Supreme Court likely decision to overturn Chicago's gun ban could impact New York

This is a discussion on Supreme Court likely decision to overturn Chicago's gun ban could impact New York within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; It is too early to be projecting how this might impact anyone, anywhere, including Chicago. Even if the Court decides that the RKBA extends to ...

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 29 of 29

Thread: Supreme Court likely decision to overturn Chicago's gun ban could impact New York

  1. #16
    Senior Member Array Tom357's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Richmond VA
    Posts
    1,068
    It is too early to be projecting how this might impact anyone, anywhere, including Chicago. Even if the Court decides that the RKBA extends to States and municipalities, it was clear in Tuesday's hearing that the Court needs to determine to what degree the US Constitution applies. Regardless, it will be up to the people of the States and cities to regain their natural right to self-defense and the RKBA. As you can see by what's happening in the Virginia Senate, even in an overwhelmingly pro-freedom State, it is a serious, protracted, on-going battle.
    - Tom
    You have the power to donate life.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    Senior Member Array hudsonvalley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    lower hudson valley ny
    Posts
    849
    No one has said the REAL reason.......2nd Amendment is there to keep government in check.....if I could quote from the Declaration.....We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights...........to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. WE are the governed.....WE are supposed to have the power over them.....where did WE go wrong.......?
    Government's first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives.
    ---Ronald Reagan

  4. #18
    VIP Member Array SIGguy229's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Kommie-fornia-stan
    Posts
    7,046
    Quote Originally Posted by 2edgesword View Post
    I agree with you that the process is lengthy, difficult and expensive BUT it does not constitute an outright ban on owning a handgun. I can't imagine a court in NYS deciding that the cost, difficulty and long process time are effectively a ban on handgun ownership. I just don't see that happening but I hope I'm wrong.
    But it does infringe....
    Magazine <> clip - know the difference

    martyr is a fancy name for crappy fighter
    You have never lived until you have almost died. For those that have fought for it, life has a special flavor the protected will never know

  5. #19
    Distinguished Member Array MinistrMalic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    1,414
    QOTD from Alan Gura: "Justice Sotomayor, States may have grown accustomed to violating the rights of American citizens, but that does not bootstrap those violations into something that is constitutional."

    It looks to me like, after reading all of the analysis on SCOTUSBlog and reading the transcript, that at the very least the same 5-4 majority in DC vs. Heller will incorporate the 2nd Amendment as a private, individual right using the due process clause of the 14th Amendment.

    I thought it was funny what Justice Scalia said to Gura. (Scalia is a comedian in disguise...) He asked him why, unless he was trying to get a faculty position at a law school, that he would work against 140 years of case law to revive the privileges and immunities clause rather than go with the due process argument? Gura responded that he would be delighted in the court incorporated the second amendment under the due process clause.

    Good stuff all around!
    "...whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one." (Luke 22:36)
    Christianity and Self Defense from a Biblical Perspective

  6. #20
    Senior Member Array 2edgesword's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    653
    Quote Originally Posted by MinistrMalic View Post
    QOTD from Alan Gura: "Justice Sotomayor, States may have grown accustomed to violating the rights of American citizens, but that does not bootstrap those violations into something that is constitutional."

    It looks to me like, after reading all of the analysis on SCOTUSBlog and reading the transcript, that at the very least the same 5-4 majority in DC vs. Heller will incorporate the 2nd Amendment as a private, individual right using the due process clause of the 14th Amendment.

    I thought it was funny what Justice Scalia said to Gura. (Scalia is a comedian in disguise...) He asked him why, unless he was trying to get a faculty position at a law school, that he would work against 140 years of case law to revive the privileges and immunities clause rather than go with the due process argument? Gura responded that he would be delighted in the court incorporated the second amendment under the due process clause.

    Good stuff all around!
    Yea, I thought that statement was pretty aggressive on his part :).

    I'm hoping for better then a 5 - 4 given Heller sets a precedent and the statement by the 9th circuit that "we conclude that the Second Amendment is indeed incorporated against the states".
    Martial Blade Concepts, Jiu-Jitsu & Eskrima NRA, GOA, NYSRPA, LIF, Old Bethpage Rifle & Pistol Club

  7. #21
    Senior Member Array hudsonvalley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    lower hudson valley ny
    Posts
    849
    Quote Originally Posted by MinistrMalic View Post
    ......I thought it was funny what Justice Scalia said to Gura. (Scalia is a comedian in disguise...) He asked him why, unless he was trying to get a faculty position at a law school, that he would work against 140 years of case law to revive the privileges and immunities clause rather than go with the due process argument? Gura responded that he would be delighted in the court incorporated the second amendment under the due process clause.

    Good stuff all around!
    Yeah, after I read it I described it to a lawyer friend as a 'slapfest'.....good reading. Really interesting how people can look at something, read it over and over, and still come out with two completely opposite viewpoints....at least those that are against it are doing so for our own good.....
    Government's first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives.
    ---Ronald Reagan

  8. #22
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    26,158
    The case involves 76-year-old Chicago resident Otis McDonald, who claimed the city's 1982 ban on handguns left him prey to street gangs.
    In a place where crime runs rampant, being forced by the state to live a defenseless life is the real crime being perpetrated. There is no cause for it. Nobody benefits, except criminals. Even the political hacks who put the damned statutes in place to criminalize upstanding people didn't get anything out of it, as their children then were forced to live in the cess pool along with everyone else.


