PDA

View Full Version : Really bad ruling from: 2nd Circuit on NY & CN



platoonDaddy
10-19-15, 10:33
http://law-policy.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/NYSRAP-vs-Cuomo-OPINION-10192015.pdf

We hold that the core provisions of the New York and
21 Connecticut laws prohibiting possession of semiautomatic assault
22 weapons and large‐capacity magazines do not violate the Second
23 Amendment, and that the challenged individual provisions are not
24 void for vagueness. The particular provision of New York’s law
25 regulating load limits, however, does not survive the requisite
26 scrutiny. One further specific provision—Connecticut’s prohibition
27 on the non‐semiautomatic Remington 7615—unconstitutionally
28 infringes upon the Second Amendment right. Accordingly, we
29 AFFIRM in part the judgment of the District Court for the District of
30 Connecticut insofar as it upheld the prohibition of semiautomatic
31 assault weapons and large‐capacity magazines, and REVERSE in
32 part its holding with respect to the Remington 7615. With respect to

Straight Shooter
10-19-15, 11:11
Im am in no way surprised. And, this other "assault weapons" law that SCOTUS is supposedly maybe going to take and review..Im guessing/betting they wont take it...but..if they do..itll be about the same.
We will end up with basically what we've already got now: Free states that allow such weapons...and Commie states that don't.
Itll be your choice then as to where you want to live, as it is now.
The writing is on the wall for the 2A.

jpmuscle
10-19-15, 12:29
http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/10/19/76019ed11d8541f5d5d90294083e0726.jpg

So using that logic why aren't we banning hammers?

Substantially related to government interests...

How about constitutionally protected freedoms become substantially related to government interests.... Damn lib POSs

platoonDaddy
10-19-15, 14:36
Based on the ruling, it is "Public Safety", now it wouldn't surprise me if potus does ban large capacity magazines & AR's. Of course he doesn't have the legal power, but he has the pen and he doesn't care if it is legal or not.

BoringGuy45
10-20-15, 20:15
So, basically, it's okay for the government to ignore Constitutional rights when they feel that it's in their best interests to do so.

Well, if the 5 who ruled in favor of Heller and McDonald do their jobs, that's a pretty easy one to overturn. However, that's a big IF.

platoonDaddy
10-22-15, 15:34
The 2nd Circuit decision exemplifies the pattern in many lower federal courts of defying the Supreme Court’s admonition in McDonald v. Chicago that the Second Amendment is not “a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.” The approach of some lower courts seems to be that Heller stands for little beyond its holding that handgun bans are unconstitutional. In Heller, the court chastised lower courts for having “overread” the court’s 1939 decision in United States v. Miller; the Miller court had upheld the federal tax and registration system for sawed-off shotguns, but many lower courts asserted that Miller had ruled that the Second Amendment is a “collective right” that no individual can assert. Among the lower courts which, according to Heller, placed “erroneous reliance” on an incorrect interpretation of Miller, was the 2nd Circuit, in United States v. Scanio, No. 97–1584, 1998 WL 802060 (2d Cir., 1998).

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/10/21/2nd-circuit-upholds-n-y-and-conn-arms-bans-contradicts-heller-mcdonald/

TMS951
10-23-15, 10:35
26 scrutiny. One further specific provision—Connecticut’s prohibition
27 on the non‐semiautomatic Remington 7615—unconstitutionally
28 infringes upon the Second Amendment right. Accordingly, we


This says it all to me. This is where we are headed. It is clearly spelled out.

Semi Auto is not protected under the constitution. More than 10 rounds is not protected under the constitution.

But then we have the in 'common use' language, it would be very difficult to say semi auto is not common use. It will be very interesting to see what happens when this hits the supreme court.

If the supreme court upholds that all the constitution entitles us to is manual loading fire arms to not hold more than 10 rounds I would think the debate will be settled as to what the 2nd amendment entitles us to. There will be no going back on it. Every state that wants can adopt the SAFE act word for word.

