NYS Rifle & Pistol Association v. The City of New York & The NYPD License Division

[Cavalier Knight]

09.04.2018 - New York City prohibits its residents from possessing a handgun without a license, and the only license the City makes available to most residents allows its holder to possess her handgun only in her home or en route to one of seven shooting ranges within the city. The City thus bans its residents from transporting a handgun to any place outside city limits even if the handgun is unloaded and locked in a container separate from its ammunition, and even if the owner seeks to transport it only to a second home for the core constitutionally protected purpose of self-defense, or to a more convenient out-of-city shooting range to hone its safe and effective use.

The City asserts that its transport ban promotes public safety by limiting the presence of handguns on city streets. But the City put forth no empirical evidence that transporting an unloaded handgun, locked in a container separate from its ammunition, poses a meaningful risk to public safety. Moreover, even if there were such a risk, the City’s restriction poses greater safety risks by encouraging residents who are leaving town to leave their handguns behind in vacant homes, and it serves only to increase the frequency of handgun transport within city limits by forcing many residents to use an in-city range rather than more convenient ranges elsewhere.

The question presented is:

Whether the City’s ban on transporting a licensed, locked, and unloaded handgun to a home or shooting range outside city limits is consistent with the Second Amendment, the Commerce Clause, and the constitutional right to travel.

http://www.nysrpa.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/NYSRPA-cert-petition-9-04-18-FINAL.pdf

 

[Johnm1]

So I read the certification. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this just asks that the case be heard by the second circuit of the US court of appeals. Correct?

 

[herrwalther]

Best of luck to NYSRP. Politicians in NY and especially the city have been getting away with gun control for a long time. And they are very well invested in keeping it that way.

 

[BlueHeelerFl]

In the 1990's I had both a NYC rifle/shotgun permit and a NYC target handgun permit ( which I don't believe exists anymore).

Both permits then allowed you to take your firearms outside of city limits. I usually went to an outdoor range on Long Island to shoot.

The target handgun permit allowed you to shoot as many times that you wanted, but the guns had to be kept unloaded and loved up separate from your ammo.

Things have changed since I lived there, and I'm glad that I live in a state with more freedom.

The current NYC permit seems to be on the road to confiscation. Since you cannot removed the guns from the city legally they can be easily taken from you if the city revoked your permit or decides to ban guns at 2am

 

[jonnyc]

What if you move out of the city/state? Do you have to leave the gun there??? Leave it for the next resident???

 

[deadin]

allows its holder to possess her handgun only in her home or en route to one of seven shooting ranges within the city.

-

Question...Given this, how does one get a handgun home in the first place???

 

[Speedo66]

NYC also had a hunting permit. Are you supposed to hunt only within city limits? This new regulation has to fall. NYC permits are good anywhere within the state of NY.

 

[Kaybee]

Look, no one is overturning any gun law in NYC without federal intervention. It doesn’t matter how illogical or unjust it is. That fact is that it’s intended to be unfair and any justification they say is a thinly veiled excuse because their INTENT is to ban all firearms and they will use any lying excuse or justification to do so.

I’m not being skeptical or partisan when I say that, it’s just extremely obvious to anyone that looks at it.

They also passed a racist/classist law where you have to pay hundreds of dollars every couple years to maintain your "residence" permit. You also have to get fingerprinted for another hundred dollars and every couple years you must pay again to get re-fingerprinted (in case your fingerprints changes?). That was challenged and upheld as well. They. Don’t. Care.

 

[herrwalther]

Well this is good news.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20190122/supreme-court-grants-cert-in-critical-second-amendment-case

"The NRA-supported case, New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. The City of New York, challenges the constitutionality of a of New York City law that bans law-abiding handgun owners from traveling outside the city with their firearm."

 

[Cavalier Knight]

I saw that today. Should be interesting. I figure we don't know how it will go but if they finally took a Second Amendment case they must have seen a possible infringement.

 

[rpenmanparker]

I am frequently forgiving of regulations that don’t strike at the heart of gun ownership, but the NYC law is intolerable. I strongly condemn it and predict it will be overturned. It strikes directly at “bear arms”. The city could have protected itself from nuillification by allowing locked up guns to be transported, but they got cocky and greedy. Now they will lose everything...as they should.

 

[Jack B.]

