I'm sure there's a thread about this case somewhere, but looking back 2 pages didn't see one, so I thought I would post this here. Here's the link to the oral arguments in the NY State rifle and pistol vs NYC case where the city is trying to get them to dismiss it based on "mootness."

https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_ar...8-280_m64o.pdf




I really like the questioning starting around page 60ish, particularly the questioning about "reasonably necessary" on 64-65.., they have no fucking idea how the decide "reasonably necessary". What gives the state the right to decide what's reasonably necessary for me at all? Their whole argument appears to be "it's up to the cop!" I believe it will come down to Roberts, again, whether or not this goes forward.