I don't think this will be the end though, then they will start in with prohibitive taxing, need for insurance and licensing. All designed to make gun ownership unaffordable and difficult.

platoonDaddy
10-23-15, 19:22
I don't think this will be the end though, then they will start in with prohibitive taxing, need for insurance and licensing. All designed to make gun ownership unaffordable and difficult.

Yes it is coming, firearm owners who state it will never happen in my state, get ready partner it is coming:

There are two methods of removing guns from citizens.

The first is when governments ban types of firearms. Australia banned many types of semi-automatic, self-loading rifles and shotguns in 1996. The United Kingdom banned semi-automatic, pump-action and private handgun ownership in mainland Britain in 1997. President Obama praised these as common-sense gun laws in his speech the night of the Oregon shootings.

The second is when governments tax guns out of existence. Muhlenberg College English professor Alec Marsh proposes a $10 per round annual tax assessed on each weapon's loaded ammunition capacity.

http://www.mcall.com/opinion/letters/mc-gun-control-laws-taxes-krauss-20151017-story.html


Don't believe this will occur in my lifetime, but for many of my young firearm friends it is a possibility:


http://i933.photobucket.com/albums/ad176/slickville/Australia_zpsl5h3i0w8.jpg (http://s933.photobucket.com/user/slickville/media/Australia_zpsl5h3i0w8.jpg.html)

Munsta750
10-23-15, 21:17
Molon labe.

wilson1911
10-23-15, 23:04
When I look at that picture, I wonder how many of those guys said they would never turn their guns in........Molon Labe is not going to keep your family safe, feed your children, or keep you warm at night.

platoonDaddy
10-24-15, 03:42
When I look at that picture, I wonder how many of those guys said they would never turn their guns in........Molon Labe is not going to keep your family safe, feed your children, or keep you warm at night.

Or keep you out of jail.

Munsta750
10-24-15, 07:27
When I look at that picture, I wonder how many of those guys said they would never turn their guns in........Molon Labe is not going to keep your family safe, feed your children, or keep you warm at night.


Or keep you out of jail.

You guys should just turn your arms over now because that is exactly the attitude that the people who want to take your guns want you to have.

TommyG
10-24-15, 11:29
You guys should just turn your arms over now because that is exactly the attitude that the people who want to take your guns want you to have.

It is a reality that we may have to soberly consider very soon. It is an easy call when there are no real consequences. When you are looking at a 25 year Federal Prison Sentence while your loved ones suffer without you, or worse, it bears some serious soul searching.

Not saying many will not come to the same conclusions but I don't think it ever bad to consider a risk of that magnitude in a serious and thoughtful manner.

wilson1911
10-24-15, 13:15
TommyG you get it. My post is in reference to history. Most people do turn in their guns etc. These are people who said "molon labe", but when the time came, they turned them in. Go read some history books. They are not filled with guys who said "NO". Nor did they make the gov't retreat to the dark hole they crawled out of.

What I implore you to do is read what history says, did happen.

I do not think the cops would come to your house, line your family up, and then point a gun to your wife's head. Asking "where are they".....then one of them breaks down and reveals the location. It could happen, but the reality is that it will be a political change that remove's them. They will chip away your ability to defend or raise your hand against the gov't. You and your family will need to contemplate this ahead of time, or it will not make any difference. There are some serious consequences should you choose to go against the law/gov't.

Munsta, I have not stated my position on what I would do, and I will not on a forum. All I will say is... that's a bad idea. Take a deep breathe, then go find out what others in history said what they would do, then what actually happened. Are you willing to be the next Ruby Ridge ?

Much of this thought comes from me not understanding how the founders of our country were strong enough to not only say "NO', but to rise up against the gov't. How did they willingly do this knowing it will cost them dearly family/fortune/home/life???? Our constitution is designed for the people to remove transgressors from gov't, but we have never done it. We face the same type of tyrannical gov't as they did in there day. The same omni powerful of the world.

