SAF sues Westchester County, NY to block "good cause" requirement for CCW

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Al Norris

    Spud Head
    Dec 1, 2010
    746
    Rupert, Idaho
    Albert Einstein: “Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

    He also said, "No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it," which is what we are up against.
     

    yellowfin

    Pro 2A Gastronome
    Jul 30, 2010
    1,516
    Lancaster, PA
    100 years later and the gun-grabbers STILL haven't seen the light.

    Isn't there a quote out there on the definition of Insanity being the constant repeating of an ineffective action...(sic)? Too bored too look it up, but you get the point.
    :innocent0
    Oh, but they have. They saw it the day they passed the Sullivan Act. Gun control is politically profitable for them. In 1911 it allowed them to be openly associated with organized crime yet able to publicly claim to be doing something about violence, enabling them to appeal to both sides. In the 1960's it gave them an alternative to racism to have a minority class of people to hate as a substitute for racial minorities, so they could keep Jim Crow but be up with the times. In the 1980's and forward, it gives them a means of gerrymandering gun owners out of the population of key large cities, a convenient scapegoat for their (likely intentional) failed social experimentation, a convenient voodoo doll boogeyman to rally all their various constituency groups who have their different adverse connotations for gun owners, and a handy sock puppet for fundraising for high profile police departments, legal systems, and correctional departments which feed them the GDP of small to medium countries for their reelection.

    The gun grabbers fight for gun control and against repeal thereof like their lives depend on it because their careers and life as they know it very much does.
     
    Last edited:

    Seajay17

    Member
    Apr 13, 2011
    5
    Genesee County NY
    Hello, I have been following this post as best I can,not speaking legalise I tend to get confused sometimes. I appreciate all the info you guys have posted. I am following this closely as I live in a county with the same situation. I am hoping that if this is decided in favor of the plaitiffs that there will be some change in our county. Is there any new news to report or any updates? I have found you guys are the best source of info. Again Thank You.
     

    yellowfin

    Pro 2A Gastronome
    Jul 30, 2010
    1,516
    Lancaster, PA
    We're waiting on the district level decision, which will only be the first step. After that decision is given, it's a guarantee the case will be appealed to the 2nd Circuit. I'd say there's about a 90% chance our side will be ruled against, unless Woollard and/or Richards are ruled on first. A carry case will have to be ruled on by the Supreme Court, and I really hope it's within the next year to year and a half.
     

    jrosenberger

    Active Member
    Jan 19, 2011
    332
    NH
    It took two years between the Heller and McDonald SCOTUS decisions. I'm guessing we'll probably get the first carry decision summer 2012.
     

    yellowfin

    Pro 2A Gastronome
    Jul 30, 2010
    1,516
    Lancaster, PA
    The problem is that the anti gun judges know what they stand to lose so they're likely colluding on this to stall all the cases as much as possible in hopes of a Supreme Court shift.
     

    krucam

    Ultimate Member
    The problem is that the anti gun judges know what they stand to lose so they're likely colluding on this to stall all the cases as much as possible in hopes of a Supreme Court shift.

    Collusion amongst the Federal Judges is highly unlikely, although it makes for great theater and conjecture...

    Still unlikely, but still plausible and more likely, is a mass, uncoordinated dragging of feet.

    The timelines in all of these cases (~40) aren't ouside the realm of norm for Civil Suits with two exceptions: Nordyke (9th Ckt) & Palmer (DC Dist).

    We're currently waiting on decisions from:
    Nordyke (9C)
    Palmer (DC-D)
    Heller II (DC-C)
    Dearth v Holder (DC-C)
    Muller (NJ-D)
    Ezell v Chicago (7C)

    Woollard will join the above list on May 5th.

    We're doing just fine....
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,929
    WV
    Where in the world is Palmer? It is at least 6 months over-due...

    6 months? Oral arguments were held in January of 2010. It's more like a YEAR overdue. Pisses me off too since this case had a big head start on the others and could have been at SCOTUS by now if it had been done within the usual 3 months after orals.
     

    Patrick

    MSI Executive Member
    Apr 26, 2009
    7,725
    Calvert County
    From what I gather, the judge in Palmer got bogged down by something that's been delaying all his cases.

    Yes, and Heller II could play into the Palmer decision. Palmer in in the child court of Heller II, so it makes sense to wait on that one.

    Heller may get decided on circumspect language regarding DC Home Rule and what regulations might be "other than usual" - home rule granted DC police powers to effect "usual" laws and practices. So the Circuit is now asking whether the gun rules are usual in the context of overall national policy. They are not. Palmer could take the same appraoch, assuming the Circuit goes that route.

    It's crafty - agreeing with the plaintiffs on effect but ignoring substance. It also opens some doors for home rule challenges outside of guns. By avoiding one door - the constitutional question on 2A - the may be opening several more.

    Another option: they go with home rule and then say the laws were "usual" when enacted. Case dismissed. Of course, that fails to rule on any 2A issues, which would be quick cause for an appeal to SCOTUS.
     

    yellowfin

    Pro 2A Gastronome
    Jul 30, 2010
    1,516
    Lancaster, PA
    Striking down laws because they're unusual and excessive might be a good basis to attack anti economic freedom laws as well, which we're considerably overdue on doing.
     

    Patrick

    MSI Executive Member
    Apr 26, 2009
    7,725
    Calvert County
    The consideration of "usual" only applies to certain home rules aspects of DC. Nowhere else.

    Technically, even today, Congress runs DC. Back in the 70s they gave them home rule, which says that Congress will step away from day to day management of the city and let the city decide certain things for itself. One things granted the city was the ability to make laws necessarily for the "usual" and normal policing required by the city. I think some other aspects of home rule also include that language.

    Congress could yank the whole enchilada if it wanted and make the council and mayor disappear. They could then replace them with a subcommittee in the Congress. Or let a flock of seagulls manage the whole town. Whatever. It's not a real city, in normal American terms.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    276,073
    Messages
    7,307,097
    Members
    33,566
    Latest member
    Pureblood

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom