed off all the time as well :lol: 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Djgb13 said:

Ppl like MDCuck and the other retarded liberals here are upset. Of course, if I had a small d1ck I’d prob be pissed off all the time as well :lol: 

How would you know if I’m upset? You put me on ignore remember?

  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bernhard Goetz :wub:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Vikings4ever said:

That's pretty much the thinking. The SC's job is not to decide if laws are good ideas or bad ideas. Their job is to determine constitutional/unconstitutional. There are plenty of stupid laws that are constitutional. And there are good laws that are constitutional if enacted by states, but unconstitutional if enacted by the federal government.

actually it is NOT the supreme court's job to determine if a law is constitutional or not.  there is absolutely nothing in the Constitution giving the supreme court that power.  And the 10th amendment says that any power not delegated to the federal government by the Constitution automatically is a state power.  so judicial review is a state power.  the states could invoke the 10th and set up a court to perform judicial review.

the supreme court asserted that power in Marbury vs Madison (1803) but they didn't have nor have they ever had the authority to do that.

right now, most state governors are republican, and the overwhelming majority of state legislatures are republican, so if they would just assert the power of judicial review, wed get a very very conservative court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, avoiding injuries said:

I hope this comes to Maryland. There are so many restrictions on me taking my guns out of my house. 

 It did. Huge ruling for the 2nd amendment 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, avoiding injuries said:

I hope this comes to Maryland. There are so many restrictions on me taking my guns out of my house. 

SCOTUS rulings like this go nationwide.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, JustinCharge said:

actually it is NOT the supreme court's job to determine if a law is constitutional or not.  there is absolutely nothing in the Constitution giving the supreme court that power.  And the 10th amendment says that any power not delegated to the federal government by the Constitution automatically is a state power.  so judicial review is a state power.  the states could invoke the 10th and set up a court to perform judicial review.

the supreme court asserted that power in Marbury vs Madison (1803) but they didn't have nor have they ever had the authority to do that.

right now, most state governors are republican, and the overwhelming majority of state legislatures are republican, so if they would just assert the power of judicial review, wed get a very very conservative court.

No one is a bigger proponent of the 10th Amendment than me. The federal government has long exceeded its constitutional powers in this country, and it's only getting worse. It makes my blood boil just thinking about how much power the feds have that was never intended or granted.

That said, I have no problem whatsoever with the Supreme Court determining whether a state violates the Constitutional rights of its citizens. When you're talking about the rights of the people, no one - local, state, or federal, can violate those rights. You need a supreme arbiter of that, and that has to fall on the US Supreme Court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to now have the crime statistics drop like of of a cliff and see how the libs try to dance that away.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best way to get crime stats to drop is to get people to not report them.  And reclassify the ones that do. That’s why liberals play the “rate” game. They just lump them all together. In that world a low level assault and a murder are the same on the stat sheet. Both are violent crimes.  Murder and shootings are the only reliable, for the most part, measure of violent crime. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, GobbleDog said:

Nobody is more pro-gun RESTRICTION than me.  But Biden's reaction is perplexing... the Supreme Court doesn't make laws, they decide if laws are Constitutional. Apparently New York's gun law isn't.  Did Biden expect them to say "well we think it's unconstitutional, but we'll let the law stand anyway"  ???

Seems like people expect the Supreme Court to make laws.  If it's not in the Constitution (like abortion), then citizens should ask legislators put it in. Don't blame the Court.

As for concealed-carry and gun violence.... meh. It probably doesn't help, but it probably doesn't make that big of difference. Open carry seems a lot more dangerous.

Exactly, just like it says in the Bill of Rights, everyone has the right to Conceal/Carry.  :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mike Honcho said:

Exactly, just like it says in the Bill of Rights, everyone has the right to Conceal/Carry.  :thumbsup:

Right to bear arms. :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

Right to bear arms. :thumbsup:

On Roe v Wade today:

Quote

“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision,” Alito wrote.

So again where does it say you can Conceal/Carry..since the Constitution makes no reference to that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

On Roe v Wade today:

So again where does it say you can Conceal/Carry..since the Constitution makes no reference to that.  

 

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

 

bear arms
 
phrase of arms
 
  1. 1.
    carry firearms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Utilit99 said:

 

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

 

bear arms
 
phrase of arms
 
  1. 1.
    carry firearms.

So nothing about them being concealed.  Thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

So nothing about them being concealed.  Thanks. 

What does that have to do with anything? Bearing arms means having them on you. In your pocket, in your hand, whatever....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

So nothing about them being concealed.  Thanks. 

Does it say anything about them having to be in view? Also right to privacy.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×