Think about how they say the constitution is a living document, needing to be interpreted, for the good of the people. At first glance this sounds great, the gov't is going to do the right thing for once. This depends on your view. Either its something solid,like a foundation/fortress made of steel that confines/bars you, or malleable like gumby to do you bidding. If you reinterpret the constitution and change the definition of a few words......it can mean something quite different.

I am with you on this.....please release your anger and think objectively about what I have said.

Phillygunguy
10-24-15, 19:48
It is a reality that we may have to soberly consider very soon. It is an easy call when there are no real consequences. When you are looking at a 25 year Federal Prison Sentence while your loved ones suffer without you, or worse, it bears some serious soul searching.

Not saying many will not come to the same conclusions but I don't think it ever bad to consider a risk of that magnitude in a serious and thoughtful manner.

It's even more sober when years later a group of thugs break into your home rape your wife and daughter and beat you so bad that you are in the icu brain dead because you did your "civic duty" years earlier.

Cagemonkey
10-24-15, 22:03
It is a reality that we may have to soberly consider very soon. It is an easy call when there are no real consequences. When you are looking at a 25 year Federal Prison Sentence while your loved ones suffer without you, or worse, it bears some serious soul searching.

Not saying many will not come to the same conclusions but I don't think it ever bad to consider a risk of that magnitude in a serious and thoughtful manner.
I think about this reality and many others quite a bit. We live in scary times. Its easy to talk shit like; Molon Labe, its another thing to live it. Face it. If your a gun owner who believes in the Constitution, you might as well make retirement plans at your nearest FEMA camp.

platoonDaddy
10-25-15, 04:48
In the case of NY, it appears many are ignoring the registration requirement & CT mostly complying.

Low assault-weapon registration stats suggest low compliance with Gov. Cuomo’s landmark SAFE Act gun control law
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-safe-act-weapons-registry-numbers-released-article-1.2267730

Under New York law, failure to register an assault weapon by the April 2014 deadline can be treated as misdemeanor offense, punishable by “forfeiture of the weapon” and up to one year in jail, according to the New York State Police.

Under a different statute, the situation can also be treated as a low-level felony, punishable by up to four years in prison.

TommyG
10-25-15, 11:45
It's even more sober when years later a group of thugs break into your home rape your wife and daughter and beat you so bad that you are in the icu brain dead because you did your "civic duty" years earlier.

Agreed.

TommyG
10-25-15, 11:52
I think about this reality and many others quite a bit. We live in scary times. Its easy to talk shit like; Molon Labe, its another thing to live it. Face it. If your a gun owner who believes in the Constitution, you might as well make retirement plans at your nearest FEMA camp.

It is coming. Not sure how long it will take. With the Supreme Court being the final word on everything lately it may not take long.

I have almost reached the point of hoping for a Balkan States of America. I'll pack it up and move the hard working, honest, gun owning territory. I don't care about region, climate, etc. They can have the coasts, the cities and the criminals and let us have a quiet existence in what they derisively call "flyover country". I suppose they would never agree to leave us alone like that though.

wilson1911
10-25-15, 12:58
In the case of NY, it appears many are ignoring the registration requirement & CT mostly complying.

Low assault-weapon registration stats suggest low compliance with Gov. Cuomo’s landmark SAFE Act gun control law
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-safe-act-weapons-registry-numbers-released-article-1.2267730

Under New York law, failure to register an assault weapon by the April 2014 deadline can be treated as misdemeanor offense, punishable by “forfeiture of the weapon” and up to one year in jail, according to the New York State Police.

Under a different statute, the situation can also be treated as a low-level felony, punishable by up to four years in prison.

This is what I am waiting to see the outcome of. What will happen to the first few caught with an AR. To Molan Labe or to not molan labe ???

