https://conservativebrief.com/appears-53900/?utm_source=CB&utm_medium=922

The U.S. Supreme Court appears poised to strike down a restrictive New York gun permitting law, which would be a major win for the Second Amendment and gun rights.
The nation’s highest court heard arguments in its biggest guns case in more than a decade, which involves a dispute over whether New York’s law violates the Second Amendment right to “keep and bear arms.”


Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

I would love to see the SCOTUS rule in favor of the people of NY. I have been EDC now for about a year and I have to say it is the best thing I can do for myself and my wife. I never leave home without it.

This also affects Young v. Hawaii and not just NY.

Would’ve been awesome if they could combine it because I think Young v. is even stronger.
Some interesting, possibly even encouraging, questions from the Justices being reported.

ACB sure has turned out to be a disappointment.

ACB sure has turned out to be a disappointment.

What did you expect her to do that she hasn't? 


What has she done that you didn't want her to?


She made some comments, but not as part of the final decision.  I think it's premature to pounce on her right now.

As for the Times Square thing.... I agree that states have the authority to restrict places where one may not carry -- bars, courthouses, inside the offices of public officials, etc.  If that's where they want to draw the line, I can see how places that serve booze and involve sometimes emotional events and meetings might not be the best places for firearms in the mix.

Anyone who doesn't agree is free to stay away from the places they can't carry.  Many people do that with businesses that prohibit CCW.

People being packed in like Times Square on New Year's Eve not only involves a bunch of drunks, but if someone starts shooting for whatever reason, the stampede alone could result in dozens of deaths and injuries.

So, before jumping on her for that comment, we need to realize that the federal Constitution gives us the right, but it also gives the states to right to pass laws placing limits on those rights as long as they don't violate the Constitution.

I agree with above.  It's not unlimited. 

What did you expect her to do that she hasn't? 


What has she done that you didn't want her to?


She made some comments, but not as part of the final decision.  I think it's premature to pounce on her right now.

As for the Times Square thing.... I agree that states have the authority to restrict places where one may not carry -- bars, courthouses, inside the offices of public officials, etc.  If that's where they want to draw the line, I can see how places that serve booze and involve sometimes emotional events and meetings might not be the best places for firearms in the mix.

Anyone who doesn't agree is free to stay away from the places they can't carry.  Many people do that with businesses that prohibit CCW.

People being packed in like Times Square on New Year's Eve not only involves a bunch of drunks, but if someone starts shooting for whatever reason, the stampede alone could result in dozens of deaths and injuries.

So, before jumping on her for that comment, we need to realize that the federal Constitution gives us the right, but it also gives the states to right to pass laws placing limits on those rights as long as they don't violate the Constitution.

First she punted on election fraud, and now she's doing a creative reinterpretation of the constitution.

At least RGB had some convictions. ACB will apparently roll over and do whatever the status quo wants.

Times square in New Years is exactly where I want a gun, along with everywhere else in the country for that matter now that Democratic goon squads are apparently free to assault citizens with no consequences, crime rates are skyrocketing, and we have an invasion of narco terrorist slave traders pouring across the southern border.

Get with the program, son. There is no middle ground any more.

Is this Great!
Or not ?

London…Mac…CMO.

Re: effect on  Young v. Hawaii and CCW. Or Open.
Gotta wait for decision ?

Andrew  looked good on TV.

First she punted on election fraud, and now she's doing a creative reinterpretation of the constitution.

At least RGB had some convictions. ACB will apparently roll over and do whatever the status quo wants.

Times square in New Years is exactly where I want a gun, along with everywhere else in the country for that matter now that Democratic goon squads are apparently free to assault citizens with no consequences, crime rates are skyrocketing, and we have an invasion of narco terrorist slave traders pouring across the southern border.

Get with the program, son. There is no middle ground any more.

Where did I say there is a middle ground?   The Constitution protects the rights of of the people AND the rights of the individual states.  If the state decides to restrict WHERE you can exercise a right, as long as that restriction doesn't make it impossible for you to exercise your individual rights, your rights are intact. 

If you want to be an absolutist when talking individual rights, I can handle that.  I like when rules are short, simple and completely understandable.  The issue is, the Constitution creates a framework, not a user's manual.  Some of the components are in direct opposition and must maintain a balance.  The needs of the many vs. the needs of the few is not just a Star Trek meme.

I get where you're coming from, and that pendulum that swung toward gun control since the 1930s is now swinging the other way. But that arc isn't going to happen instantaneously.  It took 90 years for it to swing to the current apex.  It's going to take time and effort to see that it's allowed to continue on this new arc toward the kind of America we want as it relates to firearms.

