# Carrying guns in public is protected by the 2nd Amendment....the Supreme Court ruling in New York permit case...



## 2aguy (Jun 23, 2022)

Here is the ruling that ends the argument from anti-gun fanatics that you can't carry a gun in public....

Thankfully, Justice Thomas wrote the opinion...he has shown that he is sick and tired of the lower courts lying about Heller and ignoring Heller and the other Rulings by the Supreme court...

*The Court has little difficulty concluding also that the plain text of the Second Amendment protects Koch’s and Nash’s proposed course of conduct—carrying handguns publicly for self-defense. Nothing in the Second Amendment’s text draws a home/public distinction with respect to the right to keep and bear arms, and the definition of “bear” naturally encompasses public carry.
Moreover, the Second Amendment guarantees an “individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation,” id., at 592, and confrontation can surely take place outside the home. Pp. 23–24.*



			https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf
		


*(c) The constitutional right to bear arms in public for self-defense is not “a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.” 

McDonald, 561 U. S., at 780 (plurality opinion). The exercise of other constitutional rights does not require individuals to demonstrate to government officers some special need. The Second Amendment right to carry arms in public for self- defense is no different. New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms in public. Pp. 62–63.*

I think they call it the "drops the mic," moment......


----------



## Stormy Daniels (Jun 23, 2022)

SCOTUS overturns New York's conceal carry law, because it deprives people with "ordinary" self defense needs from equal access to enjoying their 2nd amendment rights, thereby violating the 14th amendment.

New York's law made it a crime to possess a gun without a license in one's own home. That is clearly unconstitutional, but this case likely won't have as much precedent value as some might hope (or fear).

In 6-3 ruling, court strikes down New York's concealed-carry law - SCOTUSblog


----------



## Failzero (Jun 23, 2022)

If NJ starts issuing and honors other States Permits I may be able to carry there when visiting my Daughter & Grandsons


----------



## shockedcanadian (Jun 23, 2022)

Isn't it odd that all of these S.C cases, decisions and issues (guns, abortion) are making the news so loudly just moths before the mid-term?

CNN ad their "America Last" donors will now loudly push this as a way to motivate the alt-left to go out ad vote, "look, they want to kill you!"


----------



## Abatis (Jun 23, 2022)

This is what I wanted . .  .It means all the "assault weapon" bans and "large capacity" magazine bans will all be challenged in short order and struck down . . .

"Despite the popularity of this two-step approach, it is one step too many. Step one of the predominant framework is broadly consistent with Heller, which demands a test rooted in the Second Amendment’s text, as informed by history. But Heller and McDonald do not support applying means end scrutiny in the Second Amendment context. Instead, the government must affirmatively prove that its firearms regulation is part of the historical tradition that delimits the outer bounds of the right to keep and bear arms. . . .​​In sum, the Courts of Appeals’ second step is inconsistent with Heller’s historical approach and its rejection of means end scrutiny. We reiterate that the standard for applying the Second Amendment is as follows: When the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. The government must then justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only then may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s “unqualified command.” Konigsberg, 366 U. S., at 50, n. 10.""​


----------



## HandleTheTruth (Jun 23, 2022)

Stormy Daniels said:


> SCOTUS overturns New York's conceal carry law, because it deprives people with "ordinary" self defense needs from equal access to enjoying their 2nd amendment rights, thereby violating the 14th amendment.
> 
> New York's law made it a crime to possess a gun without a license in one's own home. That is clearly unconstitutional, but this case likely won't have as much precedent value as some might hope (or fear).
> 
> In 6-3 ruling, court strikes down New York's concealed-carry law - SCOTUSblog


Where does it say in your own home. 

All I've seen is in public.


----------



## HandleTheTruth (Jun 23, 2022)

You see this is misleading it was a conceal carry law. 

Not a home defense law. So it's not in ones home it's carrying in public.


----------



## HandleTheTruth (Jun 23, 2022)

I agree with this ruling 

But I don't agree with the op saying that it denied somebody from defending their own home. This is a conceal carry law in public.


----------



## Stormy Daniels (Jun 23, 2022)

HandleTheTruth said:


> Where does it say in your own home.
> 
> All I've seen is in public.



That's according to the text of the court's opinion.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 23, 2022)

and here...

*We declined to engage in means-end scrutiny because “[t]he very enumeration of the right takes out of the hands of government—even the Third Branch of Government—the power to decide on a case-by-case basis whether the right is really worth insisting upon.” Heller, 554 U. S., at 634.

 We then concluded: “A constitutional guarantee subject to future judges’ assessments of its use- fulness is no constitutional guarantee at all.” Ibid.*


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 23, 2022)

Abatis said:


> This is what I wanted . .  .It means all the "assault weapon" bans and "large capacity" magazine bans will all be challenged in short order and struck down . . .
> 
> "Despite the popularity of this two-step approach, it is one step too many. Step one of the predominant framework is broadly consistent with Heller, which demands a test rooted in the Second Amendment’s text, as informed by history. But Heller and McDonald do not support applying means end scrutiny in the Second Amendment context. Instead, the government must affirmatively prove that its firearms regulation is part of the historical tradition that delimits the outer bounds of the right to keep and bear arms. . . .​​In sum, the Courts of Appeals’ second step is inconsistent with Heller’s historical approach and its rejection of means end scrutiny. We reiterate that the standard for applying the Second Amendment is as follows: When the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. The government must then justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only then may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s “unqualified command.” Konigsberg, 366 U. S., at 50, n. 10.""​




I am soooo glad that Thomas wrote this opinion...........


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 23, 2022)

And this is Thomas flipping off the lower courts...

*If the last decade of Second Amendment litigation has taught this Court anything, it is that federal courts tasked with making such difficult empirical judgments regarding firearm regulations under the banner of “intermediate scru- tiny” often defer to the determinations of legislatures.*


----------



## whitehall (Jun 23, 2022)

The decision only levels the field for handgun permits in NY and most other states have far more liberal gun laws but the governor is hysterical about the notion of equal rights. No surprise here.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 23, 2022)

And Thomas.......taking on the left when they try to declare New York state as a "sensitive place...."


*But expanding the category of “sensitive places” simply to all places of public congregation that are not isolated from law enforcement defines the cat- egory of “sensitive places” far too broadly. Respondents’ ar- gument would in effect exempt cities from the Second Amendment and would eviscerate the general right to pub- licly carry arms for self-defense that we discuss in detail below. See Part III–B, infra. *

*Put simply, there is no his- torical basis for New York to effectively declare the island of Manhattan a “sensitive place” simply because it is crowded and protected generally by the New York City Po- lice Department.*

*Thank you Justice Thomas....for dealing with the mile the democrats would take with the "sensitive places," inch.....*

*To confine the right to “bear” arms to the home would nullify half of the Second Amendment’s operative protections.
----
The Second Amendment’s plain text thus presumptively guarantees petitioners Koch and Nash a right to “bear” arms in public for self-defense.*


----------



## Canon Shooter (Jun 23, 2022)

This is excellent news!


----------



## HandleTheTruth (Jun 23, 2022)

Stormy Daniels said:


> That's according to the text of the court's opinion.


Yeah but the law it overturned says nothing about in the home. It say conceal carry in public.


----------



## Stormy Daniels (Jun 23, 2022)

Here's something that stands out as peculiar.
_
Consider, for example, Heller’s discussion of “longstand-ing”  “laws  forbidding  the  carrying  of  firearms  in  sensitive places  such  as schools  and  government  buildings.”    554  U. S.,  at  626.    Although  the  historical  record  yields  rela-tively few 18th- and 19th-century “sensitive places” where weapons  were  altogether  prohibited—e.g.,  legislative  as-semblies,  polling  places,  and  courthouses—we  are  also  aware of no disputes regarding the lawfulness of such pro-hibitions. See  D.  Kopel  &  J.  Greenlee,  The  “Sensitive Places” Doctrine, 13 Charleston L. Rev. 205, 229–236, 244– 247 (2018); see also Brief for Independent Institute as Ami-cus Curiae 11–17.  We therefore can assume it settled that these locations were “sensitive places” where arms carrying could  be  prohibited  consistent  with  the  Second  Amend-ment.  And courts can use analogies to those historical reg-ulations of “sensitive places” to determine that modern reg-ulations prohibiting the carry of firearms in new and analogous sensitive places are constitutionally permissible._

It seems that, here, the court is saying that is _assumes _that it is _settled_ that one type of restriction is constitutional, simply because three have been no prior challenges to such a regulation's constitutionality.  This sounds like a manufactured post-hoc rationalization to preserve a restriction.

To me, this raises serious concerns about what the court may hold as being constitutional, and how it will go about making that determination. I don't believe for a moment that the court will apply this kind of approach in other scenarios. In fact, based on the draft abortion ruling, the exact opposite approach is applied.


----------



## jc456 (Jun 23, 2022)

Stormy Daniels said:


> SCOTUS overturns New York's conceal carry law, because it deprives people with "ordinary" self defense needs from equal access to enjoying their 2nd amendment rights, thereby violating the 14th amendment.
> 
> New York's law made it a crime to possess a gun without a license in one's own home. That is clearly unconstitutional, but this case likely won't have as much precedent value as some might hope (or fear).
> 
> In 6-3 ruling, court strikes down New York's concealed-carry law - SCOTUSblog


McDonald vs City of Chicago.


----------



## HandleTheTruth (Jun 23, 2022)

The bill says conceal carry in public not in the home. So this will probably be challenged in the courts again.


----------



## HandleTheTruth (Jun 23, 2022)

Stormy Daniels said:


> Here's something that stands out as peculiar.
> 
> _Consider, for example, Heller’s discussion of “longstand-ing”  “laws  forbidding  the  carrying  of  firearms  in  sensitive places  such  as schools  and  government  buildings.”    554  U. S.,  at  626.    Although  the  historical  record  yields  rela-tively few 18th- and 19th-century “sensitive places” where weapons  were  altogether  prohibited—e.g.,  legislative  as-semblies,  polling  places,  and  courthouses—we  are  also  aware of no disputes regarding the lawfulness of such pro-hibitions. See  D.  Kopel  &  J.  Greenlee,  The  “Sensitive Places” Doctrine, 13 Charleston L. Rev. 205, 229–236, 244– 247 (2018); see also Brief for Independent Institute as Ami-cus Curiae 11–17.  We therefore can assume it settled that these locations were “sensitive places” where arms carrying could  be  prohibited  consistent  with  the  Second  Amend-ment.  And courts can use analogies to those historical reg-ulations of “sensitive places” to determine that modern reg-ulations prohibiting the carry of firearms in new and analogous sensitive places are constitutionally permissible._
> 
> ...


Hey in the d west whole towns you had to check your guns at the sheriff's office and couldn't carry them in town at all.


----------



## jc456 (Jun 23, 2022)

HandleTheTruth said:


> The bill says conceal carry in public not in the home. So this will probably be challenged in the courts again.


Not sure what you think you're saying.  It's your house, not public atmosphere.  Derp dude.


----------



## jc456 (Jun 23, 2022)

HandleTheTruth said:


> Hey in the d west whole towns you had to check your guns at the sheriff's office and couldn't carry them in town at all.


looks like you were born in the wrong time.


----------



## Rogue AI (Jun 23, 2022)

HandleTheTruth said:


> Hey in the d west whole towns you had to check your guns at the sheriff's office and couldn't carry them in town at all.


While they were territories or states? Big difference. I'll wait.


----------



## Papageorgio (Jun 23, 2022)

HandleTheTruth said:


> Hey in the d west whole towns you had to check your guns at the sheriff's office and couldn't carry them in town at all.


I am sure everyone followed the law except for those didn't follow the law.


----------



## Open Bolt (Jun 23, 2022)

Abatis said:


> This is what I wanted . .  .It means all the "assault weapon" bans and "large capacity" magazine bans will all be challenged in short order and struck down . . .
> 
> "Despite the popularity of this two-step approach, it is one step too many. Step one of the predominant framework is broadly consistent with Heller, which demands a test rooted in the Second Amendment’s text, as informed by history. But Heller and McDonald do not support applying means end scrutiny in the Second Amendment context. Instead, the government must affirmatively prove that its firearms regulation is part of the historical tradition that delimits the outer bounds of the right to keep and bear arms. . . .​
> In sum, the Courts of Appeals’ second step is inconsistent with Heller’s historical approach and its rejection of means end scrutiny. We reiterate that the standard for applying the Second Amendment is as follows: When the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. The government must then justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only then may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s “unqualified command.” Konigsberg, 366 U. S., at 50, n. 10.""​


I would have been more comfortable with strict scrutiny.  I don't have a clear idea what sort of laws the above standard will allow and disallow.

I hope you're right though about laws against pistol grips/flash suppressors and magazine size restrictions being struck down.

Hopefully also New Jersey's ban on hollowpoints, and all the various laws against .50 caliber guns.


----------



## BlackSand (Jun 23, 2022)

Stormy Daniels said:


> Here's something that stands out as peculiar.
> 
> _Consider, for example, Heller’s discussion of “longstand-ing”  “laws  forbidding  the  carrying  of  firearms  in  sensitive places  such  as schools  and  government  buildings.”    554  U. S.,  at  626.    Although  the  historical  record  yields  rela-tively few 18th- and 19th-century “sensitive places” where weapons  were  altogether  prohibited—e.g.,  legislative  as-semblies,  polling  places,  and  courthouses—we  are  also  aware of no disputes regarding the lawfulness of such pro-hibitions. See  D.  Kopel  &  J.  Greenlee,  The  “Sensitive Places” Doctrine, 13 Charleston L. Rev. 205, 229–236, 244– 247 (2018); see also Brief for Independent Institute as Ami-cus Curiae 11–17.  We therefore can assume it settled that these locations were “sensitive places” where arms carrying could  be  prohibited  consistent  with  the  Second  Amend-ment.  And courts can use analogies to those historical reg-ulations of “sensitive places” to determine that modern reg-ulations prohibiting the carry of firearms in new and analogous sensitive places are constitutionally permissible._
> 
> ...


. 

It wouldn't have been an issue if New York wasn't trying to call the entire city a _"sensitive place"_.
Some people need to have things spelled out for them instead of just pretending a city or state is the same thing as a courthouse.

.​


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 23, 2022)

And Thomas opens the door to fighting the use of mandatory Insurance to own or carry a gun....


----------



## task0778 (Jun 23, 2022)

Stormy Daniels said:


> New York's law made it a crime to possess a gun without a license in one's own home.



I thought NY made it a crime to carry a gun OUTSIDE the home without a permit, not inside.  That law is still unchanged and is in effect.  There was never a requirement to have a permit inside, but you had to show proper cause to get a permit to carry outside in public.  The SC struck that down, it cannot be up to the state gov't to decide whether or not you have proper cause.


----------



## Hugo Furst (Jun 23, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Here is the ruling that ends the argument from anti-gun fanatics that you can't carry a gun in public....
> 
> Thankfully, Justice Thomas wrote the opinion...he has shown that he is sick and tired of the lower courts lying about Heller and ignoring Heller and the other Rulings by the Supreme court...
> 
> ...



NY law Cancelled,


----------



## 1srelluc (Jun 23, 2022)

Stormy Daniels said:


> SCOTUS overturns New York's conceal carry law, because it deprives people with "ordinary" self defense needs from equal access to enjoying their 2nd amendment rights, thereby violating the 14th amendment.
> 
> New York's law made it a crime to possess a gun without a license in one's own home. That is clearly unconstitutional, but this case likely won't have as much precedent value as some might hope (or fear).
> 
> In 6-3 ruling, court strikes down New York's concealed-carry law - SCOTUSblog


Good but too narrow of a ruling.


----------



## jc456 (Jun 23, 2022)

HandleTheTruth said:


> Hey in the d west whole towns you had to check your guns at the sheriff's office and couldn't carry them in town at all.


How come they still had gun fights?

Then, why did they stop it?


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 23, 2022)

Stormy Daniels said:


> SCOTUS overturns New York's conceal carry law, because it deprives people with "ordinary" self defense needs from equal access to enjoying their 2nd amendment rights, thereby violating the 14th amendment.
> 
> New York's law made it a crime to possess a gun without a license in one's own home. That is clearly unconstitutional, but this case likely won't have as much precedent value as some might hope (or fear).
> 
> In 6-3 ruling, court strikes down New York's concealed-carry law - SCOTUSblog


So much for states rights.


----------



## jc456 (Jun 23, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> So much for states rights.


Defined by federal doctrines


----------



## 1srelluc (Jun 23, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> So much for states rights.


_*Nothing in the Second Amendment distinguishes between home and public "with respect to the right to keep and bear arms."*_ - Clarence Thomas


----------



## Rogue AI (Jun 23, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> So much for states rights.


The states don't have the right to deprive citizens the protections of the Constitution.


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 23, 2022)

1srelluc said:


> _*Nothing in the Second Amendment distinguishes between home and public "with respect to the right to keep and bear arms."*_ - Clarence Thomas


I think this is great.  I'm going to start carrying my gun everywhere I go.  And fuck me taking a class before I can do it.  The 2nd amendment doesn't mention anything about having to take a class before you can carry a concealed gun right?


----------



## BlackSand (Jun 23, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> So much for states rights.


.

So true ... States and cities don't have the Right to pretend they are the same thing as a courthouse.
It's a shame someone had to tell them that.

.​


----------



## 1srelluc (Jun 23, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> I think this is great.  I'm going to start carrying my gun everywhere I go.  And fuck me taking a class before I can do it.  The 2nd amendment doesn't mention anything about having to take a class before you can carry a concealed gun right?


Baby steps my man, baby steps.....I think we will see much broader rulings in the future.


----------



## task0778 (Jun 23, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> I think this is great.  I'm going to start carrying my gun everywhere I go.  And fuck me taking a class before I can do it.  The 2nd amendment doesn't mention anything about having to take a class before you can carry a concealed gun right?



It doesn't say anything about Gun Free Zones either.  A state can still require a permit to carry gun in public, but they cannot discriminate based on their idea of what 'proper cause' is.  And they can designate certain places where a concealed gun is illegal.  Right now those limitations are legal and constitutional until the SC says they are not.  Let's not bitch about future court decisions before they exist.


----------



## Rogue AI (Jun 23, 2022)

1srelluc said:


> Baby steps my man, baby steps.....I think we will see much broader rulings in the future.


This ruling is pretty broad. Many liberal hellholes have similar standards. If liberals pretend they don't understand the limitations, this Court will remove all doubt quickly.


----------



## Stormy Daniels (Jun 23, 2022)

Rogue AI said:


> This ruling is pretty broad. Many liberal hellholes have similar standards. If liberals pretend they don't understand the limitations, this Court will remove all doubt quickly.



But it's really not. It doesn't seem to set any new precedent, really. It just applies past precedent to the instance at hand. In fact, while the court points to "may issue" states as being comparable to New York's "proper cause" position, the court seems to reiterate _may issue_ laws are constitutional.


----------



## 1srelluc (Jun 23, 2022)

Rogue AI said:


> This ruling is pretty broad. Many liberal hellholes have similar standards. If liberals pretend they don't understand the limitations, this Court will remove all doubt quickly.


Yeah, two years after some liberal court rules otherwise.


----------



## Rogue AI (Jun 23, 2022)

1srelluc said:


> Yeah, two years after some liberal court rules otherwise.


I don't see it. Challenging the ruling too quickly will set liberals back decades. They are all about chipping away. This was not an ambiguous ruling.


----------



## task0778 (Jun 23, 2022)

Rogue AI said:


> I don't see it. Challenging the ruling too quickly will set liberals back decades. They are all about chipping away. This was not an ambiguous ruling.



JMO, okay?  But I think that if and when the day comes that the democrats own the WH, Senate, and the House AND they have more progressive justices than the conservatives do, they won't be chipping away.  Filibuster?  Gone.  Pack the Court?  Yup.  Add Puerto Rico and/or DC?  Yup.  Neuter the 2nd Amendment?  Absolutely.  Legalize abortion everywhere and under any circumstance?  Yup.  Kill the oil and gas companies?  ASAP.  This and a bunch of other progressive shit.

This ain't going to happen for some time yet, God willing.  But it's coming IMHO.


----------



## 1srelluc (Jun 23, 2022)

Rogue AI said:


> I don't see it. Challenging the ruling too quickly will set liberals back decades. They are all about chipping away. This was not an ambiguous ruling.


Well I hope you are correct in that the dems will cool their jets for a while.....But they are dems so.....

The court certainly looks like they are are going to take a strict 2A view on any cases they take in the future.


----------



## Nostra (Jun 23, 2022)

HandleTheTruth said:


> The bill says conceal carry in public not in the home. So this will probably be challenged in the courts again.


Why would the law need to be challenged again?  The SC just ruled it unconstitutional.


----------



## Nostra (Jun 23, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> So much for states rights.


States rights doesn’t mean they get to shit on the Constuitution.


----------



## BackAgain (Jun 23, 2022)

Nostra said:


> Why would the law need to be challenged again?  The SC just ruled it unconstitutional.


Shhh. You’re  confusing the imbecile,  HandlesHisAnus. 

By the way, that the NY permit issuance law was unconstitutional is now “settled law.”  😎


----------



## Brain357 (Jun 23, 2022)

And the illegitimate court brings more death to our country.  Homicides increase as gun laws get weaker.  Sad.


----------



## Failzero (Jun 23, 2022)

HandleTheTruth said:


> The bill says conceal carry in public not in the home. So this will probably be challenged in the courts again.


Why ???


----------



## Failzero (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> And the illegitimate court brings more death to our country.  Homicides increase as gun laws get weaker.  Sad.


Criminals & Potential criminals will have to consider their Prey May Mag dump them now


----------



## Rogue AI (Jun 23, 2022)

1srelluc said:


> Well I hope you are correct in that the dems will cool their jets for a while.....But they are dems so.....
> 
> The court certainly looks like they are are going to take a strict 2A view on any cases they take in the future.


If liberals play it wrong, they might lose the permit altogether. High risk low reward for a few quick political points now.


----------



## bendog (Jun 23, 2022)

Stormy Daniels said:


> SCOTUS overturns New York's conceal carry law, because it deprives people with "ordinary" self defense needs from equal access to enjoying their 2nd amendment rights, thereby violating the 14th amendment.
> 
> New York's law made it a crime to possess a gun without a license in one's own home. That is clearly unconstitutional, but this case likely won't have as much precedent value as some might hope (or fear).
> 
> In 6-3 ruling, court strikes down New York's concealed-carry law - SCOTUSblog


Sorry.  I didn't see your thread.  Actually, I started working on mine after the mod moved one to "history," and that may have been before you posted.  I'm multitasking.  LOL

But I agree.  Aside from the opinions themselves, the only real impact should be in a few states that just need to amend their laws for carry permits.


----------



## Brain357 (Jun 23, 2022)

Failzero said:


> Criminals & Potential criminals will have to consider their Prey May Mag dump them now


Funny how red states with weak gun laws have the highest homicide rates.  Just making it easier for criminals to arm.


----------



## Rogue AI (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> Funny how red states with weak gun laws have the highest homicide rates.  Just making it easier for criminals to arm.


Until someone with a brain points out those homicides occur in liberal run shitholes.


----------



## BluesLegend (Jun 23, 2022)

Rogue AI said:


> Until someone with a brain points out those homicides occur in liberal run shitholes.


Dems know that, they LIE anyway.


----------



## Brain357 (Jun 23, 2022)

Rogue AI said:


> Until someone with a brain points out those homicides occur in liberal run shitholes.


The states are red and have weak gun laws.  Want to talk cities?  Blue cities in blue states have much lower homicide rates than blue cities in red states.


----------



## BluesLegend (Jun 23, 2022)

And the Democrats go down in flames again, bitch slapped as unconstitutional by the SCOTUS.


----------



## Brain357 (Jun 23, 2022)

BluesLegend said:


> And the Democrats go down in flames again, bitch slapped as unconstitutional by the SCOTUS.


And the illegitimate court brings more death.


----------



## Rogue AI (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> The states are red and have weak gun laws.  Want to talk cities?  Blue cities in blue states have much lower homicide rates than blue cities in red states.


How silly. If you want to play that game, you need to demonstrate that these homicides are in any way related to the actual gun laws. You folks never seem able to do that. You make ridiculous statements but never tie them to the legislation or lack thereof. I'll wait.


----------



## BluesLegend (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> And the illegitimate court brings more death.


LOL okay, and the SCOTUS is illegitimate because?


