NY red Flag Laws found unconstitutional (again)

Poper

Poper

Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2006
Messages
2,834
Location
Semi-Free State of Arizona
I like Mark W. Smith and the Four Boxes Diner.
I watch a lot of his videos.
He does a great job of explaining and helping to understand what is going on.
I haven’t watched this video yet but here’s my thoughts before I do.
He will show how they’re (NY State) unconstitutional and wrong at what they’re doing and how they’re doing it.
But nothing happens.
It is like Scooter22 mentioned, “a tennis game of back and fourth.”
They just chisel away and take those tiny wins, and they break the law again, and go back to court, and get another tiny win, and break the law again….
And pretty soon we have no rights!
 
Right now, local executive and legislative branches are more nimble (some would say devious) and just keep coming back with sidesteps or new means to the old end. Unless courts will expedite review, sanction those responsible, and make it clear what transgressions will be quickly and efficiently reversed, the games will continue.
 
stillquietvoice said:
The assembly is probably in an emergency, fly by night session to develop an even more unconstitutional law that will immediately be signed by dictator hochul.
Click to expand...

Seems like they're experts in this. Which is pretty amazing that the governing body of a state which passes so much of what they do in broad daylight would choose the cover of darkness to pass stuff that they don't want their constituents to see. That's pretty telling, in my opinion.
 
NY passes far more unconstitutional laws than the courts can keep up with. Their "justifiable need" was struck down and they counter with turning over your social media to determine if you are the "right kind of person" to get a restricted carry permit. NY will just come up with another law rewording their red flag law or just ignore the courts. There are no repercussions for the legislators passing these laws, so they will continue.
 
If you think you've got a nut with a gun and you take the gun and leave the nut free to find another way to create mischief what have you done. Of course the red flag laws aren't about dealing with the nut, but just getting the gun/s. I have some experience with this albeit about 50 years ago. In Texas back then a peace officer (that had a legal definition) could commit someone for a 72 hour mental evaluation if they had probable cause to believe the person was a danger to themselves or someone else. So you get a call and find a nut that you think might fit that situation, you could take him to the county hospital and commit them. A gun didn't even have to be involved, but many time was. I had occasion to do that a few times. Ironically after I became a Special Agent for the Secret Service, Texas law did not define me as a peace officer. So when we had to deal with a nut we had to find a peace officer that would do it for us. The paperwork involved for the peace officer was not a quick and easy process. And, probably shouldn't be. But all of this is not a new problem, we as a society have been having to deal with it for a long time. Seems to me there was a process all the way back then to do it. The difference now is just a device to eliminate guns and not really deal with the real problem. I know I'm stating the obvious. But them my 2 cents.
 
It is clear that the progun judges and justices are outmatched in ingenuity, speed of processing and will to act at the level above the lowest court. They see no real priority in acting against laws, nor getting beyond ambiguous, seemingly clever blather that leaves loop hole and paths around seemingly progun decisions.
 
armoredman said:
Remember that Sandy Cortez just opened that can of worms on the world stage, suggesting that a federal court order can be ignored if they don't like it...
Click to expand...

AOC is no Heinlein, that's for sure.

Heinlein, of course, had a quote for this... but the key was that it was in reference to people being oppressed by authority, not authority being checked by the people.

"I will accept any rules that you feel necessary to your freedom. I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do."

- The Moon is a Harsh Mistresses, Robert A. Heinlein
 
Last edited:
GEM said:
It is clear that the progun judges and justices are outmatched in ingenuity, speed of processing and will to act at the level above the lowest court. They see no real priority in acting against laws, nor getting beyond ambiguous, seemingly clever blather that leaves loop hole and paths around seemingly progun decisions.
Click to expand...
The way you want the judiciary system to work isn't the way it actually works and can't work. District level courts are pretty much useless because they always get appealed to the Circuit Courts who then make rulings that get appealed to the Supreme Court.

Most of the Appellate Circuits are majority Democrat judges and Appellate court rulings only have power in their jurisdictions.

