View in: Desktop
Copyright @2022 TigerDroppings.com. All rights reserved.
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Posted by
Message
Does the 2A ruling justify complete constitutional carry?
Posted by SportTiger1
on 6/23/22 at 4:48 pm
52
5Meaning, does this end up impacting more than just extremely restrictive states like NY and CA?
LA for instance...i could easily make the case that
$150 class +
8 hours "training" +
$125 Fee to the state +
~4-6 waiting for them to approve.
.....and do it all over again in 5 years.
All that crap is the definition of infringement.
Especially for poor people who dont have money lying around OR a day to spend at the gun range.
p.s. screw JBE for veto'ing this in the first place
LA for instance...i could easily make the case that
$150 class +
8 hours "training" +
$125 Fee to the state +
~4-6 waiting for them to approve.
.....and do it all over again in 5 years.
All that crap is the definition of infringement.
Especially for poor people who dont have money lying around OR a day to spend at the gun range.
p.s. screw JBE for veto'ing this in the first place
Posted by CoachChappy on 6/23/22 at 4:51 pm to SportTiger1
on 6/23/22 at 4:51 pm to SportTiger1I sure hope so. All these fees are bull shite money grabs by states.
Posted by Stuckinthe90s on 6/23/22 at 4:52 pm to SportTiger1
on 6/23/22 at 4:52 pm to SportTiger1I don’t think so. I think it was the added requirements that you had to have a legitimate fear for your safety and making the entire NYC area a safe zone that killed it.
Posted by TeaParty on 6/23/22 at 4:53 pm to SportTiger1
No according to some of the talking heads states can still put up what I call barriers. What it stops is New York and other states saying you need a reason to need a gun outside your home and if we don't like your reason. No gun for you
Posted by Kino74 on 6/23/22 at 4:57 pm to SportTiger1
on 6/23/22 at 4:57 pm to SportTiger1quote:
Does the 2A ruling justify complete constitutional carry?
No. What it does do is affect the states who either have carry banned or have a "may issue" wherein a "good cause" had to be approved before permit was issued. Self defense was not considered a good cause unless one was a celebrity, very wealthy person or government official.
I don't see where any of the process to issue a permit was addressed outside of good cause so don't just run out with your carry permit from a may issue state and think you can carry in NY. Do expect reprocity at all.
Any win for the 2A is good but I think we may be thinking this case allows carry from any state or the process to get a permit is easy. Heller allowed handguns and DC has practically a ban on every type outside of revolvers with very onerous conditions to acquire one.
This post was edited on 6/23 at 5:00 pm
Posted by Tigerlaff on 6/23/22 at 4:58 pm to SportTiger1
on 6/23/22 at 4:58 pm to SportTiger1quote:
Does the 2A ruling justify complete constitutional carry?
Nope. I guess we can wait another 14 years for them to make a major 2A ruling.
Posted by td1 on 6/23/22 at 4:58 pm to SportTiger1
No. There is nothing wrong with admin fees and training, or a expiration date.
It may bring into question some of the May issue states practices though. In LA they shall issue if you meet the requirements, and the things you would be disqualified for are not that bad except for the whole divorce shite. I don’t have to fill that part out but it seems like a major pain in the ass.
It may bring into question some of the May issue states practices though. In LA they shall issue if you meet the requirements, and the things you would be disqualified for are not that bad except for the whole divorce shite. I don’t have to fill that part out but it seems like a major pain in the ass.
Posted by AggieHank86 
on 6/23/22 at 5:01 pm to SportTiger1
on 6/23/22 at 5:01 pm to SportTiger1From what I have seen, it was the arbitrariness of the New York regimen that offended the Court. The Louisiana proposal that you reference (if enacted) would not have included that "arbitrary" element (but was instead largely ministerial) and might thus withstand scrutiny.
Caveat: I have not yet read the opinion, only some brief summaries.
Caveat: I have not yet read the opinion, only some brief summaries.
This post was edited on 6/23 at 5:06 pm
Posted by TrueTiger on 6/23/22 at 5:05 pm to SportTiger1
on 6/23/22 at 5:05 pm to SportTiger1I think the trouble with NY is that the issuance of the permit was damn near 100% subjective.
So if they clean it up and make it objective like your example, the law may be Constitutional.
So if they clean it up and make it objective like your example, the law may be Constitutional.