----------



## 1srelluc (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> And the illegitimate court brings more death.


----------



## Brain357 (Jun 23, 2022)

Rogue AI said:


> How silly. If you want to play that game, you need to demonstrate that these homicides are in any way related to the actual gun laws. You folks never seem able to do that. You make ridiculous statements but never tie them to the legislation or lack thereof. I'll wait.


The areas with weak gun laws have higher homicide rates.  It’s quite clear.


----------



## Brain357 (Jun 23, 2022)

BluesLegend said:


> LOL okay, and the SCOTUS is illegitimate because?


Clearly partisan hacks.  Obama’s pick was stolen .  3 selected by a illegitimate president who was elected with Russian help and failed to get the popular vote twice.


----------



## Rogue AI (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> The areas with weak gun laws have higher homicide rates.  It’s quite clear.


No it's not. More likely cheesy data manipulation due to vastly disparate population comparisons.


----------



## BluesLegend (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> Clearly partisan hacks.  Obama’s pick was stolen .  3 selected by a illegitimate president who was elected with Russian help and failed to get the popular vote twice.


6 of 9 SCOTUS justices, all confirmed by the Senate are illegitimate?


----------



## Brain357 (Jun 23, 2022)

BluesLegend said:


> 6 of 9 SCOTUS justices, all confirmed by the Senate are illegitimate?


3 are enough to ruin the court.  Partisan hacks.


----------



## Brain357 (Jun 23, 2022)

The Red State Murder Problem – Third Way
					

Third Way is a center-left think tank that champions modern solutions to the most challenging problems in US public policy, including the economy, climate and energy, national security, social policy, and politics.




					www.thirdway.org
				





In 2020, per capita murder rates were 40% higher in states won by Donald Trump than those won by Joe Biden.
 8 of the 10 states with the highest murder rates in 2020 voted for the Republican presidential nominee in every election this century.


----------



## Failzero (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> Funny how red states with weak gun laws have the highest homicide rates.  Just making it easier for criminals to arm.


I would not know about that ( I’m a California CCW holder )


----------



## BackAgain (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> And the illegitimate court brings more death to our country.  Homicides increase as gun laws get weaker.  Sad.


Brainless: there is nothing even mildly “illegitimate” about the court, you dope.


----------



## Failzero (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> The states are red and have weak gun laws.  Want to talk cities?  Blue cities in blue states have much lower homicide rates than blue cities in red states.


Lol Newark Camden Baltimore
Chicago ...


----------



## task0778 (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> The states are red and have weak gun laws.  Want to talk cities?  Blue cities in blue states have much lower homicide rates than blue cities in red states.



This is a total lie.  Got any data to back that up?


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 23, 2022)

Nostra said:


> States rights doesn’t mean they get to shit on the Constuitution.


So they don't have their own rights.  They have to follow federal law.


----------



## Brain357 (Jun 23, 2022)

task0778 said:


> This is a total lie.  Got any data to back that up?











						Crime In America: Study Reveals The 10 Most Unsafe Cities (It’s Not Where You Think)
					

A new list ranked the most dangerous cities in the US—and the safest cities in America. The results will surprise you.




					www.forbes.com
				




Lotta red
10 Most Dangerous Cities in the US (#1 is the highest cost of crime)​


St. Louis, Missouri
Jackson, Mississippi
Detroit, Michigan
New Orleans, Louisiana
Baltimore, Maryland
Memphis, Tennessee
Cleveland, Ohio
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Kansas City, Missouri
Shreveport, Louisiana


----------



## Failzero (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> Crime In America: Study Reveals The 10 Most Unsafe Cities (It’s Not Where You Think)
> 
> 
> A new list ranked the most dangerous cities in the US—and the safest cities in America. The results will surprise you.
> ...


Where is Red Bluff California ?


----------



## Rogue AI (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> Crime In America: Study Reveals The 10 Most Unsafe Cities (It’s Not Where You Think)
> 
> 
> A new list ranked the most dangerous cities in the US—and the safest cities in America. The results will surprise you.
> ...


Pure disingenuous bullshit. For dangerous cities they use populations over 100,000. For safest cities they start at 300,000. That's data manipulation. You rubes are pretty sad.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jun 23, 2022)

Eat it raw libs!

I wonder if Stephen Colbert will cry tonight?


----------



## Failzero (Jun 23, 2022)

DigitalDrifter said:


> Eat it raw libs!
> 
> I wonder if Stephen Colbert will cry tonight?


Good Morning America & the View lol


----------



## Brain357 (Jun 23, 2022)

Rogue AI said:


> Pure disingenuous bullshit. For dangerous cities they use populations over 100,000. For safest cities they start at 300,000. That's data manipulation. You rubes are pretty sad.


It really doesn’t matter how you look at it.  Our homicide rate is 2-3x higher than other wealthy nations that have strong gun control.  Our worst homicide states are red with weak laws.  Our worst cities are in red states with weak laws.  Our homicide rate increases as gun laws weaken.


----------



## bendog (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> Crime In America: Study Reveals The 10 Most Unsafe Cities (It’s Not Where You Think)
> 
> 
> A new list ranked the most dangerous cities in the US—and the safest cities in America. The results will surprise you.
> ...


Fuck NO! We're NUMBER TWO.  No way.  





__





						saint louis murder rate - Search
					






					www.bing.com
				








__





						the peoples council jackson ms murder rate - Search
					






					www.bing.com
				




St Louis ain't got shit (besides pizza and ribs)  67 murders per 100K

The Capital City has 98 per 100K 

BOW DOWN WHO YOUR DADDY!


----------



## Failzero (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> It really doesn’t matter how you look at it.  Our homicide rate is 2-3x higher than other wealthy nations that have strong gun control.  Our worst homicide states are red with weak laws.  Our worst cities are in red states with weak laws.  Our homicide rate increases as gun laws weaken.


Our ability for self defense is off the charts compared to those countries


----------



## Brain357 (Jun 23, 2022)

Failzero said:


> Our ability for self defense is off the charts compared to those countries


And easy access to guns means higher homicide rates.  Homicide increasing with more concealed carry.


----------



## Failzero (Jun 23, 2022)

Like when the “ Happy Time “ ended for the German Sub Wolf packs in WW2 , the gunless victim happy times are over for criminals


----------



## Failzero (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> And easy access to guns means higher homicide rates.  Homicide increasing with more concealed carry.


Homicide ( killing )of attackers yes


----------



## Rogue AI (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> It really doesn’t matter how you look at it.  Our homicide rate is 2-3x higher than other wealthy nations that have strong gun control.  Our worst homicide states are red with weak laws.  Our worst cities are in red states with weak laws.  Our homicide rate increases as gun laws weaken.


You post disingenuous bullshit, get called on it, and respond it doesn't matter? Bye.


----------



## Brain357 (Jun 23, 2022)

Failzero said:


> Homicide ( killing )of attackers yes


No killing of victims.


----------



## Brain357 (Jun 23, 2022)

Rogue AI said:


> You post disingenuous bullshit, get called on it, and respond it doesn't matter? Bye.


I post facts.  All the worst have weak gun laws.  Country, state, city…


----------



## Brain357 (Jun 23, 2022)

Failzero said:


> Homicide ( killing )of attackers yes


Very few criminals are killed in defense . More people die in gun accidents.


----------



## struth (Jun 23, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> So much for states rights.


haha states have rights, but they can’t violate the US Constitution


----------



## Failzero (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> No killing of victims.


So an attacker is a victim ???


----------



## Failzero (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> Very few criminals are killed in defense . More people die in gun accidents.


Incorrect


----------



## BS Filter (Jun 23, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> So much for states rights.


States don't have a "right" to override the US Constitution.


----------



## Failzero (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> I post facts.  All the worst have weak gun laws.  Country, state, city…


No Chicago , Newark , Camden , Baltimore ... do not have weak gun laws


----------



## Rogue AI (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> I post facts.  All the worst have weak gun laws.  Country, state, city…


You posted silly nonsense that had nothing to do with what you are whining about. Did you even bother to read that garbage? The rankings were based on 'cost of crime' not gun laws. You people don't have any integrity much less the intellectual basics to discuss anything. You have posted nothing that backs your silly claims.


----------



## Brain357 (Jun 23, 2022)

Failzero said:


> Incorrect


No, it’s correct.  There are more accidental deaths than criminals killed in self defense.


