Win from SCOTUS

[kenpoprofessor]

The constitutional right to bear arms in public for selfdefense 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). We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need. That is not how the First Amendment works when it comes to unpopular speech or the free exercise of religion. It is not how the Sixth Amendment works when it comes to a defendant’s right to confront the witnesses against him. And it is not how the Second Amendment works when it comes to public carry for selfdefense.

New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment in that it prevents law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms. We therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

It is so ordered.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/supreme-court-rules-major-case-involving-carrying-concealed/story?id=85160761&fbclid=IwAR24K__XP_H47dmo6G65WH_YPFsODdmkhYaolm6u6CAanDFYGuYP4SW0w5E



Have a great, gun carryin', Kenpo day

Clyde

 

[knockonit]

was just reading this, good news for some states and all of America as a whole. see how long it takes for the idgits of freedom attempt a coup

 

[thom]

Maybe just maybe, the SCOTUS understands that the U.S. doesn't need a CCW to cross state lines either.

 

[Doc]

Maybe just maybe, the SCOTUS understands that the U.S. doesn't need a CCW to cross state lines either.

I think it’s called “don’t ask don’t tell”

 

[BigNate]

Absolutely a step in the right direction.

The proper long-term end point is national constitutional-carry. I mean - given that the Constitution, as amended, explicitly guarantees the right to carry, I'd think that any law restricting such a right should be held unconstitutional.

 

[delta6]

Maybe just maybe, the SCOTUS understands that the U.S. doesn't need a CCW to cross state lines either.

I think it’s called “don’t ask don’t tell”

Actually Doc, sadly it's "don't tell don't get caught"

 

[samnev]

Absolutely a step in the right direction.

The proper long-term end point is national constitutional-carry. I mean - given that the Constitution, as amended, explicitly guarantees the right to carry, I'd think that any law restricting such a right should be held unconstitutional.

With SCOUTUS ruling I can see other Woken state laws being struck down,

 

[BigNate]

Absolutely a step in the right direction.

The proper long-term end point is national constitutional-carry. I mean - given that the Constitution, as amended, explicitly guarantees the right to carry, I'd think that any law restricting such a right should be held unconstitutional.

With SCOUTUS ruling I can see other Woken state laws being struck down,

One can hope... I can already hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth from the coasts...

 

[Suck My Glock]

What is interesting to me is that I am seeing language in the text of the rendering (which I am reading) that specifically attacks the logic Scalia used in HELLER to defend the continuation of felon prohibition. He stated in HELLER that the government has a "compelling interest" in depriving felons of their 2nd Amendment rights even after all other rights are restored. Basically endorsing the "interest balancing" rationale he rips apart Breyer for using.

Yet in this rendering, Justice Thomas eviscerates the "interest balancing" rationale even further than Scalia did. And by doing so, lays the ground work for arguing against the NFA as well as felon prohibition.

 

[Suck My Glock]

Hopefully this new case will have a chilling effect on the new proposed laws. If someone cares enough to look for it, the new case probably establishes how these proposed laws will not stand.

 

[Doc]

Maybe just maybe, the SCOTUS understands that the U.S. doesn't need a CCW to cross state lines either.

I think it’s called “don’t ask don’t tell”

Actually Doc, sadly it's "don't tell don't get caught"

Ya got me.

 

[kenpoprofessor]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iu-FJxP_FPk


Have a great, gun carryin', Kenpo day

Clyde

 

[delta6]

Interesting.. didn't think you could possible bring more "illegal" guns to the streets of NY?

Who knew???

 

[kenpoprofessor]

And here, the NRA is claiming a victory, when they didn't even argue the case. Muther Phuckers, they were probably trying to sabotage it like the other cases.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20220623/nra-wins-supreme-court-case-nysrpa-v-bruen

Have a great, gun carryin', Kenpo day

Clyde

 

[Half Cocked]

Here is an initial assessment of this Supreme Court ruling by Anthony Miranda, an attorney in Commiefornia.

[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8Q53qcSUsI[/media]

 

[87jeep]

And on a day the red flag laws are to be voted on. Makes you wonder.....Na!

 

[kenpoprofessor]

:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

They are apoplectic over this decision, and their hypocrisy knows no bounds.

https://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2022/06/23/lol-not-enough-popcorn-check-out-this-thread-of-some-of-the-worst-blue-check-meltdowns-on-twitter-over-scotus-gun-ruling/


Have a great, gun carryin', Kenpo day

Clyde

 

[xerts1191]

:clap:

 

[Dauph]

https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/1539983989859127296?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1539983989859127296%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fcitizenfreepress.com%2Fbreaking%2Fjustice-alito-rubs-the-2nd-amendment-in-breyers-face%2F

 

[Suck My Glock]

https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1539984804258758656?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1539984804258758656%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fcitizenfreepress.com%2Fbreaking%2Fjustice-alito-rubs-the-2nd-amendment-in-breyers-face%2F