Long Island Shooters Forum banner
1 - 2 of 2 Posts

·
SASI Firearms Chairman, LISAPA Training Committee
Joined
·
7,245 Posts
Kevin:
You may be aware of it but the preliminary injunction is not the end of the Antonyuk #2 lawsuit. It's only the opening salvo. There is still a full blown trial to be conducted, examining every aspect of the CCIA's ability to meet the strict scrutiny standards set down by the Bruen decision.
Gary
 

·
SASI Firearms Chairman, LISAPA Training Committee
Joined
·
7,245 Posts
Kevin:
Judge Suddaby is a tickler, for "standing." As I understand it and, if you're speaking with the attorney for the GOA suit, I'm sure he'll tell you that the remaining issues of standing can be remedied, with the plaintiffs advising, on the stand, under oath, that they want firearms access to all of NYS' geography and transportation forms, other than the traditionally restricted areas of court, polling places and the like. As one of our other brethren said, to me, in a PM, Judge Suddaby has been hanging neon signs around the necks of the problems with the CCIA. Once this suit is settled, I expect that the CCIA will look like shredded rags, with no remaining substance.

I don't see the training and proficiency requirements being upheld, once they're under the magnifying glass of strict scrutiny. There is no history of it, for any of the other items protected by the Bill of Rights and the standards, for any one of them, have to be the same standards, for all of them. Yes, NY has had many years, in many counties, with training requirements. Same is true of the Sullivan Law. Their length of time, in effect, does not make them Constitutional.

If you can legally impose training and proficiency requirements, on the exercise of the 2nd Amendment, you can do that, for all of the others, which takes them out of the realm of rights, then places them in the realm of privileges, to be granted at the whim and caprice of the government.
Gary
 
1 - 2 of 2 Posts
Top