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jun 23, 2022)

It's a "dark day". Yeah, a dark day for Dimocrats you mean!!


'Dark day’: Democrats respond to Supreme Court striking down New York gun law​



> Prominent Democrats called a Supreme Court decision further expanding gun rights a “dark day” for the country that “should deeply trouble us all.”
> 
> The Supreme Court released its ruling on New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen on Thursday morning, with all six Republican-appointed justices overturning a New York law that required residents to show “proper cause” in order to carry a concealed handgun. The broad ruling from Justice Clarence Thomas is likely to undercut other gun safety legislation across the country.
> 
> ...


----------



## DigitalDrifter (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> Crime In America: Study Reveals The 10 Most Unsafe Cities (It’s Not Where You Think)
> 
> 
> A new list ranked the most dangerous cities in the US—and the safest cities in America. The results will surprise you.
> ...


Yep, all Dimocrat controlled shitholes!


----------



## Failzero (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> No, it’s correct.  There are more accidental deaths than criminals killed in self defense.


Suicides are not accidents


----------



## Ralph Norton (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> It really doesn’t matter how you look at it.  Our homicide rate is 2-3x higher than other wealthy nations that have strong gun control.  Our worst homicide states are red with weak laws.  Our worst cities are in red states with weak laws.  Our homicide rate increases as gun laws weaken.


"Our worst cities are in red states with weak laws..."
Except the cities themselves are blue. Weird how you "forgot" to mention that.


----------



## Failzero (Jun 23, 2022)

Ralph Norton said:


> "Our worst cities are in red states with weak laws..."
> Except the cities themselves are blue. Weird how you "forgot" to mention that.


New Jersey is a Red State ? DC is a Red State ?? Maryland is a Red State ??? Illinois is a Red State ????


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 23, 2022)

struth said:


> haha states have rights, but they can’t violate the US Constitution


If you ask Trump, Bush, Gore, Hillary and Biden what is and isn't constitutional, you'll get 5 different answers.  

You interpretation of the constitution might be extreme.  

We saw Trump do unconstitutional things all the time when he was president.  You didn't care or you didn't agree it was constitutional.  

You claim this 100 year law in NY was unconstitutional?  You claim that abortion is unconstitutional?  Since when?  Oh yea, since Trump appointed 3 Heritage Foundation nut jobs.


----------



## struth (Jun 23, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> If you ask Trump, Bush, Gore, Hillary and Biden what is and isn't constitutional, you'll get 5 different answers.
> 
> You interpretation of the constitution might be extreme.
> 
> ...


Trump, Xiden, Gore, Bush Clinton aren't judges...so nobody cares.

nobody claimed that abortion was unconstitutional.

As far as the NY law, 6 judges said it was unconstitutional...not 3 justices appointed by Trump.   The fact it's been on the books for 100 years isn't relevant...has it ever been challenged and brought to court before?


----------



## Doc7505 (Jun 23, 2022)

U.S. Supreme Court expands gun rights, strikes down New York law​


			U.S. Supreme Court expands gun rights, strikes down New York law
		

23 Jun 2022 ~~ By Andrew Chung & Lawrence Hurley

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday declared for the first time that the U.S. Constitution protects an individual's right to carry a handgun in public for self-defense, handing a landmark victory to gun rights advocates in a nation deeply divided over how to address firearms violence.
*The 6-3 ruling, with the court's conservative justices in the majority and liberal justices in dissent, struck down New York state's limits on carrying concealed handguns outside the home. The court found that the law, enacted in 1913, violated a person's right to "keep and bear arms" under the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment.*
The ruling, authored by Justice Clarence Thomas, declared that the Constitution protects "an individual's right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home."
~Snip~
The New York restriction is unconstitutional because it "prevents law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms," Thomas added.
Liberal Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in dissent that the court had expanded gun rights without wrestling with the "nature or severity" of firearms violence in a country where there are more guns per person than any other nation.
"I fear that the court's interpretation ignores these significant dangers and leaves states without the ability to address them," Breyer wrote.
~Snip~
In another concurring opinion, conservative Justice Samuel Alito wrote that the court has said "nothing about who may lawfully possess a firearm or the requirements that must be met to buy a gun. Nor does it decide anything about the kinds of weapons that people may possess."
Alito disputed that gun regulations like the one in New York would deter mass shootings, mentioning the recent Buffalo massacre.
"The New York law at issue in this case obviously did not stop that perpetrator," Alito wrote.


Commentary:
At no point in history has any government ever wanted its people to be defenseless for any good reason. 
Given the abject and complete ignorance of anti-gun cowards: CRIMINALS CANNOT GET A CCW
Only law-abiding CITIZENS can get a CCW.
The SCOTUS cannot "expand" rights. We already have them. They can however stop Progressive Maoist/DSA Democrat Communists from taking them away.
This decision by SCOTUS on NYC gun laws has been long in coming. 
Anyone been to NYC recently? New York City and its five boroughs are a total dumpster fire…..with vagrants sleeping on every street corner, subways…. 
Then there's the violence on the streets in places like Fort Greene, City Line etc. 
The laws in NYC are made to control the honest citizen not the criminal.


----------



## BluesLegend (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> 3 are enough to ruin the court.  Partisan hacks.


3 you say, I think you fail at math.


----------



## Bootney Lee Farnsworth (Jun 23, 2022)

25-inch SCOTUS dick down the gun grabbers' throats. 

We should dance in their STUPID FACES and make them CRY!!!


----------



## Doc7505 (Jun 23, 2022)

Critics slammed Hochul over her claims that the Second Amendment was meant for muskets​








						Twitter slams Gov. Hochul’s anger over SCOTUS gun ruling: ‘Sorry the Constitution happened to you’
					

Conservatives on Twitter railed against Governor Kathy Hochul, D-N.Y., for defiantly speaking out against Thursday's Supreme Court decision upholding gun rights.




					www.foxnews.com
				




Conservatives on Twitter slammed Governor Kathy Hochul, D-N.Y., after she railed against the Supreme Court ruling which overturned New York’s restrictive concealed carry firearm regulations.

**********
​

Commentary:
The last time I checked Convicted felons were not lining up in New York Cities applying for a concealed carry permit. Maybe Gov. Hochul should be turning her attention to those who carry unlawfully would get a better effect.
Hochul claimed the Supreme Court "has stripped away the State of New York’s right and responsibility to protect its citizens." Exactly how does this ruling do that? NY still has every right and responsibility it did before. The only difference is that the citizens of the state have finally been restored some of their rights and responsibilities. NY has Not done a good job of protecting its citizens. Violent crime has increased more than 40% YTD.
If the Governor and mayors of the Blue Plantation cities of New York continue in disarming its citizens, then they assume the responsibility of protecting them. Failure to do so leaves the Governor and mayors and the governing body open to lawsuits. i.e., NYC Syracuse, Rochester and Buffalo.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Jun 23, 2022)

BluesLegend said:


> LOL okay, and the SCOTUS is illegitimate because?


It doesn’t rule the way he wants it to in violation of the Constitution.


----------



## Rogue AI (Jun 23, 2022)

Doc7505 said:


> Critics slammed Hochul over her claims that the Second Amendment was meant for muskets​
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm ignoring that hypocrite bitch until her statements are are released only by hand operated printing presses.


----------



## Failzero (Jun 23, 2022)

Rogue AI said:


> I'm ignoring that hypocrite bitch until her statements are are released only by hand operated printing presses.


She may be the Turnip’s running mate in 24


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 23, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> If you ask Trump, Bush, Gore, Hillary and Biden what is and isn't constitutional, you'll get 5 different answers.
> 
> You interpretation of the constitution might be extreme.
> 
> ...



Slavery existed in this country starting in 1776…didn’t end till 1865 when Republicans made you democrats free the slaves…….

Was slavery Constitutional?

No…….but it took Republican guns to end it…..Republican, religious people with guns…..to end democrat party slavery….

I guess you democrats hate religion and guns because they are the reason you guys can’t own slaves anymore?


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 23, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Slavery existed in this country starting in 1776…didn’t end till 1865 when Republicans made you democrats free the slaves…….
> 
> Was slavery Constitutional?
> 
> ...


Why do modern republicans worship those democrats?


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 23, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> Why do modern republicans worship those democrats?