    Quote Originally Posted by TheSaiga308 View Post
    I hope and pray that ALL Americans including the "Average American" that the media refers to will have the ability to defend themselves and their families extended to them and not only to the elite classes in areas where gun-control has run amuck.
    Absolutely.

    And may the Nine Robes ultimately pull the head out, and rule for liberty and the People, when this case ultimately get before them. These ridiculous laws do NOBODY any good other than the criminals.


    In case the Robes have forgotten their duty:

    I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
    Foreign and domestic. Foreign and domestic.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, SAF, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  9. #23

  10. #24
    Member Array joecs1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    155
    But where does this leave NJ, where they describe my right "to keep and bear arms" is just owning and keeping at work and at home?
    S&W M&P 9C
    RUGER LCP
    S&W 5906
    COLT DET. SPEC.
    S&W 686-6"
    "If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck", Author un-known

  11. #25
    VIP Member
    Array oneshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    +42.893612,-082.710236 , Mi.
    Posts
    7,943
    Quote Originally Posted by titleist View Post
    How could it NOT change Bloomy's laws? Seems pretty straight forward, unless someone REALLY drops the ball on this one.
    ^^^^^Because^^^he's^^^a^^^^BILLIONAIRE^^^^^


    And New York is His town, dont'cha know


    "I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them, it is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed in their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is ‘needed’ before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents’ interests, I shall reply that I was informed their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can." Barry Goldwater
    If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.

    Washington didn't use his freedom of speech to defeat the British, He shot them!

    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." -- Ernest Benn

  12. #26
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,602
    Two quick points:
    1) No matter what the court rules there will be political entities or subdivisions which will work hard to find creative ways to circumvent the ruling and test the limits of whatever rights the court may appear to confer.

    2) It took nearly 15 years for the Federal Government to drag the states kicking as screaming into compliance with school integration orders from the Supremes. It took --literally and actually-- the use of Federal troops to enforce the Supreme's ruling in MS.

    I do not believe that the Executive branch (and Congress), and Federal Officialdom in general (regardless of party), will have the will to enforce a broad right to bear arms.

    No one is going to send Federal officials to arrest the Chicago city counsel for violating an order which goes against that city. Ain't gonna happen. Same for NY, and NYC. Ain't gonna happen.

    You'll see more dancing around the issue and hand wringing than we are used to; and that already is too much.

  13. #27
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post

    No one is going to send Federal officials to arrest the Chicago city counsel for violating an order which goes against that city. Ain't gonna happen. Same for NY, and NYC. Ain't gonna happen.
    I tend to agree with you that the feds are not going to jumping up and down at the prospect of enforcing this. But what we are going to see (assuming SCOTUS finds in our favor) is police departments and officers that would now be facing massive civil fines and criminal penalties for violating our Rights if they keep enforcing the old system. My old department was investigated by the Justice Dept. over allegations of racial profiling on traffic stops. Even when you are not violating peoples Rights the whole investigation is a pain in the rear. I can only imagine what it would be like for a department that was in violation.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  14. #28
    Senior Member Array 2edgesword's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    653
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    Two quick points:
    1) No matter what the court rules there will be political entities or subdivisions which will work hard to find creative ways to circumvent the ruling and test the limits of whatever rights the court may appear to confer.
    This is one of the reason Gura (lawyer that presented the pro 2nd amendment oral arguments in McDonald) argued for incorporation based on privileges and immunities. In his mind incorporation based on P & I provides less wiggle room for states and localities to craft legislation to get around a favorable SCOTUS decision and linfringe on our 2nd amendment rights.
    Martial Blade Concepts, Jiu-Jitsu & Eskrima NRA, GOA, NYSRPA, LIF, Old Bethpage Rifle & Pistol Club

  15. #29
    VIP Member Array Hiram25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Wyoming, DE
    Posts
    10,989
    I would like to see a CCDW (That's what we have in Delaware, we can carry blow-guns, etc.) extend from one State to the rest of them. Now would't that be an improvement!!

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Supreme Court shoots down Chicago!
    By jsunsr in forum Open Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: June 28th, 2010, 09:51 PM
  2. CNN gun poll - Supreme Court on Chicago handgun ban
    By mlkx4 in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: March 3rd, 2010, 11:57 AM
  3. McDondald v. Chicago Petitioner Supreme Court Brief
    By Jetpilot007 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: January 26th, 2010, 07:07 PM
  4. Supreme Court schedules argument in Chicago gun case
    By Blackeagle in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: December 3rd, 2009, 08:18 PM
  5. Supreme Court taking on Chicago Gun laws: MERGED
    By NYcarry in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: October 10th, 2009, 12:02 PM

Search tags for this page

any hope to overturn gun law in nyc

,

can new yorks gun law be over turned

,

how long does ny court system need to overturn cuomo's gun laws

,

new york city overturn gun registration laws

,

new york gun laws overturned

,

overturn new york gun control bill

,

overturn ney yorks gun laws

,

overturning new york gun laws

,

overturning ny gun control bill

,

scotus overturning gun law in chicago

,

will new york gun ban be overturned by courts

,

will new york gun laws be overturned

,

will supreme court overturn illinois concealed weapon ban

Click on a term to search for related topics.