Joe Mamma
10-25-15, 19:10
I do not think the cops would come to your house, line your family up, and then point a gun to your wife's head. Asking "where are they".....then one of them breaks down and reveals the location. It could happen, but the reality is that it will be a political change that remove's them. They will chip away your ability to defend or raise your hand against the gov't. You and your family will need to contemplate this ahead of time, or it will not make any difference. There are some serious consequences should you choose to go against the law/gov't.


Actually, things are probably worse than you think. This video is from Hurricane Katrina years ago, and many will say the legal/political landscape for gun owners is much worse now.

Not only could gun confiscation happen, but if it does, a lot of people will be defending the people who do it. And the people who do it will say it's not their fault, they were just doing what they were told, etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-taU9d26wT4


Take a deep breathe, then go find out what others in history said what they would do, then what actually happened. Are you willing to be the next Ruby Ridge ?

Most of the people among us are not Randy Weavers. The more relevant questions are will you disobey a direct and clear order, are you willing to lose your job, jeopardize your career, face punishment, etc. when you can just hide behind the person giving you the order and everyone else who is following it? Because I guarantee every military/law enforcement officer who confiscated guns during Hurricane Katrina is able to justify (in their minds) that they were doing the right thing.

Joe Mamma

platoonDaddy
10-26-15, 05:25
I am glad you located the Katrina youtube video, for sure the confiscation happened and yes, they were just following orders.

BoringGuy45
10-26-15, 13:11
Actually, things are probably worse than you think. This video is from Hurricane Katrina years ago, and many will say the legal/political landscape for gun owners is much worse now.

I'd have to disagree with that. Many people I know who are today very pro-gun were very anti-gun at the time. Plus, Heller and McDonald hadn't happened yet, so there was still a very big question mark among many as to whether or not the 2nd Amendment is an individual or collective right. The GOP-controlled Congress was very close to passing a permanent assault weapons ban. Even handguns were in extreme danger of being banned up until Heller.

Ironically, it was the Hurricane Katrina confiscations that really gave new life to gun rights and swung the pendulum in our direction. For years, people said the NRA was nothing but a bunch of alarmists and conspiracy theorists for claiming that the government was going to come door-to-door for our guns. Then, the government DID go door-to-door for people's guns. Suddenly, it wasn't a conspiracy theory anymore; it was reality. Katrina showed a good cross section of why we have the 2nd Amendment.

platoonDaddy
10-29-15, 07:23
From the loony left coast:


Firearms Policy Coalition Ramps Up Gun Rights Grassroots to Oppose Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom’s “Safety for All Act” Gun Control Ballot Initiative]

Instituting a total, confiscatory ban on the possession of “large-capacity magazines” – even legally-owned “grandfathered” magazines and those that are possessed by active and retired law enforcement officers;
Adding severe and expensive new restrictions on ammunition purchases, including a mandatory DOJ ammunition purchase permit for anyone who wants to buy ammunition, a ban on private ammunition sales, and a gun owner database of ammunition purchasers;
A ban on the private purchase and importation of ammunition from out-of-state retailers;
Requiring all ammunition sellers to acquire a special DOJ ammunition sales permit and to have every employee that handles or sells ammunition to have a DOJ-issued Certificate of Eligibility;
A $25 Million theft of fees paid by gun owners to fund the new DOJ ammunition program;
And other gun control regulations that have already failed passage in the Legislature or were vetoed by Governor Jerry Brown.

https://www.fpcsadc.org/2015/10/27/firearms-policy-coalition-ramps-gun-rights-grassroots-oppose-lt-gov-gavin-newsoms-safety-act-gun-control-ballot-initiative/

jpmuscle
10-29-15, 08:37
Yea... They can go to hell.

TMS951
11-02-15, 09:25
Yea... They can go to hell.

Or hopefully drift off into the pacific ocean. Califonia would be best as an independent dictatorship. We don't need that shit here.