You are the ones supporting them.,,,,


----------



## excalibur (Jun 23, 2022)

Stormy Daniels said:


> SCOTUS overturns New York's conceal carry law, because it deprives people with "ordinary" self defense needs from equal access to enjoying their 2nd amendment rights, thereby violating the 14th amendment.
> 
> New York's law made it a crime to possess a gun without a license in one's own home. That is clearly unconstitutional, but this case likely won't have as much precedent value as some might hope (or fear).
> 
> In 6-3 ruling, court strikes down New York's concealed-carry law - SCOTUSblog




The decision involved guns outside the house. As in concealed carry. It also seems to have made open carry an automatic right.


----------



## excalibur (Jun 23, 2022)

Stormy Daniels said:


> That's according to the text of the court's opinion.




Not what the ruling meant or said. The crux was permits for concealed carry. 

NY was issuing them as they pleased whereas the Court basically said they must issue when requested, with only certain restrictions allowed.


----------



## excalibur (Jun 23, 2022)

HandleTheTruth said:


> The bill says conceal carry in public not in the home. So this will probably be challenged in the courts again.




Uh, no, there is one Supreme Court and they just issued a decision.


----------



## excalibur (Jun 23, 2022)

HandleTheTruth said:


> Hey in the d west whole towns you had to check your guns at the sheriff's office and couldn't carry them in town at all.




Usually in a Territory and not a State.


----------



## excalibur (Jun 23, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> I would have been more comfortable with strict scrutiny.  I don't have a clear idea what sort of laws the above standard will allow and disallow.
> 
> I hope you're right though about laws against pistol grips/flash suppressors and magazine size restrictions being struck down.
> 
> Hopefully also New Jersey's ban on hollowpoints, and all the various laws against .50 caliber guns.




The Court said it did not address those issues in this decision.


----------



## excalibur (Jun 23, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> So much for states rights.




So, did you think the same thing when the Court ordered gay marriage in all states?


----------



## excalibur (Jun 23, 2022)

1srelluc said:


> _*Nothing in the Second Amendment distinguishes between home and public "with respect to the right to keep and bear arms."*_ - Clarence Thomas




Seems to open the door quite wide for _open carry_ in public. In fact, I believe that it did just that.


----------



## excalibur (Jun 23, 2022)

Stormy Daniels said:


> But it's really not. It doesn't seem to set any new precedent, really. It just applies past precedent to the instance at hand. In fact, while the court points to "may issue" states as being comparable to New York's "proper cause" position, the court seems to reiterate _may issue_ laws are constitutional.




It is _shall issue_ in 43 other states.  New York and several others were 'may issue' and that is now dead as the other states will have to follow.


----------



## excalibur (Jun 23, 2022)

Rogue AI said:


> If liberals play it wrong, they might lose the permit altogether. High risk low reward for a few quick political points now.


 

Twenty-five states allow permitless concealed carry already.


----------



## excalibur (Jun 23, 2022)

Rogue AI said:


> Until someone with a brain points out those homicides occur in liberal run shitholes.




Mostly where the knee grows.


----------



## excalibur (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> The states are red and have weak gun laws.  Want to talk cities?  Blue cities in blue states have much lower homicide rates than blue cities in red states.




Blacks commit 50% of all murders at 12% of the population.

Eleven of the top 20 murder rates are in blues cities in blue states and DC.





__





						Cities with Most Murders 2022
					





					worldpopulationreview.com


----------



## excalibur (Jun 23, 2022)

BluesLegend said:


> LOL okay, and the SCOTUS is illegitimate because?




Putin!


----------



## excalibur (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> The areas with weak gun laws have higher homicide rates.  It’s quite clear.




Chicago? Baltimore? DC?


----------



## excalibur (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> 3 are enough to ruin the court.  Partisan hacks.



Sotomayor, Kagan, Breyer. You got it.


----------



## excalibur (Jun 23, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> The Red State Murder Problem – Third Way
> 
> 
> Third Way is a center-left think tank that champions modern solutions to the most challenging problems in US public policy, including the economy, climate and energy, national security, social policy, and politics.
> ...




Blue cities in those states. And the black population of those blue cities didn't vote for Trump.


----------



## excalibur (Jun 23, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> ... We saw Trump do unconstitutional things all the time when he was president.




No, he did not.


----------



## excalibur (Jun 23, 2022)

Rogue AI said:


> I'm ignoring that hypocrite bitch until her statements are are released only by hand operated printing presses.




Sent by horse.


----------



## Polishprince (Jun 23, 2022)

My own thoughts on the matter is that New York should be forced to give full faith and credit to the Sheriff of Mercer County's decision to issue me a concealed carry permit in the event I decide to go there.


----------



## Stormy Daniels (Jun 23, 2022)

excalibur said:


> It is _shall issue_ in 43 other states.  New York and several others were 'may issue' and that is now dead as the other states will have to follow.



That's not what the court said.


----------



## 1srelluc (Jun 23, 2022)

Stormy Daniels said:


> That's not what the court said.


That's the effect....It's just a matter of jumping through the hoops the shit-stain states put in the way now.


----------



## maybelooking (Jun 24, 2022)

And the gov. of NY went on television and told the SCOTUS to GFY!!!!  She should have been cuffed and taken to jail RIGHT THEN.

If I give the bird to the law,  I get locked up.  Why aren't politicians treated the same way?


----------



## Open Bolt (Jun 24, 2022)

excalibur said:


> The Court said it did not address those issues in this decision.


But it did lay out strict rules for those issues to be addressed in upcoming decisions.


----------



## Batcat (Jun 24, 2022)

HandleTheTruth said:


> Where does it say in your own home.
> 
> All I've seen is in public.





HandleTheTruth said:


> Hey in the d west whole towns you had to check your guns at the sheriff's office and couldn't carry them in town at all.


Those towns also practiced selective enforcement. If you were a citizen in good standing you could pack heat.









						Did the Wild West Really have More Gun Control than We Do? - CRPA
					

California Rifle & Pistol Association




					crpa.org
				




***snip***

_The reason was that enforcement of the anti carry ordinances  in Tombstone and Dodge City and other frontier towns like Dead- wood, South Dakota that had them were highly selective. In Tomb- stone, those friendly with the Earps and their buddies got a pass.  In Dodge City those friendly with the powers that be and or the Dodge City Gang — which included Wyatt when there — got a pass too on the side of Dodge with the carry ban. That “side” is a rarely mentioned fact._


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 24, 2022)

excalibur said:


> So, did you think the same thing when the Court ordered gay marriage in all states?


No I notice sometimes we like states rights and sometimes you do.

I've embraced Republican/Nazi rule.  What's the worst that can happen to me?  I'm a white male.  Well, white enough.  White enough MAGA nazi's walk up to me and say MAGA and call the president Brandon.

Now I see how it happened in Germany.  More than half probably didn't like the Nazi's but only 50% vote.  And the economy sucked.  So I'll be able to honestly say I didn't vote for Hitler.  But I should do fine under the Nazi regime.  Seriously.  I'm not black, gay, a woman, young enough that global warming will affect me much before I die of old age.  No college loans, no kids, make a lot.

Anyways, even I am fed up with Democrats.  I'm ready to join the dark side.  Is there a secret handshake or is it just the code words we say to each other like calling the president Brandon?


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 24, 2022)

excalibur said:


> No, he did not.


Oh yes the fuck he did.  Thanks for proving my point.  You can find constitutional lawyers who lean left who can explain how he did.  But then you can find extreme righties who interpret things differently.  

You do realize Ron Paul and Bush would disagree on what is and isn't constitutional, right?  See in your pea brain you think you have it 100% right and anyone who disagrees with your INTERPRETATION is wrong.  Get over yourself.



			https://www.cato.org/commentary/exit-survey-trumps-constitutional-misdeeds
		


For example, Trump’s “travel ban,” which placed restrictions on nationals of half a dozen predominantly Muslim nations seeking to enter the U.S. — or at least the properly conceived and drafted third version of it — was correctly upheld by the Supreme Court even if it didn’t do anything to protect national security. And Trump’s claim that Article II gave him “the right to do whatever I want as president,” while accompanied by regular attacks on officials and institutions, rarely resulted in executive action that broke the law. As Bob Bauer and Jack Goldsmith write in _After Trump: Reconstructing the Presidency_, “the argument for reform of the presidency does not rest primarily on Trump’s defiance of the law. Trump’s law‐breaking bark … has often been worse than his bite.”

