Good man!
Court Cases Against New York’s CCIA
1001 - 1020 of 1136 Posts
State's latest Reply Brief to 2nd Circuit for Antonyuk. #346 in Antonyuk v. Hochul (2d Cir., 22-2908) – CourtListener.com
What is their lame answer now?Didnt have time to scan it yet.State's latest Reply Brief to 2nd Circuit for Antonyuk. #346 in Antonyuk v. Hochul (2d Cir., 22-2908) – CourtListener.com
all they are saying is that the plaintive dosnt have standing. And there would be no harm to him.... Sounds like they have nothingWhat is their lame answer now?Didnt have time to scan it yet.
they also went on to cry about mass shootings again they simply are grasping at anything ... Its a very weak argument and they will loose large portions of
They couldn’t even file their briefs on time. The only one that has filed so far was Chief Cecile as posted above. And it was due yesterday 2/20.
More smoke, mirrors and groundless statements, from NYS. They're grasping at straws, again, while thowing more fecal matter against the wall, in the hope that some will stick..
Gary
Gary
Gary, we are in for a long fight!More smoke, mirrors and groundless statements, from NYS. They're grasping at straws, again, while thowing more fecal matter against the wall, in the hope that some will stick..
Gary
i seem to think most of this will get figured out during the second circuit hearing. What i don't understand is usually if u miss your file date they would dismiss the case. But i guess if your above the law that dosnt matters
With that I agree. We know that the 2nd Circuit is not 2A friendly and, whatever decision they issue will be appealed, by one side or the other. If they follow the Bruen decision, NYS will appeal. If they ignore even a part of Bruen, our side will appeal. The one thing we have going, in our favor, is that the SCOTUS has already made it clear what it will do, if the 2nd Circuit does not follow Bruen, to the letter. Honestly, I'm hoping that the 2nd Circuit ignores Bruen, which will unleash the fury of SCOTUS and make the Bruen decision look like a minor footnote.Gary, we are in for a long fight!
Gary
Hey Gary, on march 20th will we know that day what the deal is moving forward? Or will it take a few days. I feel like the 2nd circuit will keep all training requirements including the social media. But will rule alot of "sensitive areas" unconstitutional and obviously private property but the rest of the stuff i don't see moving in the 2nd circuit
Listening to various 2A attorneys, the Second Circuit will only remove private property Restricted Locations. He said with all the other Federal cases happening, the CCIA will be at the SCOTUS in 3-5 years. The liberal judges are playing the game. Ignoring the Bruen decision.Hey Gary, on march 20th will we know that day what the deal is moving forward? Or will it take a few days. I feel like the 2nd circuit will keep all training requirements including the social media. But will rule alot of "sensitive areas" unconstitutional and obviously private property but the rest of the stuff i don't see moving in the 2nd circuit
they can play all the games they want but i don't listen to tyrants that try and take away my civil rights. Civil disobedienceListening to various 2A attorneys, the Second Circuit will only remove private property Restricted Locations. He said with all the other Federal cases happening, the CCIA will be at the SCOTUS in 3-5 years. The liberal judges are playing the game. Ignoring the Bruen decision.
Also i can see that as a correct assumption. And u know what ill take that because in the long run there going to get destroyed
For me personally, if they lift their stay on the private property restricted locations and if we can get a lift on restaurants that serve alcohol, that’s 95% of the places where I would carry. Hope the restaurants are part of it. Let’s hope it doesn’t take that long to get back to SCOTUS. Thomas is getting up there in age. He is what, 78 now? I think there is a good probability that if the 2nd circuit doesn’t lift their stay on most of it, SCOTUS may step in sooner.Listening to various 2A attorneys, the Second Circuit will only remove private property Restricted Locations. He said with all the other Federal cases happening, the CCIA will be at the SCOTUS in 3-5 years. The liberal judges are playing the game. Ignoring the Bruen decision.
hes 74 and i agreeFor me personally, if they lift their stay on the private property restricted locations and if we can get a lift on restaurants that serve alcohol, that’s 95% of the places where I would carry. Hope the restaurants are part of it. Let’s hope it doesn’t take that long to get back to SCOTUS. Thomas is getting up there in age. He is what, 78 now? I think there is a good probability that if the 2nd circuit doesn’t lift their stay on most of it, SCOTUS may step in sooner.
The facebook crap should also go away. They should just lift the stay and allow the injunction to proceed as written by the judge. If not the GOA will go back to Thomas. I do not know why no one is bringing up the Firearms Owners Protection act of 1986. It specifically forbids Federal, state and local agencies from keeping records of firearms. Its 18 USC 926. Its the same law that granted 218 for retired police, and allows for intersate transport of firearms.. The CCIA is in direct violation. Under the Supremecy Clause of the Constitution, the Federal law takes presedence over the state law.
Has anyone heard if there were any effects of the state missing the filing deadline? It'd be an awfully nice gift if they essentially forfeited. Although I wouldn't doubt they'd try it as some sort of legal strategy/trickery.
Just for clarification: the training requirements are not up for dispute at the Second Circuit. What will be heard on the 20th and ruled on sometime later (hopefully not too long) is what will become of Suddaby and Sinatra (and a few others) injunctions.Hey Gary, on march 20th will we know that day what the deal is moving forward? Or will it take a few days. I feel like the 2nd circuit will keep all training requirements including the social media. But will rule alot of "sensitive areas" unconstitutional and obviously private property but the rest of the stuff i don't see moving in the 2nd circuit
I believe, but am not certain, that the FOPA of 1986 allowed states which were already keeping records would be able to continue doing so. But from that point forward, no new states could do what New York is doing regarding keeping a registry of guns.The facebook crap should also go away. They should just lift the stay and allow the injunction to proceed as written by the judge. If not the GOA will go back to Thomas. I do not know why no one is bringing up the Firearms Owners Protection act of 1986. It specifically forbids Federal, state and local agencies from keeping records of firearms. Its 18 USC 926. Its the same law that granted 218 for retired police, and allows for intersate transport of firearms.. The CCIA is in direct violation. Under the Supremecy Clause of the Constitution, the Federal law takes presedence over the state law.
1001 - 1020 of 1136 Posts
Long Island Shooters Forum
A forum community dedicated to Long Island firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Recommended Communities
