Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 35 of 55

Thread: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,708

    Default New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen


  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    59,315

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    SCOTUS seems to be reading more into the words of the militia clauses and the 2nd that is actually written.
    Can any one point to the words self-defense in either the Constitution or Amendment?
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Sharon, MA
    Posts
    24,926

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    It seems that the phrase 'well regulated militia' has been completely ignored... and the stated constitutional reason for the second amendment... notably, 'for the security of the state' has been perverted. Neither textualism, or originalism, could possibly be justifications for this decision.

    As I have said before, SCOTUS is the MOST political branch of government.
    "Reason and facts are sacrificed to opinion and myth. Demonstrable falsehoods are circulated and recycled as fact. Narrow minded opinion refuses to be subjected to thought and analysis. Too many now subject events to a prefabricated set of interpretations, usually provided by a biased media source. The myth is more comfortable than the often difficult search for truth."







  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Valley of the Sun
    Posts
    119,258

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    shall not be infringed, bitches
    Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,708

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    It is decided

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    o
    Posts
    10,471

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    Not that I have any intention of reading it, but I have to wonder what there is to say, relevant to the subject, that takes a hundred-thirty-five pages.


  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    59,315

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Pless View Post
    shall not be infringed, bitches
    What shall not be infringed?
    The right to own a long gun for putting food in the pot?
    The right to belong to a well regulated militia?
    The right to wear your penis extension when shopping at Walmart?
    The right to carry a weapon for shooting at cops at a traffic stop?
    Which right would that be, O Fartmeister?
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    St. Paul, MN, USA
    Posts
    62,256

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    We need to repeal the @#$&#^ Second Amendment. Yeah, I know, sparkly pink unicorns. Or get enough sane people on the Supreme Court who can read the first half of the sentence, the part about the militia.

    The lives lost in the US because of idiot gun fetishists probably number in the millions, or near. Makes we wish I believed in hell.
    Last edited by Keith Wilson; 06-23-2022 at 11:13 AM.
    "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations,
    for nature cannot be fooled."

    Richard Feynman

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,708

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    Quote Originally Posted by Peerie Maa;[URL="tel:6683162"
    6683162[/URL]]What shall not be infringed?
    The right to own a long gun for putting food in the pot?
    The right to belong to a well regulated militia?
    The right to wear your penis extension when shopping at Walmart?
    The right to carry a weapon for shooting at cops at a traffic stop?
    Which right would that be, O Fartmeister?
    The rights not afforded the Irish in 1845?

    How might that have played out differently?

    I love it when the brits don’t like our stuff.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,708

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    The opinion really is worth a read. If you have the discipline for such fun.

    Agree or disagree, moot point.

    A lot of smart people spent a lot of time on it.

    64097FC4-E36E-4B44-AB5A-52706D2F264D.jpg

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    59,315

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    You can argue with the first paragraph right off. The amendment's opening clause links it firmly to the needs of the militia.
    As I said above, there is nothing in the wording about "confrontation". That was made up out of the whole cloth.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Location
    Dubai, UAE
    Posts
    439

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    Second Amendment


    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    2nd amendment.JPG


    Depending on how the second amendment is interpreted, either people can bear arms or they can't.

    What it does not say is that people can bear arms subject to reasonable, well defined restrictions such as when they might be before, er, justices of the peace and other government officials.

    It sounds horribly as if they realise that guns are rather dangerous to be on the receiving end of and so a sensible compromise is to infringe on the right of the people to bear arms anywhere near themselves and their colleagues but, so as to keep the gun folks happy, they leave the general public in the firing line.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    40,115

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    Scalia... I'd like to p1ss on his grave.
    "Where you live in the world should not determine whether you live in the world." - Bono

    "Live in such a way that you would not be ashamed to sell your parrot to the town gossip." - Will Rogers

    "Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others." - Groucho Marx

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Valley of the Sun
    Posts
    119,258

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    Quote Originally Posted by Peerie Maa View Post
    You can argue with the. . .
    are you new here?

    this is the bilge

    we have in actuality argued whether water is wet in this venue. . .
    Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Topeka, KS
    Posts
    2,020

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    I would like to think that courts are insulated from the political mood of the moment. Of course I know that is a humanly impossible expectation of them. That is why the news being reported here of the already gun controlled Australia using police to crack down on anti lockdown speech dissent was to me the tipping point against gun control in the USA. The bilge didn't' see it that way and indeed it was an "apple and oranges" comparison. But among the age group of Americans that are politically engaged and have the property and income that matters, our fringe right wing and libertarian irrational, ridiculous belief that the 2nd Amendment was somehow a meaningful protection and safeguard for 1st Amendment freedom of speech suddenly resonated with the people that really run America....