Posted by gaetti15 
on 6/23/22 at 5:05 pm to AggieHank86
on 6/23/22 at 5:05 pm to AggieHank86the absolutely most important thing is it gets rid of the two step test and "intermediate" scrutiny as it relates to gun cases.
after heller/McDonald, most of the circuit courts were using this and it essentially led to alot of arguments for keeping gun regs because "oh look the public need for less guns outweighs the constitutional right to bear arms".
after heller/McDonald, most of the circuit courts were using this and it essentially led to alot of arguments for keeping gun regs because "oh look the public need for less guns outweighs the constitutional right to bear arms".
TD Sponsor
TD Fan
USA
Member since 2001
TD FanUSA
Member since 2001
Thank you for supporting our sponsors Posted by Site Sponsor to Everyone
to EveryoneAdvertisement
for example, there is a court case the is about to be heard en banc 9th circuit that uses the two step test to say that in times of emergencies (i.e. covid) california is totally within its rights to completely shut down gun shops and prevent people from even traveling out of county to shoot guns at a range.
the appellate judge that overturned the district court even said as much about the stupidity of the test and made fun of this argument in his dissent because he was so sure that en banc would overrule his decision (9th circuit ALWAYs does that for gun cases en banc)
this kills that argument from being used
the appellate judge that overturned the district court even said as much about the stupidity of the test and made fun of this argument in his dissent because he was so sure that en banc would overrule his decision (9th circuit ALWAYs does that for gun cases en banc)
this kills that argument from being used
This post was edited on 6/23 at 5:10 pm
Posted by tgerb8 on 6/23/22 at 5:12 pm to SportTiger1
on 6/23/22 at 5:12 pm to SportTiger1quote:
CA?
LA for instance...i could easily make the case that
$150 class +
8 hours "training" +
$125 Fee to the state +
~4-6 waiting for them to approve.
ever bought a NFA item?
submitting fingerprints, profile, pictures.
creating a trust
200 dollar arbitrary fee to govt.
and then wait AT LEAST 90 days but probably closer to a year for them to take your money and say OK.
at which point you still have to pay a transfer fee to your FFL and fill out (and wait for) a regular NICS form.
all of this to protect the public from a metal tube that will reduce the sound of a gun shot from a jet engine to a AC/DC concert.
thats infringey AF. but I don't know of any legitimate challenges yet.and it's been like, what? 70+ years?
) Posted by keakar on 6/23/22 at 5:17 pm to SportTiger1
quote:
Does the 2A ruling justify complete constitutional carry?
yes it specifically did
but liberals will deny deny deny and try to parse it in some way to say it doesnt
Posted by Jspaspa3303 on 6/23/22 at 5:19 pm to SportTiger1
on 6/23/22 at 5:19 pm to SportTiger110th amendment applies . Still have to abide by state laws . Same as abortion . It’s the states decision on how to govern their state .
Posted by SportTiger1 on 6/23/22 at 6:00 pm to AggieHank86
on 6/23/22 at 6:00 pm to AggieHank86I just cant see how you can say something is a constitutional right, yet still force people to pay for that right and have training.
The permit in itself isnt the biggest issue constitutionally...to me anyways. It's basically making sure you fit the criteria/background check.
It's the cost and waiting period
The permit in itself isnt the biggest issue constitutionally...to me anyways. It's basically making sure you fit the criteria/background check.
It's the cost and waiting period
Posted by SportTiger1 on 6/23/22 at 6:03 pm to Jspaspa3303
on 6/23/22 at 6:03 pm to Jspaspa3303quote:no sir. In theory and reality, the ruling today does the exact opposite.
10th amendment applies . Still have to abide by state laws . Same as abortion . It’s the states decision on how to govern their state
If constitutionally protected, states have no ability to govern in lieu of the given right.
Posted by Timeoday on 6/23/22 at 6:20 pm to SportTiger1
on 6/23/22 at 6:20 pm to SportTiger1quote:
The permit in itself isnt the biggest issue constitutionally
I have a huge problem having to register with a state in order to protect myself from harm with a gun the US Constitution says I have a right to bear.
I do not have to do anything at all or register with the state for free speech, religious choice, unlawful search, etc.
The court made it clear that 2A must be treated the same as all of the other Amendments.
Yes, my buds and I have already tied one on in celebration of this incredible ruling.
Posted by choupiquesushi on 6/23/22 at 6:22 pm to SportTiger1
on 6/23/22 at 6:22 pm to SportTiger1No..... most people need a robust bg check and training before conceal carrying
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News