Or this

The Constitution’s appointments clause gives the president power to appoint officers, with the Senate’s advice and consent. There are often delays in the confirmation process so Congress enacted the Federal Vacancies Reform Act to allow the president to appoint “acting” officers for a maximum of 210 days. Keeping an officer in such an “acting” position past the statutory limit violates the appointments clause.  But Trump did it.

If you don't care you are a cherry picker.  If you disagree with me, you prove that opinions on what is and isn't constitutional is subjective.  Now I will admit this new court will agree with you now more than it will me.  So I guess you are right because this right leaning court will be agreeing with you for 30 years.  I have to remember, this is a new America.  Or the old America.  Like 1950's.


----------



## Flash (Jun 24, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> I think this is great.  I'm going to start carrying my gun everywhere I go.  And fuck me taking a class before I can do it.  The 2nd amendment doesn't mention anything about having to take a class before you can carry a concealed gun right?


Having the right to keep and bear arms is not a license to commit a crime with the arm.

Just be a law abiding citizen and you will be OK.

If you are not a law abiding citizens then you are not going to obey any carry law anyhow.


----------



## Flash (Jun 24, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> Oh yes the fuck he did.  Thanks for proving my point.  You can find constitutional lawyers who lean left who can explain how he did.  But then you can find extreme righties who interpret things differently.
> 
> You do realize Ron Paul and Bush would disagree on what is and isn't constitutional, right?  See in your pea brain you think you have it 100% right and anyone who disagrees with your INTERPRETATION is wrong.  Get over yourself.
> 
> ...


You know that Joe Potatohead supported a ban on abortion and said that R v W should be overturned, don't you?  Now the sonofabitch is bitching about the same thing he once supported.

He is beaucoup dinky dau, isn't he?


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2022)

HandleTheTruth said:


> Hey in the d west whole towns you had to check your guns at the sheriff's office and couldn't carry them in town at all.



On a few towns…. and it didn’t stop criminals from carrying guns.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2022)

HandleTheTruth said:


> The bill says conceal carry in public not in the home. So this will probably be challenged in the courts again.



Why?  Owning a gun in the home was settled in Heller……


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2022)

Flash said:


> You know that Joe Potatohead supported a ban on abortion and said that R v W should be overturned, don't you?  Now the sonofabitch is bitching about the same thing he once supported.
> 
> He is beaucoup dinky dau, isn't he?



Great reference… I can see Sean Penn right now…


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> I think this is great.  I'm going to start carrying my gun everywhere I go.  And fuck me taking a class before I can do it.  The 2nd amendment doesn't mention anything about having to take a class before you can carry a concealed gun right?



Yep….. any mandatory requirement will be used to deny access to the Right…just like when you democrats used Literacy tests to deny the Right to vote


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> And the illegitimate court brings more death to our country.  Homicides increase as gun laws get weaker.  Sad.



Nope… you lie.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> The areas with weak gun laws have higher homicide rates.  It’s quite clear.



Wrong, that is a lie…….


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> And the illegitimate court brings more death to our country.  Homicides increase as gun laws get weaker.  Sad.




That is a lie....gun murder increases as the democrat party attacks and destroys the local police, and as democrat party prosecutors and judges create a revolving door for violent criminals as they refuse to press charges against gun criminals, drop weapon charges against criminals, give them no cash bail to release them so they can intimidate and murder witnesses, and remove laws that keep violent gun criminals in jail.....

For 27 years we had increasing gun ownership, and the gun murder rate went down 49%....gun crime went down 75%..........that ended in 2015 when the democrat party went to war against the police and ramped up their campaign to free violent criminals....

Over  27 years,  from 1993  to the year 2015, we went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 19.4 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2019 (in 2020 that number is 21.52 million)...guess what happened...

New Concealed Carry Report For 2020: 19.48 Million Permit Holders, 820,000 More Than Last Year despite many states shutting down issuing permits because of the Coronavirus - Crime Prevention Research Center


-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

*Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.
*

This means that access to guns does not create gun crime........

Why do our democrat party controlled cities have gun crime problems?

*What changed in 2015?*

The democrat party did 3 things...

1) they began a war on the police that forced officers to stop pro active police work, allowing criminals to run wild.

2) they began to release the most violent and dangerous gun offenders over and over again, not matter how many times they had been arrested for gun crimes

3) they used their brown shirts, blm/antifa to burn, loot and murder for 7 months in primarily black neighborhoods while the democrat party mayors ordered the police to stand down and not stop them......in order to hurt Trump during the election.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> The areas with weak gun laws have higher homicide rates.  It’s quite clear.




Nope......you guys lie about that research using suicides to fake your numbers......but thanks for lying....good to see you are still as dishonest and evil as you were before...


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> The Red State Murder Problem – Third Way
> 
> 
> Third Way is a center-left think tank that champions modern solutions to the most challenging problems in US public policy, including the economy, climate and energy, national security, social policy, and politics.
> ...




Nope...what they don't tell you is the cities that make those numbers?   Have been controlled by the democrat party....completely.....for decades.......as they undermined their police, and released violent criminals...or simply refused to prosecute them...no matter how many gun crimes they engage in.....

The leftists use "States," because they need to hide the fact that it is the blue cities in those Red States driving the crime problems...

That is how they lie, and that is why you can't trust anything they say...


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> Crime In America: Study Reveals The 10 Most Unsafe Cities (It’s Not Where You Think)
> 
> 
> A new list ranked the most dangerous cities in the US—and the safest cities in America. The results will surprise you.
> ...




They all have democrat party mayors and are under the control of democrats......but thanks for lying...

St. Louis....democrats since 1949.......and the list goes on.......


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2022)

Rogue AI said:


> Pure disingenuous bullshit. For dangerous cities they use populations over 100,000. For safest cities they start at 300,000. That's data manipulation. You rubes are pretty sad.




And they don't tell you which political party is in control of the blue cities in Red states....

The one thing you know....the anti-gun fanatics have to lie...the truth, facts, reality, human history and human nature do not support anything they believe...so they lie......hide data, change data, 

When debating an anti-gun fanatic...go with your gut, understand that they are lying....then dig out the truth so everyone can see it.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2022)

bendog said:


> Fuck NO! We're NUMBER TWO.  No way.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




St. Louis, Missouri.....democrat party mayor since 1949....


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2022)

Brain357 said:


> And easy access to guns means higher homicide rates.  Homicide increasing with more concealed carry.




That is a lie...


Brain357 said:


> No, it’s correct.  There are more accidental deaths than criminals killed in self defense.




Yes...because when a criminal is confronted by an armed citizen....they surrender, run away, or are simply wounded.....only a little over 200 criminals a year are so stupid that they actually keep attacking a victim who happens to have a gun.....

Meanwhile....the number of accidental gun deaths?

In a country with over 330 million people, and 600 million guns in private hands, and over 21.5 million people who can carry guns in public.......( Thanks to President Trump there will be a lot more now.....)

In 2020.....

535.......

Cars accidentally killed ....42,339

Accidental falls killed....42,114

Drowning killed...4,589





__





						WISQARS Fatal Injury Reports
					





					wisqars.cdc.gov


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2022)

excalibur said:


> The decision involved guns outside the house. As in concealed carry. It also seems to have made open carry an automatic right.




Excellent point....


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2022)

excalibur said:


> It is _shall issue_ in 43 other states.  New York and several others were 'may issue' and that is now dead as the other states will have to follow.




The fascist states will still try to make mandatory training requirements so expensive and lengthy that normal people will have a hard time getting past them...


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2022)

excalibur said:


> Blacks commit 50% of all murders at 12% of the population.
> 
> Eleven of the top 20 murder rates are in blues cities in blue states and DC.
> 
> ...




Actually........you have to break down that 12%...as Andrew Klavan or Ben Shapiro pointed out....

Young, black males make up 7% of the population, and they commit over 50% of the murder......and other crime....most of their victims are other young, black males.......and they are murdered in democrat party controlled cities...


----------



## excalibur (Jun 24, 2022)

2aguy said:


> The fascist states will still try to make mandatory training requirements so expensive and lengthy that normal people will have a hard time getting past them...




