NY preemptively changing gun laws ahead of SC ruling

[middlefinger]

.

https://nyassembly.gov/leg/?leg_vide...&Memo=Y&Text=Y

New York State's firearm licensing rules require people who want to
transport their gun outside of their home must show "proper cause" for
the need to carry a weapon their weapon concealed in public.

The recentSupreme Court challenge New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v.
Bruen argued that the long-standing requirement to show "proper cause"
violates the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. Given the density
of much of New York's populated areas, the possibility for harm is great
should the current rules be declared unconstitutional.

This legislation would specifically prohibit firearms from a wide list of specific
locations, including, for example, all forms of public transportation,
large gatherings and bars and restaurants.

In this video I discuss a bill introduced in New York which seeks to circumvent any favorable decision that may be issued in the NYSRPA v. Bruen Supreme Court concealed carry case

[akley88]

so the plan is to pretty much ban carry of firearms anywhere in the state

[win67]

I can't see New York rolling over on this one.

It took YEARS after DC vs. Heller for states & DC to take it seriously.

The Constitution has said "shall not be infringed" for 231 years, yet here we are explaining it to people who claim they "don't understand". The fact that this even needs to go to court in the first place shows we are not dealing with intellectually honest people here.

[Bang]

^^^ Yea, verily! ^^^

[PAMedic=F|A=]

I*m really starting to think there ought to be a law on maximum population density.

[win67]

I*m really starting to think there ought to be a law on maximum population density.

It's a valid concern. Used to be, NY and California were "tail wags the dog" states where one blue patch controlled the entire state, which was mostly red. Now, with more and more Americans living in metro areas (i.e., within an hour of the city, even if not necessarily in it); that's the case in at least half of the states. Pennsylvania being one of them. For fuck's sake, Florida of all places has been over-run by anti-gun lunatics and even has a fucking red flag law. Never thought I'd live to see the day.

Maybe a constitutional amendment that limits states to, say, 10mm residents, and after that they get split? Done properly, this would result in 2 Republican Senators every time a blue state gets out of hand.

Or, since the California we bought from Mexico is clearly defective, we could try to return it under warranty? Would Maybe Brazil or Canada would be interested? What about Illinois- could we build a wall around Chicago, then let the 99% remaining live as normal Americans?

Or, should we write off the lost causes like NY, CA, IL; and focus on the "tipping point" battles, like GA, or TX, or NC, where's it's a normal, American place, but previously second-tier cities like Atlanta, or Austin, or Raleigh, are becoming the next Los Angeles?

Just throwin' stuff out there. Eventually we'll need to address the issue PAMedic mentioned, what are y'all's thoughts?

[Totez]

SC: "NY, you can't ban the carry of guns for self defense."

NY: "Hey, cool, no problem you right. I'll just ban the carrying of guns."

[knight0334]

I*m really starting to think there ought to be a law on maximum population density.

I've said something to the effect before.

When more and more people are in a given area, crime rates go up, and the same with stupidity(stupidity is contagious). There should be a legal limit on the number of people allowed to live in a given area. Enforceable by execution, abortion up to the age of 25, and forced displacement with a high focus on those who do not work when able-bodied - gotta have some sort of job unless exempt by physical/mental defect, of retirement age, or too young to work.

Another thing that should be banned is apartment buildings/townhouse complexes where there is no green land for each person.

[knight0334]

It's a valid concern. Used to be, NY and California were "tail wags the dog" states where one blue patch controlled the entire state, which was mostly red. Now, with more and more Americans living in metro areas (i.e., within an hour of the city, even if not necessarily in it); that's the case in at least half of the states. Pennsylvania being one of them. For fuck's sake, Florida of all places has been over-run by anti-gun lunatics and even has a fucking red flag law. Never thought I'd live to see the day.

Maybe a constitutional amendment that limits states to, say, 10mm residents, and after that they get split? Done properly, this would result in 2 Republican Senators every time a blue state gets out of hand.

Or, since the California we bought from Mexico is clearly defective, we could try to return it under warranty? Would Maybe Brazil or Canada would be interested? What about Illinois- could we build a wall around Chicago, then let the 99% remaining live as normal Americans?

Or, should we write off the lost causes like NY, CA, IL; and focus on the "tipping point" battles, like GA, or TX, or NC, where's it's a normal, American place, but previously second-tier cities like Atlanta, or Austin, or Raleigh, are becoming the next Los Angeles?

Just throwin' stuff out there. Eventually we'll need to address the issue PAMedic mentioned, what are y'all's thoughts?

I saw FL turning more and more anti-gun since the 1980's. FL wasn't all that gun-friendly to begin with because it took until the 1980's to get rid of their Jim Crow era carry laws(was originally against blacks/indians, then applied to everyone after the 14 Amendment was enacted). It was only a State Supreme Court ruling that forced the hand, causing a two stage ripple of allowing carrying.

Not only does FL have red-flag, you must be 21yo to also buy a rifle or shotgun from a FFL. There is practically no unlicensed open carry(unless hunting, fishing, or "at camp"). State wide waiting periods upon handgun purchase from a FFL, some counties include long guns. Their permit then costs way more than the threshold for jury trial($20), requires a dog & pony show, and fingerprints. Most LEO's are NOT friendly to citizens owning/carrying guns, certain exception to Sheriff Grady Judd.

With more and more NY, MD, NJ, CT, MA, RI folks moving to FL - FL becomes more and more NY in regards to firearm ownership and carrying. It barely votes red on presidential elections at times, and the margin is moving closer to blue.

[win67]

I saw FL turning more and more anti-gun since the 1980's. FL wasn't all that gun-friendly to begin with because it took until the 1980's to get rid of their Jim Crow era carry laws(was originally against blacks/indians, then applied to everyone after the 14 Amendment was enacted). It was only a State Supreme Court ruling that forced the hand, causing a two stage ripple of allowing carrying.

Not only does FL have red-flag, you must be 21yo to also buy a rifle or shotgun from a FFL. There is practically no unlicensed open carry(unless hunting, fishing, or "at camp"). State wide waiting periods upon handgun purchase from a FFL, some counties include long guns. Their permit then costs way more than the threshold for jury trial($20), requires a dog & pony show, and fingerprints. Most LEO's are NOT friendly to citizens owning/carrying guns, certain exception to Sheriff Grady Judd.

With more and more NY, MD, NJ, CT, MA, RI folks moving to FL - FL becomes more and more NY in regards to firearm ownership and carrying. It barely votes red on presidential elections at times, and the margin is moving closer to blue.

Wow. I don't pass through Florida much, so TBH I had no idea it was that bad. And to think, Florida used to be a Southern state!

Funny how some states' reputation on gun rights is very different from the actual laws in place. Texas, for example, has a reputation as being a "gun state", but it's really not, at all. Pennsylvania, Ohio, and some of the New England states have the best gun laws this side of the Rockies, yet you never hear any references to that in popular culture.