Nothing will change. NYC does what they want.

 

[rpenmanparker]

Nothing will change. NYC does what they want.

Until they can’t. That is why their overreach is so stupid. They have risked a serious reversal of the trend of recent years and will suffer the consequences. I predict the decision will be more far reaching than just this one, limited issue

 

[Batty67]

The Atlantic article was pretty reasonable until it devolved into scar-mongering at the end. I'm sort of surprised NYC would open this Pandora's box (to SCOTUS) on a pretty stupid restriction, but that's where restrictions like that are going to head sooner or later...

 

[Aim1]

Is the problem with this case that even if we win it only allows you to carry a gun outside of the home that is "locked and in a secure case"?


That's definitely not carry outside of the home for protection.

 

[ATLDave]

Is the problem with this case that even if we win it only allows you to carry a gun outside of the home that is "locked and in a secure case"?

Depends on what the ruling says. Supreme Court decisions are sometimes very narrow, and sometimes speak in much broader terms that necessarily carry beyond the specific facts of the case.

 

[BlueHeelerFl]

The Atlantic article was pretty reasonable until it devolved into scar-mongering at the end. I'm sort of surprised NYC would open this Pandora's box (to SCOTUS) on a pretty stupid restriction, but that's where restrictions like that are going to head sooner or later...

The SCOTUS rarely takes up 2nd amendment cases so that probably figured into their reasoning. They were also not expecting the balance of the court to shift the way it has now

 

[Aim1]

Depends on what the ruling says. Supreme Court decisions are sometimes very narrow, and sometimes speak in much broader terms that necessarily carry beyond the specific facts of the case.

However, if it is very narrowly tailored yet states strict scrutiny must apply to the 2nd Amendment, that would be a huge win with far reaching effects, no?

 

[ATLDave]

It would be, although certainly how courts apply each of the big 3 levels of scrutiny is less-than-scientific in its consistency. I have no doubt that many, many judges would find, say, an AWB or magazine limit to meet even strict scrutiny review. I think they would be wrong, but I have no doubt some would rule that way and then see if they are reversed.

 

[627PCFan]

I think the gun owners from Maryland might want to watch this closely. Regarding Transport, Maryland has laws (which aren't well published I might add) that guns can only be transported between a residence and a repair shop, shooting event or a place of business if the business is operated or owned by the individual or hunting unless you have a CCW. I can see overlap with the current case.

 

[alsaqr]

From The Constitutional Law Professor Blog:

"Thus, this grant of certiorari has the potential to determine the level of scrutiny to be applied to gun regulations, a question left open by the Court's decisions in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010)."

https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/c...rtiorari-on-new-york-city-gun-regulation.html

 

[Basura Blanca]

I realize there's a big picture here, and hammering NYC's regulation is just the conduit to making that happen, but it made me wonder something about the actual law. What happens to an individual who's a resident of NYC but doesn't own or rent a home? Are they just barred from the permit without exception? It wouldn't even have to be a person who's literally homeless; for instance, a guy who couch surfs his way around different addresses every couple months. What of them? Are they just denied their rights for their quasi-vagrancy?

It seems to me the regulation could've been skewered on an entirely different angle. Or maybe I'm just missing something.

 

[Styx]

I realize there's a big picture here, and hammering NYC's regulation is just the conduit to making that happen, but it made me wonder something about the actual law. What happens to an individual who's a resident of NYC but doesn't own or rent a home? Are they just barred from the permit without exception? It wouldn't even have to be a person who's literally homeless; for instance, a guy who couch surfs his way around different addresses every couple months. What of them? Are they just denied their rights for their quasi-vagrancy?

It seems to me the regulation could've been skewered on an entirely different angle. Or maybe I'm just missing something.

First, I have no knowledge of NY law or case law... Logically though, I'd assume that he'd have to use the address that he currently resides at during the time he petitions for a permit, and then update his address thereafter? At least that's what I'd do..

 

[heyjoe]

First, I have no knowledge of NY law or case law... Logically though, I'd assume that he'd have to use the address that he currently resides at during the time he petitions for a permit, and then update his address thereafter? At least that's what I'd do..

that is what you would have to do. and everytime you update your address they charge you.

 

[Kaybee]

To the left this is being portrayed as “they are suing to have guns on the streets”.