Avoiding SCOTUS

It worked last time so New York state is again trying to avoid showing up before SCOTUS:

Turning Any Second Amendment Victory Into Defeat

Now, in 2022, we are witnessing a similar strategy. The Democrat anti-gun politicians have begun to introduce bills in anticipation of the possible 2022 SCOTUS decision. They have a plan to circumvent any SCOUS ordered requirements to replace current laws with  “shall issue” firearms carry laws.

On Jan. 10, Rep. Jo Ann Simon introduced A08684, a bill prohibiting “firearms in certain locations, including but not limited to all forms of public transportation, large gatherings and food and drink establishments,” in the New York Assembly. If the politicians can deny law-abiding citizens the right to carry firearms almost anywhere, a Right-to-Carry permit becomes just a useless piece of paper.  Law abiding citizens are still left defenseless, while lawsuits abound and attorneys keep laughing all the way to the bank.

They probably are going to make New York “shall issue” but with so many places off limits to people who carry that you have the “right’” to carry in name only. Sort of like making it illegal to have a gun store within five miles of a school (as President Obama suggested). No town or city in the U.S. would have been allowed to have a gun store within the city limits.

These people need to be prosecuted.


11 thoughts on “Avoiding SCOTUS

  1. Such actions seem to be intended to raise the frustration level to the point that people see no option but to move into civil disobedience in relation to carry and use of firearms. Unfortunately that is exactly what the left desires. It provides a basis in law to prosecute severely and to justify preemptive action against all gun owners. Never mind that the criminals do worse with impunity. They are the useful pawns in the leftist plan whose crimes are ignored as a means to further incite the reactions that the leftists will use to leverage more power and authority. There will, in the long run, be no winners in this game. There will be a few survivors but it will be very ugly. The only solution is a principled return by society in general to the Judaeo-Christian ethics and values that this land was founded on. Given the ubiquitous disregard for those ideas, there does not seem to be a welcoming future before us.

  2. ” It provides a basis in law to prosecute severely and to justify preemptive action against all gun owners.”

    This will not turn out the way they think it will.

    They seemingly – as Powerwagon points out – want to provoke civil disobedience. I very, very sincerely hope that does not come to pass and more reasonable action becomes the norm, but if it does occur, once begun there will be no reason whatsoever to not carry it to full conclusion; Joe’s recommended solution – trials based on existing black-letter law – will be superfluous.

    • The magic words that were used in Roe v Wade and other abortion cases were “Capable of repetition but evading review.”
      Just because they repealed the law before the courts could tell them it was an unconstitutional law doesn’t mean the court cannot make that ruling.

      • Absolutely Windy. They didn’t have any trouble deciding things in Miller vs.US.. Miller’s lawyer wasn’t even there for oral arguments.
        And Miller was dead already.
        It doesn’t matter the ordinance. 2A was found an individual right that New York should be enjoined from infringing upon.
        But then again. Not even the supreme court cares much for constitution anymore.
        They’ve been finding rights that don’t exist and restricting rights that are common sense for over a Millenia now.
        Oh, did our forefathers try to warn us.

  3. This is why I have always prioritized outlawing gun-free zones over everything else on our wish list.

  4. Pingback: Quote of the day—Justice Sonia Sotomayor | The View From North Central Idaho

  5. “Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.”

    ― H.L. Mencken, Prejudices: First Series

  6. The reason they want to moot the case by changing the law like last time is that a SCOTUS ruling is Nationwide, not just New York. That would invalidate ALL “may issue” laws in every Democrat State.

  7. This never goes away so long as we tolerate enemies of our constitution inside our borders, to vote, and even hold office. As it is, we’re guaranteed a never-ending war of attrition against the rights, and limits on government reach, that are promised to all citizens in our supreme law of the land.

    The concept of “against all enemies, foreign and domestic” has been so long ignored that it may as well never have existed. Nor is there any visible movement to restore it. Of course it would be considered outrageous today if even a slight suggestion of an effort were made to enforce it. And so we’re essentially a dead country, and have been for over a century. It’s just been taking a long time for the heartbeat and respiration to cease. There’s no going back now, except through the crucible so to speak, or through the literal “lake of fire” which is divine intervention after the fulfillment of iniquity.

  8. The problem with shall issue, for the gun-grabbers, is that it’s another incremental chip away at their prior iron grasp.

    They taught us too well. We saw how well their incremental approach worked and have wisely started using it against them. Steadily chipping away at their crappy, Jim-Crow-inspired criminal-friendly laws.

    I completely understand those of you who want to completely bury the NFA and all the other God-awful gun control laws in the trash can. But sometimes, you have to take the long road to win.

  9. Illinois was dragged into shall-issue kicking and screaming. They placed burdens on getting a permit and no reciprocity. They also put in a draconian list of forbidden zones, making it perilous to carry.

Comments are closed.