Defensive Carry banner

NY: Time To Fight!

3K views 50 replies 26 participants last post by  Ghost1958 
#1 ·
#2 ·
Go
THE NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCIATION, WESTCHESTER COUNTY FIREARMS OWNERS ASSOCIATION,
SPORTSMEN’S ASSOCIATION FOR FIREARMS EDUCATION, INC., and AR15.COM LLC,

Best of luck to you.
 
#4 ·
Give em errrrr a hot place with no exit?:redface: We have to have gun laws? Really??? I dont think the Constitution said anything about us having to have gun laws. I think it pretty much says we have one gun law that trumps all the rest of em. Shall not be infringed. :smile:
 
#7 ·
Oops. I meant to post this in the "The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion" section. Can a mod move it there?
 
#8 ·
Nope your going to DC hell
I'd be interested in if they need financial help if they set up a fund for people to contribute,to be honest now that NY'ers have said enough of this Dictator Ruling I'm all for going all Yammamoto with them
 
#9 ·
What is that sound I hear...it's a can of legal whoop getting opened and the NY tyrants are about to get a lesson in the limits of government powers.
 
#10 ·
I have an interesting thought here. As part of this eventual court case, and subsequent appeals (likely all the way to SCOTUS), if you're going to fight these infringements fight ALL of them. And if you're going to fight magazine limits as being unconstitutional, then I'd also fight the previous 10 round limit too. IF you're gonna fight, fight hard!!!!
 
#26 ·
Lol, if you'll notice that one little thing in the preamble... Something about "...and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

One of the main purposes of our Constitution is to secure Liberty for future generations... Including the freedom to drink as much fizzin' soda as you wish.
 
#13 ·
I hope that they fight hard and strong but I wont hold my breath.
 
#15 ·
I'm sympathetic to the challenge, and please don't take this as anti--- I think they will get nowhere.

Unless Congress passes national legislation the courts will leave it to the individual state legislatures. Heller IMO is
going to be our undoing and not the victory so many think it is.

OTOH, Congress could pass a "2A protection act," and set the definition of "non-infringing regulations' for everything
from capacity to licensing, thus removing the issue from the whims of the individual states.

So many here are afraid of that type of solution, but there are
huge advantages to having the regulations specified by Congress and uniform throughout the land.

If nothing is done at the national level we will get to a point in time where it is 5 in one place, unlimited in another,
7 in another, 10 in another.

And for those who don't like courts legislating, I don't see any other choice than Congressional action to keep
the states from further weaving the crazy quilt of gun laws.
 
#25 ·
We already have a national gun law...it is called the 2nd amendment and it is the only national gun law we need.

People will eventually move from the States which suppress freedoms and will take up residence in the States which promote freedom and doesn't hinder a person's ability to protect and defend themselves and their family.
 
#18 ·
I don't see any other choice than Congressional action to keep the states from further weaving the crazy quilt of gun laws.
Think outside the box.

Perhaps the correct number of coffins moved to the steps of the State Capitol (one for each legislator) with a Copy of the U.S. Constitution in each one would get the point across.
 
#19 ·
Every time someone posts something implying threats of violence we all get harmed. What does moving coffins to the
steps of the Capitol imply? Nothing I want to be involved with and nothing I want to see happen.

Please, its nice to vent anger and all, but the whole world reads what gets posted on here, including those who want a total confiscatory ban. Let's not give them something to re-post on their web sites. O.K.?
 
#21 ·
What does moving coffins to the
steps of the Capitol imply? Nothing I want to be involved with and nothing I want to see happen.
You libs are cetainly different when it comes to thinking.
No violent vibes intended. It simply implys that they are killing the U.S. Constitution by passing laws that are contrary to it.


Please, its nice to vent anger and all, but the whole world reads what gets posted on here, including those who want a total confiscatory ban
.
Yep. Do you really think that those that want a total confiscatory ban care what we think? I mean...really? Nothing we can say or do will change their way of thinking.

:rofl:
 
#27 ·
I was wondering how long it was going to take for this action to happen. I read the complaint and I like it. I wish them the best of luck. If there was something I could to help, I would be more than glad to do so. If someone here learns about a legal fund set up to take donations please post it here. I will give.
 
#28 ·
I think sodas and pretty much any other activity that can't be shown to harm anyone else should fall under the purview of the 9th Amendment, which is sadly a dead letter at this point. As far as the perceived need for gun laws...as far as I'm concerned the government got it right when it outlawed murder and theft. We don't need anything else. If we want the shootings to go down, we really need to look at getting rid of our drug war, since over 70% of the shootings are gang on gang, and they are likely getting in gunfights over drugs and other black market activities in the vast majority of these incidents. Remember that machine guns were placed under heavy regulation because of high profile incidents with them under Prohibition, that probably wouldn't have happened otherwise. Instead of looking at a real solution that would also result in more freedom and less government waste, it is telling that instead we end up with things like the SAFE Act. I wish the plaintiffs in NYS the best of luck on this suit.
 
#34 ·
And this is where the checks and balances part comes into play. The courts role is to interpret the laws, which they have done. If the interpretation is incorrect, it is incumbent upon congress to draft new laws or amend existing ones to countermand that interpretation. In this regard, Hopyard is correct, what is needed is a congressional bill that protects the 2A.
 
#38 ·
Maybe we will never know what 2A means, or what the Constitution means, for that matter. Maybe it is just a road to drive on with barriers and construction delays just like every road.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hopyard
#42 ·
#43 ·
Magazine limitations are nothing but a utopian idea.There is nothing about them that makes sense.

10 rounds,20 rounds,30 rounds...as somehow 30 rounds are more dangerous than 10. It's a stupid idea that is embraced by only ignorant fools and highly educated idiots.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top