    Of course that was the time period when the current legal thinking jelled. Then the Ukraine happened and Ukrainians were shown in Western mainstream media training with plywood rifles. But by that time the change in consensus which would have been infinitely reinforced had already happened.
    Last edited by Landrith; 06-23-2022 at 11:53 AM.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Entry Level
    Posts
    25,790

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    Quote Originally Posted by Keith Wilson View Post
    We need to repeal the @#$&#^ Second Amendment.
    Dare I say . . .
    If Russia wins, there will be no Ukraine; if Ukraine wins, there will be a new Russia.

    -- Dmytro Kuleba, Foreign Minister of Ukraine

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    59,315

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Pless View Post
    are you new here?

    this is the bilge

    we have in actuality argued whether water is wet in this venue. . .
    Wet fart?
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Valley of the Sun
    Posts
    119,258

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    Quote Originally Posted by Keith Wilson View Post
    We need to repeal the @#$&#^ Second Amendment. Yeah, I know, sparkly pink unicorns. Or get enough sane people on the Supreme Court who can read the first half of the sentence, the part about the militia.

    The lives lost in the US because of idiot gun fetishists probably number in the millions, or near. Makes we wish I believed in hell.

    the progressive lost cause, gun control. . .

    imagine how much better off we'd be as a nation if dems would drop gun control from their brand
    Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Central Coast, Ca
    Posts
    35,359

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion...

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,708

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    What a great country where a black man who grew up in a poor community in Georgia can sit on the supreme court.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Isle of Mull, Scotland
    Posts
    10,210

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Pless View Post
    the progressive lost cause, gun control. . .

    imagine how much better off we'd be as a nation if dems would drop gun control from their brand
    And imagine how much better off you would be if you had sensible gun control measures that worked.
    You know, like civilised countries have....

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Valley of the Sun
    Posts
    119,258

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    Quote Originally Posted by birlinn View Post
    And imagine how much better off you would be if you had sensible gun control measures that worked.
    You know, like civilised countries have....
    fantasy
    Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    St. Paul, MN, USA
    Posts
    62,256

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Pless View Post
    the progressive lost cause, gun control. . . imagine how much better off we'd be as a nation if dems would drop gun control from their brand
    Yeah, right. It may be a lost cause for now, but dropping it would not would not change enough votes to fill a decent size bar, and the piles of corpses will continue to get higher and higher.

    Quote Originally Posted by bluedog225 View Post
    What a great country where a black man who grew up in a poor community in Georgia can sit on the supreme court.
    And make just as bad decisions as a white man who grew up rich and privileged, or maybe even worse.
    "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations,
    for nature cannot be fooled."

    Richard Feynman

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    59,315

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    Quote Originally Posted by birlinn View Post
    And imagine how much better off you would be if you had sensible gun control measures that worked.
    You know, like civilised countries have....
    Your medical insurance costs would be lower for a start.
    We always bank on about gun deaths. What about the cost to society of putting the survivors back together.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Central Coast, Ca
    Posts
    35,359

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    Quote Originally Posted by bluedog225 View Post
    What a great country where a black man who grew up in a poor community in Georgia can sit on the supreme court.

    884CE487-A404-4C27-983D-E0D787F9840A.jpeg

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    New Zealand's Far North
    Posts
    11,012

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    There is nothing quite as permanent as a good temporary repair.

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA USA
    Posts
    16,794

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Landrith View Post
    I would like to think that courts are insulated from the political mood of the moment.
    "Insulated from the political mood of the moment?" ROTFLMAO

    Not after the Republican Party has spent the last 40 years installing young, unqualified ideologues who are reliable party lackeys and stooges.

    Not that the entire blame lies on the Repugnicans. A lot of Democratic senators have voted to confirm these bozos.