We all seem to want the same thing -- less violence.  We just have to convince the other side that trying to make everyone helpless isn't going to make anyone harmless.

Hoping for CCW in Hawaii by 2022

Hoping for CCW in Hawaii by 2022

This inspires me to write about my journey into concealed carry and open carry since I moved to AZ. I have made plenty of mistakes as well as doing some things right. Maybe if I find some time I will write a little bit about it.

This inspires me to write about my journey into concealed carry and open carry since I moved to AZ. I have made plenty of mistakes as well as doing some things right. Maybe if I find some time I will write a little bit about it.

That would be great Inspector. That’s some good information people in Hawaii will need, hopefully very very soon.

Hoping for CCW in Hawaii by 2022

I think this place in Mililani Town Center is already preparing for it.  I walked past this place (I think it was an insurance office or something) and there was this prominent sign on the door for all to see:

NO WEAPONS, FIREARMS, OR EXPLOSIVES ALLOWED ON PREMISES

 

So funny.  I had a good laugh.  I guess this business will close up soon since no one here does anything illegal.

Is this Great!
Or not ?

London…Mac…CMO.

Re: effect on  Young v. Hawaii and CCW. Or Open.
Gotta wait for decision ?

Andrew  looked good on TV.

London left the forum a while ago.


Idk much about scotus statements and how it affects how they will rule. So i will have to wait. But for now, what worries me is if they rule the states can use reasonable restrictions, then HI will focus on this and find ways to ban guns.

Example no guns in places that serve booze. U cannot leave ur gun in ur car in HI. Which means u gotta leave ur gun at home if u decide to go out and eat. Which is a "make life difficult" type of ban.

Then theres the federal school zone ban. Which means a parent dropping off their child must lock the gun when coming within 1k feet of a school. Unless u have that states issued ccw. I expect HI law makers to make similar laws like this. Defacto bans.

So although it sounds reasonable to ban guns in certain places, due to HI and other states who are anti 2a and dont abide by the constitution, a ruling that supports this would lead to more gun control years down the road. Which means our children and grandchildren would have to pick up where we left off and ask why didnt we do anything to stop this types of rulings. This is why if they do rule in this manner, i cannot support it.

I also thought the constitution is so the government cannot suppress ur rights. Private entities can do as they please. So aloha stadium is owned by hawaiian airlines. They can say no guns allowed. Blazedell is owned by the C&C, so they cannot say no guns.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

The earliest I can see this happening is fall/winter 2022.  Or early 2023. The courts decision is predicted to be summer 2022.  Then Hawaii needs some time implement the changes.  Process the undoubtedly tons of requests.

Is this Great!
Or not ?

London…Mac…CMO.

Re: effect on  Young v. Hawaii and CCW. Or Open.
Gotta wait for decision ?

Andrew  looked good on TV.

young is stayed pending this decision
basically, a supreme court ruling in this case means the same applies to HI
will have to go to the legislature and police depts to change the law and determine the rules
young pertains to open carry, the thought is that HI will not want to have people visibly strapped, so they may allow concealed carry

my prediction is that the leg and PDs will impose lots of fees and required classes/testing and mandatory insurance...

Where did I say there is a middle ground?   The Constitution protects the rights of of the people AND the rights of the individual states.  If the state decides to restrict WHERE you can exercise a right, as long as that restriction doesn't make it impossible for you to exercise your individual rights, your rights are intact. 

If you want to be an absolutist when talking individual rights, I can handle that.  I like when rules are short, simple and completely understandable.  The issue is, the Constitution creates a framework, not a user's manual.  Some of the components are in direct opposition and must maintain a balance.  The needs of the many vs. the needs of the few is not just a Star Trek meme.

I get where you're coming from, and that pendulum that swung toward gun control since the 1930s is now swinging the other way. But that arc isn't going to happen instantaneously.  It took 90 years for it to swing to the current apex.  It's going to take time and effort to see that it's allowed to continue on this new arc toward the kind of America we want as it relates to firearms.

We all seem to want the same thing -- less violence.  We just have to convince the other side that trying to make everyone helpless isn't going to make anyone harmless.

It would be one thing if we weren't currently experiencing an attempted Corporate Communist coup d'état where they are literally locking up and torturing trespassers because of their patriotic political beliefs.

You can't give these people an inch to say "here is okay but there is not okay".

They will creatively interpret the laws to make sure it is not okay anywhere, and then declare anyone who disagrees with them a terrorist.

If it wasn't for 2A then Hawaii and the rest of the USA would be just another locked down dictatorship like Australia, NZ, and Europe.

The history lesson is over. We know what the real purpose of gun control is.