SCOTUS should take up more 2A cases and with Bruen and a 6-3 court, they very well may. This bump stock case from the 5th Circuit will be very telling.
 
TTv2 said:
SCOTUS should take up more 2A cases and with Bruen and a 6-3 court, they very well may. This bump stock case from the 5th Circuit will be very telling.
Click to expand...

I'm leery of this.

SCOTUS taking to 2A cases is not a certainty for 2A supporters as this depends heavily on the the politics of the Justices on the bench.

It's only going the way of 2A supporters now because of the existing court make up. And even that's not a guarantee.
 
RetiredUSNChief said:
I'm leery of this.

SCOTUS taking to 2A cases is not a certainty for 2A supporters as this depends heavily on the the politics of the Justices on the bench.

It's only going the way of 2A supporters now because of the existing court make up. And even that's not a guarantee.
Click to expand...
The court changed with Barrett's confirmation in late 2020. Before that we had Kavanaugh mooting a different case earlier that year and without Barrett IDK if we ever even see Bruen being granted cert.

It's a very different court now, but we can't make a prediction on whether or not they're going to go on a full court press (no pun intended) and start granting cert for 2A cases with impunity. There is likely going to be a lot of circuit court splits on various 2A cases, so I think SCOTUS is going to have to take them up and with the House being help by GOP, no packing the court is happening anytime soon.
 
RetiredUSNChief said:
I'm leery of this.
SCOTUS taking to 2A cases is not a certainty for 2A supporters as this depends heavily on the the politics of the Justices on the bench.
It's only going the way of 2A supporters now because of the existing court make up. And even that's not a guarantee.
Click to expand...
For those of you believing that the RKBA movement will be rescued by SCOTUS, I've got two spans of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge for sale.

Not only is the Supreme Court appearing reluctant to take on new 2A cases, but it's obvious Justice Thomas has a big bullseye painted on his back -- the anti-gun faction, the mainstream media and the liberal/progressive party are taking active measures to discredit him and hinting of grounds for impeachment.

Given what just happened on Saturday in Washington state (the state Senate holding votes on a weekend), the passage of two egregious bills (HB 1143 and 1240, training requirements and waiting periods to buy all firearms AND an AWB) infringing on the RKBA, our opponents have zero fear of being held accountable or having their anti-gun legislation permanently overturned.

https://www.king5.com/article/news/...ence/281-4400321f-2822-4685-9fae-05a0f1cb1ef8

 
Scooter22 said:
Yeah right.:rofl: We need something more in NY than a tennis game of back and forth decisions that just hold the illegal rulings in place.
Click to expand...

rust collector said:
Right now, local executive and legislative branches are more nimble (some would say devious) and just keep coming back with sidesteps or new means to the old end. Unless courts will expedite review, sanction those responsible, and make it clear what transgressions will be quickly and efficiently reversed, the games will continue.
Click to expand...
What's odd is that when it comes to other laws that one side of the aisle doesn't like, more often than not, those laws are prompty set aside and kept from going into effect. When it's gun control laws though, the law typically remains in place for several years to decades before it's halted.
 
I hate to say this, especially as I'm not in the same residential conundrum some here are in.

But leaving a state for another further strengthens the stranglehold that those in power within that state have.

But it's hard to argue with the simple reality that people have to look out for themselves and their families as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

alsaqr
  • Locked
NY Attorney General Asks For More Subpoenas
2 3
Replies
53
Views
2K
CoalTrain49
CoalTrain49
A
  • Locked
First person charged under Florida 'red flag' law found guilty
Replies
11
Views
750
GEM
G
A
  • Locked
‘Red flag’ gun law should include minors and cohabitants, Washington state prosecutors say
2
Replies
41
Views
3K
BlueHeelerFl
BlueHeelerFl
C
  • Locked
How'd I do
Replies
2
Views
467
CNYCacher
C
U
  • Locked
Scalia: SCOTUS will be hearing a 2nd Amendment Case soon
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
jamesbeat
J
Back
Top