    There is an assumption on the part of the Senate and the confirmation process that any presidential nominee is qualified and acceptable until proved unfit. The Senate has an affirmative duty to "advise and consent": the assumption should be that the nominee is unfit for the office until the President and the nominee demonstrate that he is not only qualified for the job, but is the best candidate for the job.

    They are hiring someone with lifetime tenure after all. They've confirmed people who have essentially zero experience in the courts.

    At least in a university, to get tenure, one must

    - get hired in a tenure-track position, and
    - spend several years or so in that position
    - do original research, and
    - publish,
    - go through tenure review,
    - get promoted,
    - repeat the above for another several years,

    And then

    - apply for tenure,
    - obtain recommendations from outside scholars,
    - get approved by the tenure committee, and
    - get approved by the dean, and
    - finally, get approved by the provost and granted tenure.
    You would not enjoy Nietzsche, sir. He is fundamentally unsound. — P.G. Wodehouse (Carry On, Jeeves)

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA USA
    Posts
    16,794

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Canoeyawl View Post
    Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion...

    He can write?
    You would not enjoy Nietzsche, sir. He is fundamentally unsound. — P.G. Wodehouse (Carry On, Jeeves)

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    433

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    What it means has already been decided in a series of recent decisions. Heller and McDonald, mainly. Heller said 1) firearms and today's pistols are protected under 2A; 2) Militia is not the state militia, it is the people (based on 18th century meaning, [sorta like "body politic" is not the legislature]); 3) "Bear arms" means carry on your person, and off one's property.

    In McDonald, The supreme court affirmed that the core meaning of 2A is individual self defense.

    Carry laws are in most states now, so there is nothing constitutionally surprising about those. The question in this case was only whether NYC is some special fairy land that can ignore the presidents.

    2A advocates have been looking for specific cases that make specific rulings possible, and chiseling away at laws that restrict the right of self-defense. These create new precedents, but most are more limited than one might imagine. Regulation is still possible, within bounds.

    It is anomalous that the US has 2A, it isn't as weird that given it exists is has force. The reason 2A opponents keep loosing is probably because they don't care as much about it, and it is a powerful wedge issue, so the more mayhem the better. Also, most of the commerce is on the 2A side. Until recently citizen ownership of arms was a positive militarily. It isn't the military that invents good weapons and tactic, it is the private citizen, and sector. But that point no longer seem to have much importance.

    By the way, the fact SCOTUS keeps affirming the singular right of self defense does mean that 2A advocacy no longer is linked to having actual militia grade weapons. AR-15s, are mostly self-defense weapons in today's military. The heavy duty killing, particularly at a strategic level, is not done by low powered personal weapons.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    433

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    Quote Originally Posted by birlinn View Post
    And imagine how much better off you would be if you had sensible gun control measures that worked.
    You know, like civilised countries have....
    The reality is other countries have laxer gun laws in certain respects than the US. So for instance throughout much of Europe, a silencer (legal term) is routine, and you can just buy one for what they cost. In the US, they have become more accessible, but there is an expensive tax, and ludicrous restrictions such as on replacement parts. We are talking a tube with baffles here, the new military issue one is 3D printed, obviously not home machines, but you can't put 19th century technology out of reach in the world's most technologically advanced country, particularly one with an open border.

    We can get quite a few tasty things in Canada you can't get in the US. We can still, at this time, get everything you would need for a mass shooting. We used to be able to go into a store, and for 450 canadian get an assault rifle and 2000 rounds of ammo. You would have to show your license, but no record was kept, or background check made. You can't do it now because of shortages.

    Canada had the least restrictive gun laws after the US, and still does, though there is legislation that has been passed, however, it still pretty reasonable. And we had the lowest murder rate (if you look at brackets, there are some outliers like Japan, but beyond that we were in the group of low murder rate countries where being a 4.6 vs a 4.7 might cost you 20 places, but is statistically meaningless. So guns are not the problem. The US is just massively violent.

  31. #31
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    St. Paul, MN Mississippi River Milepost 840.2
    Posts
    14,201

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    ^ You are mistaken. Canada’s gun controls are substantially stronger than in the U.S. Your memory about buying an automatic weapon is either faulty, or recalls how things were 45 years ago.

    The U.S. is an outlier in least restrictive laws, most guns per capita, and most gun deaths per capita. It’s the guns, period.