Democrats schemed against blacks after the Civil War to deny freedmen the right of possessing guns for self-defense. Democrats, same as ever, except everyone is their target now (it was Democrats who passed the now unconstitutional NY gun law).


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 24, 2022)

excalibur said:


> Democrats schemed against blacks after the Civil War to deny freedmen the right of possessing guns for self-defense. Democrats, same as ever, except everyone is their target now (it was Democrats who passed the now unconstitutional NY gun law).




As Justice Thomas points out........freed blacks were some of the first armed teachers in this country...to keep the democrats from murdering their students...


----------



## airplanemechanic (Jun 26, 2022)

HandleTheTruth said:


> The bill says conceal carry in public not in the home. So this will probably be challenged in the courts again.



Um, what court do you appeal a SCOTUS ruling to?


----------



## Death-Ninja (Jun 26, 2022)

Stormy Daniels said:


> SCOTUS overturns New York's conceal carry law, because it deprives people with "ordinary" self defense needs from equal access to enjoying their 2nd amendment rights, thereby violating the 14th amendment.
> 
> New York's law made it a crime to possess a gun without a license in one's own home. That is clearly unconstitutional, but this case likely won't have as much precedent value as some might hope (or fear).
> 
> In 6-3 ruling, court strikes down New York's concealed-carry law - SCOTUSblog


You could not be more wrong, and I do not mean that pejoratively either, its only just starting to click with attorneys, the true scope of just what that decision definitively orders all lower courts and other administrators of the law to follow in any and all 2nd amendment cases. 

The portion dealing with Bruen while immensely important, is literally "teency weency" compared with what followed it, and what followed it was a total constitutional beat down of all federal infringements upon the 2nd amendment predicated upon an erroneous, totally unconstitutional two tier review process, and orders them to apply exactly the same standard the high court did, and does, specifically, "text, history, and tradition, coupled to the unqualified command of the 2nd(Shall Not Be Infringed)!

Do you know what that means, it means all federal & state gun law must adhere to the strict command of the 2nd amendment when enacting any law's and regulations, and that in doing so, the government "must present historical analog" supporting such actions, in other words they are ordered to corroborate any new gun laws/regulations with the exact historical analog from 1791!!! 

This means they cannot pass any infringing laws and enforce them upon the law abiding American citizen, because no such historical analog exists, indeed the senate brand spanking new gun law Biden just signed into law last week, that is tossed on its face by the very first court to hear it as there is absolutely no historical analog for any of its infringing provisions! 

The American revolution was kicked off against the British due to an attempt at gun control, thus the only historical analog extant, does not just reject gun control infringements, it illustrates that the nation was founded upon a total rejection of such, and was backed up by the waging of total war against King George, thus no red flag laws democrats/rinos, they violate the unqualified command of the 2nd! 

You can also kiss the GCA68 and NFA bye bye, as absolutely no historical analog exists justifying such egregious infringement, indeed until 1933 Americans were free to purchase any fully automatic weapon they so desired, and thanks to last weeks Bruen decision, they are soon to enjoy that unfettered right again! Folks Bruen was an absolutely massive beat down of the federal governments nearly unfettered century of illegally infringing upon your 2nd amendment rights!

Check fucking mate!


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 26, 2022)

airplanemechanic said:


> Um, what court do you appeal a SCOTUS ruling to?




Ummmmm...the Hague?  Or was that just in Captain America:  Civil War?


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 26, 2022)

Flash said:


> Having the right to keep and bear arms is not a license to commit a crime with the arm.
> 
> Just be a law abiding citizen and you will be OK.
> 
> If you are not a law abiding citizens then you are not going to obey any carry law anyhow.


Let’s compare now to how things will be. Now I have an unloaded gun in the car. It has to take a couple steps to load the gun. Like the ammo has to be separated from the gun. In the future I will be locked and loaded with it in the passengers seat. I like it


----------



## Flash (Jun 26, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> Let’s compare now to how things will be. Now I have an unloaded gun in the car. It has to take a couple steps to load the gun. Like the ammo has to be separated from the gun. In the future I will be locked and loaded with it in the passengers seat. I like it


Good for you.  Now shut the fuck up about my Constitutional rights.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 26, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> Let’s compare now to how things will be. Now I have an unloaded gun in the car. It has to take a couple steps to load the gun. Like the ammo has to be separated from the gun. In the future I will be locked and loaded with it in the passengers seat. I like it




Why not put it on your hip?  But that should be your choice.

Not sure what your point is?


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 26, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Why not put it on your hip?  But that should be your choice.
> 
> Not sure what your point is?


I think the supremes just made t so I’m not a mistake away from a felony. Now I’m scared I’m going to get pulled over. I don’t bring the paperwork with me. I’d have to find it. Am I breaking the law? I love it I will no longe4 have to worry about it.


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 26, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Yep….. any mandatory requirement will be used to deny access to the Right…just like when you democrats used Literacy tests to deny the Right to vote


I listened to right wing radio all weekend. Then npr. It’s amazing how different they see things.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 26, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> I think the supremes just made t so I’m not a mistake away from a felony. Now I’m scared I’m going to get pulled over. I don’t bring the paperwork with me. I’d have to find it. Am I breaking the law? I love it I will no longe4 have to worry about it.




Depends on the state........


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 26, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> I listened to right wing radio all weekend. Then npr. It’s amazing how different they see things.




Yes....NPR, government radio....fascists through and through...


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 26, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Depends on the state........


Well my Republican controlled state senate and house should get it done. Will Whitmer sign it?

Remember republicans don’t want to make it that easy and legal for detroiters to carry around loaded guns.


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 26, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> I think the supremes just made t so I’m not a mistake away from a felony. Now I’m scared I’m going to get pulled over. I don’t bring the paperwork with me. I’d have to find it. Am I breaking the law? I love it I will no longe4 have to worry about it.




In Illinois.... if you do not have a carry permit, you have to transport your gun and ammo seperated..........if you have a carry permit, you don't have to separate them.


----------



## Open Bolt (Jun 26, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> Well my Republican controlled state senate and house should get it done. Will Whitmer sign it?
> Remember republicans don’t want to make it that easy and legal for detroiters to carry around loaded guns.


Michigan already has shall-issue concealed carry.


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 26, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> Michigan already has shall-issue concealed carry.


What’s that?


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 26, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> Michigan already has shall-issue concealed carry.


I think this part is going away. 

Michigan requires that any applicant for a concealed handgun license, prior to issuance of the license, complete a handgun safety training course certified by the state of Michigan or a national or state firearms training organization.15 Effective December 1, 2015, an applicant will be considered to have satisfied this requirement if he or she has passed an approved handgun safety training course within 5 years preceding the date of his or her application and all the other required conditions are met.16

Supremes said it’s unconstitutional to make us jump thru hoops


----------



## sealybobo (Jun 26, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> Michigan already has shall-issue concealed carry.


I shouldn’t have to get a license. Everyone should be able to carry a loaded gun. It’s our right


----------



## 2aguy (Jun 26, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> I shouldn’t have to get a license. Everyone should be able to carry a loaded gun. It’s our right




Yes......except for criminals who have been convicted of a crime.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Jun 27, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Ummmmm...the Hague?  Or was that just in Captain America:  Civil War?
> [/the USA isn’t a member of, nor does it recognize the authority of the world court at The Hague.  Their rulings have no authority within the borders of the USA.


----------



## LuckyDuck (Jun 27, 2022)

Stormy Daniels said:


> SCOTUS overturns New York's conceal carry law, because it deprives people with "ordinary" self defense needs from equal access to enjoying their 2nd amendment rights, thereby violating the 14th amendment.
> 
> New York's law made it a crime to possess a gun without a license in one's own home. That is clearly unconstitutional, but this case likely won't have as much precedent value as some might hope (or fear).
> 
> In 6-3 ruling, court strikes down New York's concealed-carry law - SCOTUSblog


New York's Governor Hochul, said they will abide by the Supreme Court's ruling; however, they would restrict those that carry firearms from entering any locations her state government deems to be sensitive and various locations could be added to a list of "sensitive areas."  The subway being one.  Well, that would stop them from travelling, except on foot or in their own vehicle.


----------



## miketx (Jun 27, 2022)

HandleTheTruth said:


> Hey in the d west whole towns you had to check your guns at the sheriff's office and couldn't carry them in town at all.


Unconstitutional.


----------

