General Categories > Laws and Legislation
SCOTUS rules on New York Licensing
sidearm1:
Waiting for more details, but the SCOTUS has ruled that New York's "proper cause" licensing of carry permits is unconstitutional. It ruled that Shall Issue permits are OK as long as it protects the rights of the individual.
Phantom:
--- Quote from: sidearm1 on June 23, 2022, 12:09:20 PM ---Waiting for more details, but the SCOTUS has ruled that New York's "proper cause" licensing of carry permits is unconstitutional. It ruled that Shall Issue permits are OK as long as it protects the rights of the individual.
--- End quote ---
From what I've heard those details might end up more interesting and more far reaching them we think. :o
A big part being how courts are to interpret and applied related laws from now. (Not sure about older already resolved cases.)
Basically the right to keep and bare arms is older then the 2Nd amendment.
And the 2Nd amendment exists mainly to keep the government from infringing on those rights. ???
It will be interesting to watch ......I'm not saying they won't still try BUT.... could be real interesting!
shooter:
Have to wait and see where this goes. im hearing stuff all over the map on what its gonna effect,
Phantom:
--- Quote from: shooter on June 23, 2022, 05:25:22 PM --- Have to wait and see where this goes. im hearing stuff all over the map on what its gonna effect,
--- End quote ---
One of the more interesting ones i heard is that RED flag laws might (Might) be unconstitutional.
GreyGeek:
Say you have a fight with a relative, or your wife or girl friend and they, out of spite, report you as owning firearms and being psychology unstable. You HAVE NOT committed a crime, but a LEO shows up and using the Red Flag Law confiscates all of your firearms. The RFL's do not allow you to know who has accused you. They do not allow you to know on what basis you are being accused of being a danger.
Your Constitutional rights, on the other hand, are being denied wholesale.
4th Amendment - "...The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated,..."
6th Amendment - Not having been accused of a crime your home is searched and your property removed without a warrant, or even with one. So, you can't face your accuser and cross examine them in a court of law. Since there is no trial, speedy or otherwise, you can't present witnesses in your favor to counter arguments made by your accuser. Further, there is no limit to how long your property will be withheld from you.
8th Amendment - "... cruel or unusual punishment..." You have property taken from you for being accused of being a threat to the community, without any proof being presented, or the names of your accusers being given. You are not given a speedy trial to cross examine your accusers. You have no recourse.
Cruel, unusual, and unconstitutional. Red Flag Laws fly in the face of the Constitution and 200 years of jurisprudence. It is simply just another unconstitutional infringement.
If you could learn the name of the person who triggered the RFL against you, you would sue them for defamation of character.
And HOW do I know that the Red Flag Laws are unconstitutional?
Because on May 17, 2021 the SCOTUS ruled that they were unconstitutional, in Caniglia vs Strom:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/20-157
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/caniglia-v-strom/
--- Quote ---Holding: Neither the holding nor logic of Cady v. Dombrowski justifies the removal of Edward Caniglia’s firearms from his home by police officers under a “community caretaking exception” to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement.
Judgment: Vacated and remanded, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Thomas on May 17, 2021. Chief Justice Roberts filed a concurring opinion, in which Justice Breyer joined. Justices Alito and Kavanaugh also filed concurring opinions.
--- End quote ---
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version