The courts struck it downā¦
12 Likes
YES a very big win, just heard some of the info on Becks show.
Larry
10 Likes
Another link:
BREAKING: SCOTUS tosses āmay issueā firearm carry permit laws in Bruen, 6-3 ā HotAir
This is huge!
In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. 570 (2008), and McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U. S. 742 (2010), we recognized that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect the right of an ordinary, law-abiding citizen to possess a handgun in the home for self-defense. In this case, petitioners and respondents agree that ordinary, law-abiding citizens have a similar right to carry handguns publicly for their self-defense. We too agree, and now hold, consistent with Heller and McDonald, that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individualās right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home.
The parties nevertheless dispute whether New Yorkās licensing regime respects the constitutional right to carry handguns publicly for self-defense. In 43 States, the government issues licenses to carry based on objective criteria. But in six States, including New York, the government further conditions issuance of a license to carry on a citizenās showing of some additional special need. Because the State of New York issues public-carry licenses only when an applicant demonstrates a special need for self-defense, we conclude that the Stateās licensing regime violates the Constitution.
11 Likes
Liar Bitchā¦figures it runs in the familyā¦
1 Like
Hmmmmā¦bet the PRoMD is one of themā¦
I see the Washington Post has already published a rather weak, yet typical (for a left-leaning rag), rebuttal article with some rather pathetic analogies regarding this decision. The wave of horseshit propaganda never endsā¦
6 Likes
The language of the Supreme Court Opinion by Justice Thomas is both strong and extremely favorable for those who believe in the Second Amendment:
āWe reiterate that the standard for applying the Second Amendment is as follows: When the Second Amendmentās plain text covers an individualās conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. The government must then justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the Nationās historical tradition of firearm regulationā¦ā
Note the opinion properly shifts the burden of proof. Conduct within the plain text of the amendment is presumptively protected. The government must justify its regulation of that conduct in a manner consistent with the āhistorical tradition of firearm regulationā in this country.
11 Likes
That headline should read: Analysis | Criminals, get ready for more armed law abiding people in Americas largest states.
10 Likes
Iāve always found many peopleās āinterpretationā of the 2nd Amendment to be laughable at bestā¦aside from the fact they think itās actually up for interpretation. Spoiler Alert! Itās the 2nd and the second shortest amendment for a reason, it was designed as protection for tenets laid out in the 1st Amendment (as well as those to come after) and the founding fatherās didnāt mince words or use flowery language for a reason, but I digress. To my original point, the issue comes from their viewpoint on regulation. Their stance is easy to defeat without debate simply by asking them how it is that a domestic threat, in particular a potentially tyrannical government, should have the ability to regulate what is allowed by the 2nd Amendmentā¦and in doing so, essentially circumventing the 2nd in itās entirety, allowing the tyrannical government to be, well, tyrannical and unfetteredā¦
Feckinā morons, the lot.
11 Likes
Funny you mention the headline, that was the first thing I laughed out loud atā¦just a shameful and blatant attempt at fear mongering, the standard M.O. of the liberal douchebags. But thatās ājournalismā for yaā¦ 
Oh, and happy cake day! 
7 Likes
Definitely good news from the Court. NYC Mayor has been schooling his chronies on a āprohibited placesā defense against this decision for the past couple of months.
They (NY, MD, etc.) will now see a flood of legislation to restrict places carry is allowed. When NYC bans carry in the Subway ā¦ that will prevent many from exercising newly restored rights.
10 Likes
And from Politico:
SCOTUS decision likely invalidates a California concealed carry rule, state DOJ says (msn.com)
9 Likes
But it will still be acceptable to beat a stranger with a framing hammer or shove an old lady off the platform onto the subway tracksā¦
7 Likes
Thatās not necessary.
Larry
5 Likes
It certainly wonāt affect any criminals when carrying firearms on subways!
4 Likes
Heās just trolling again as you pointed out before.
3 Likes
Surely youāre not suggesting that criminals wonāt follow the lawā¦ 
7 Likes
Not only is it a win for NY CCW (and self defense OUTSIDE the home), but its also a win for how they need to scrutinise constitutional cases as well (lots of folks missing this part), not to mention the 3-4 cases that weāre waiting for a decesion on this case so they can move forward (in kommiefornia). So as good as this is for NY, I think its a much bigger win for how they will have to use scrutiny for constitutional cases.
Not lets see how fast these cases move in kommiefornia.
7 Likes
Itās a family liar affairā¦simple as thatā¦
Earlier this week, after a congressional subpoena, Holder turned over all of his footage to the committee. In it, Ivanka Trump is seen telling Holder that former President Trumpshould continue to fight the election results. That contradicts her sworn testimony to the committee that she acceptedformer Attorney General Bill Barrās statement that there was no proof of voter fraud. Holder said this discrepancy was the main focus of the committee.
When is enough enough? Libs wonāt let it go.
2 Likes