    In the wake of the Winnipeg General Strike of 1919 came concern over security in general and immigrant radicals in particular. That year Parliament passed a law requiring all aliens to have a permit to possess any kind of gun. Still afraid of civil unrest and the number of guns that had returned home with veterans of the Great War, Parliament in 1920 put a similar requirement on all Canadians. When it seemed that the radicalism of 1919 had passed by 1921, Parliament relaxed the permit requirements on the long guns of British subjects, but kept the policies regarding aliens.
    Change came again in the early 1930s with more stringent guidelines for issuing gun permits, as well as mandatory minimum sentences for using a firearm in the commission of a crime. Fearful of the unrest the Depression could unleash, Parliament created the nation’s first gun registry in 1935.
    The registry was eventually centralized under the RCMP in 1951 and modified in 1969 to require separate registration certificates for each restricted weapon. The late 1960s also saw the creation of the legal categories of “firearm,” “restricted weapon,” and “prohibited weapon” to accompany the changes in registration requirements.
    Prohibitions on fully automatic weapons came into effect under Bill C-51 in 1977, as well as screening for Firearms Acquisition Certificates, and requirements for Firearms and Ammunition Business Permits. Bill C-51 was a compromise bill after gun owners (almost exclusively men) pushed back against the attempt to pass Bill C-83 in 1976—a response to rising rates of violent crime and gun-related murders, and two school shootings in Brampton and Ottawa, Ontario. Although the prohibition on fully automatic weapons remained from the bill’s original incarnation, restrictions like requiring two personal letters of reference when applying for a firearms license were dropped.
    Under current Canadian law, most handguns are classified as “restricted firearms” and handgun owners must obtain a federal firearms license, a registration certificate, and Authorization to Transport if the gun is to be moved to a new location. Concealed carry permits are rare and hard to obtain, though in recent years applications have been on the rise.
    But, as Global News reports, citing the increase in concealed carry permit applications from British Columbia, Alberta, and the Arctic, the recent spike is “likely driven by demand among people who work in the bush and want portable protection against wildlife.”
    https://origins.osu.edu/article/good...tent_entity=en

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Norwalk CT
    Posts
    2,791

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    Kinda feels like the SCOTUS and particularly Thomas and the newly appointed justices are being as petty and blatantly antagonistic as the GOP that installed them. I cant help thinking that this is some sick kind of payback; an "Owning the Libs" move. The potential overturning of Roe feels very much the same.

    This is not an apolitical court by any stretch of the imagination.

  33. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Gulf Islands B.C.
    Posts
    4,312

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    Quote Originally Posted by C. Ross View Post
    ^ You are mistaken. Canada’s gun controls are substantially stronger than in the U.S. Your memory about buying an automatic weapon is either faulty, or recalls how things were 45 years ago.

    The U.S. is an outlier in least restrictive laws, most guns per capita, and most gun deaths per capita. It’s the guns, period.
    He’s not wrong. The only thing he shouldn’t have done is use “assault rifle” in the modern, inaccurate way. But that’s the way it’s been used in this forum so who could blame him. What do you, after all, call an AR-15 or similar? Probably assault rifle. Your (to use the more accurate name) semi auto rifles aren’t (in almost every case) full auto either.


    I’ve got multiple “assault rifles” in my safe, purchased with no record keeping by government. Also several thousand rounds of ammo for each (other than for the 300 blackout. Ammo for it isn’t cheap…). They did, however, cost me somewhat more than $450 each.


    The difference is the license that I have and maintain. The process for getting it is a huge filter for nuts.
    Last edited by Decourcy; 06-24-2022 at 08:30 AM.

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    o
    Posts
    10,471

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    I’ve got multiple “assault rifles” in my safe, purchased with no record keeping by government. Also several thousand rounds of ammo for each...
    Why?


  35. #35
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,708

    Default Re: New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen

    Facts matter. Here are some data points.

    These are the rankings:

    64F840C1-8836-43D9-BFA9-1E7F4D394C58.jpg

    We own a lot of guns.

    D235E06A-8EC9-4778-AD6B-27A6721B2205.jpg

    Some places are safer. The wild west fears didn’t pan out.

    399DE30D-3491-4310-B1E3-138FAF10874D.jpg
    Last edited by bluedog225; 06-24-2022 at 09:06 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •