Gunboards Forums banner
1 - 20 of 91 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,986 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
NYC unaffected by Supreme Court gun ruling, officials say


Last Updated: 12:04 PM, June 28, 2010

Posted: 12:03 PM, June 28, 2010


Officials do not believe Monday’s Supreme Court ruling casting doubt on a Chicago area gun ban will have any effect on New York City gun laws.

The justices ruled that the Constitution’s “right to keep and bear arms” applies nationwide as a restraint on the ability of the federal, state and local governments to substantially limit its reach.

The court, by a narrow 5-4 margin, also signaled that less severe restrictions could survive legal challenges.

New York City does not have a gun ban. The city does restrict who can have them.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg said in a statement that the decision makes clear that authorities can keep guns away from criminals and terrorists while also respecting citizens’ constitutional rights.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/...me_court_3aH98bI9jKanGHOa6Zw0zM#ixzz0sBpxneiu
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,631 Posts
Let's see...
  • It costs MANY hundreds of dollars to apply and you may not get one.
  • There are volumes of paperwork to fill out.
  • They may prosecute you if you make a mistake filling them out (even like forgetting to report a traffic ticket from years ago).
  • They must give someone a license if they have no reason not to in six months but it can take a couple of years anyway.
  • They issue them for three years and charge a coupla hundred dollars every renewal.
  • The renewal has you basically fill out all the same information again regarding the current license including info from the original applications and the details of your firearms, same as is actually printed right on the license.
  • Another component is a notarized affidavit from a licensed gun owner who is responsible for taking posession of your handguns if you are unable to safeguard them for some reason.
  • Renewals often require inspections -- they will come to your home.
  • When they issue a license they issue a Purchase Requisition -- a gun must be purchased and registered in 30 days or the license is revoked.
  • When a licensee wants a new gun they have to fill out a Purchase Requisition explaining what they want and why.
  • The request will take months to "process."
  • You cannot submit more than one request at a time (a defacto one-gun a quarter, maybe two-gun a year rule).
  • The request may be declined for reasons such as "home protection is not a valid use of a firearm" and you have to start all over.
  • If you are awarded a Purchase Req. you have only limited days and hours and long waits to go to a central location in the large city to pick up the Req. in person (requires a half-day away from work and lots of difficult travel).
  • If you are issued a Req. you have to buy a gun with it within days I believe.
  • The specific model of the gun to be purchased is on the requisition.
  • Once you buy a gun you have three days (they will not tell you if it is calendar or business days) to have it inspected (even if it is brand new).
  • Inspection is only available a couple of hours a day at the same single location and this requires another half-day off of work to accomplish, forget about going and picking your arm up.
  • If you bring your gun for inspection without it being unloaded, triggerlocked, and locked in a case it will be confiscated and your license revoked and you may be prosecuted.
  • Transportation to the range is unloaded with a triggerguard i a locked case with ammunition locked up separately.
  • If you are buying a fourth gun you are required to buy a safe and and file the purchase receipt as well as photographs of it, inside and out, with the police.
There could be more I don't know offhand but I know it used to be worse...
  • You had to belong to a formal range with proof of membership.
  • Had to get notarized affidavits from the range saying you were a known-to-them shooter there.
  • You were not allowed to have a loaded gun at home with the usual Target license.
  • You needed a Hunting Rider, having proved you were a licensed hunter, to use your gun for hunting outside the City.
  • A Home license let you have a loaded gun at home but you could only take it to the range a few approves times per year and had to prove you did or they would revoke your license.
  • You could not have both a Target and a Home license...
Yeah, you can get a gun in NYC. 2,000 licenses is it in a city of 7,000,000?

I'm outta breath!

Alden
 

·
Gold Bullet member
Joined
·
2,705 Posts
Let's see...
  • It costs MANY hundreds of dollars to apply and you may not get one.
  • There are volumes of paperwork to fill out.
  • They may prosecute you if you make a mistake filling them out (even like forgetting to report a traffic ticket from years ago).
  • They must give someone a license if they have no reason not to in six months but it can take a couple of years anyway.
  • They issue them for three years and charge a coupla hundred dollars every renewal.
  • The renewal has you basically fill out all the same information again regarding the current license including info from the original applications and the details of your firearms, same as is actually printed right on the license.
  • Another component is a notarized affidavit from a licensed gun owner who is responsible for taking posession of your handguns if you are unable to safeguard them for some reason.
  • Renewals often require inspections -- they will come to your home.
  • When they issue a license they issue a Purchase Requisition -- a gun must be purchased and registered in 30 days or the license is revoked.
  • When a licensee wants a new gun they have to fill out a Purchase Requisition explaining what they want and why.
  • The request will take months to "process."
  • You cannot submit more than one request at a time (a defacto one-gun a quarter, maybe two-gun a year rule).
  • The request may be declined for reasons such as "home protection is not a valid use of a firearm" and you have to start all over.
  • If you are awarded a Purchase Req. you have only limited days and hours and long waits to go to a central location in the large city to pick up the Req. in person (requires a half-day away from work and lots of difficult travel).
  • If you are issued a Req. you have to buy a gun with it within days I believe.
  • The specific model of the gun to be purchased is on the requisition.
  • Once you buy a gun you have three days (they will not tell you if it is calendar or business days) to have it inspected (even if it is brand new).
  • Inspection is only available a couple of hours a day at the same single location and this requires another half-day off of work to accomplish, forget about going and picking your arm up.
  • If you bring your gun for inspection without it being unloaded, triggerlocked, and locked in a case it will be confiscated and your license revoked and you may be prosecuted.
  • Transportation to the range is unloaded with a triggerguard i a locked case with ammunition locked up separately.
  • If you are buying a fourth gun you are required to buy a safe and and file the purchase receipt as well as photographs of it, inside and out, with the police.
There could be more I don't know offhand but I know it used to be worse...
  • You had to belong to a formal range with proof of membership.
  • Had to get notarized affidavits from the range saying you were a known-to-them shooter there.
  • You were not allowed to have a loaded gun at home with the usual Target license.
  • You needed a Hunting Rider, having proved you were a licensed hunter, to use your gun for hunting outside the City.
  • A Home license let you have a loaded gun at home but you could only take it to the range a few approves times per year and had to prove you did or they would revoke your license.
  • You could not have both a Target and a Home license...
Yeah, you can get a gun in NYC. 2,000 licenses is it in a city of 7,000,000?

I'm outta breath!

Alden


Holy Cr*p, Batman. Time to get out of Gotham......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
847 Posts
All I can say is

THANK GOD I LIVE IN TEXAS!!!!!!

NO permit to own
NO permit to buy
NO permit to use
SHALL ISSUE if you take the class and pass the back ground check
NO NICS call needed with a Texas CHL

Oneshooter
Livin in Texas
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,986 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Let's see...
  • It costs MANY hundreds of dollars to apply and you may not get one.
  • There are volumes of paperwork to fill out.
  • They may prosecute you if you make a mistake filling them out (even like forgetting to report a traffic ticket from years ago).
  • They must give someone a license if they have no reason not to in six months but it can take a couple of years anyway.
  • They issue them for three years and charge a coupla hundred dollars every renewal.
  • The renewal has you basically fill out all the same information again regarding the current license including info from the original applications and the details of your firearms, same as is actually printed right on the license.
  • Another component is a notarized affidavit from a licensed gun owner who is responsible for taking posession of your handguns if you are unable to safeguard them for some reason.
  • Renewals often require inspections -- they will come to your home.
  • When they issue a license they issue a Purchase Requisition -- a gun must be purchased and registered in 30 days or the license is revoked.
  • When a licensee wants a new gun they have to fill out a Purchase Requisition explaining what they want and why.
  • The request will take months to "process."
  • You cannot submit more than one request at a time (a defacto one-gun a quarter, maybe two-gun a year rule).
  • The request may be declined for reasons such as "home protection is not a valid use of a firearm" and you have to start all over.
  • If you are awarded a Purchase Req. you have only limited days and hours and long waits to go to a central location in the large city to pick up the Req. in person (requires a half-day away from work and lots of difficult travel).
  • If you are issued a Req. you have to buy a gun with it within days I believe.
  • The specific model of the gun to be purchased is on the requisition.
  • Once you buy a gun you have three days (they will not tell you if it is calendar or business days) to have it inspected (even if it is brand new).
  • Inspection is only available a couple of hours a day at the same single location and this requires another half-day off of work to accomplish, forget about going and picking your arm up.
  • If you bring your gun for inspection without it being unloaded, triggerlocked, and locked in a case it will be confiscated and your license revoked and you may be prosecuted.
  • Transportation to the range is unloaded with a triggerguard i a locked case with ammunition locked up separately.
  • If you are buying a fourth gun you are required to buy a safe and and file the purchase receipt as well as photographs of it, inside and out, with the police.
There could be more I don't know offhand but I know it used to be worse...
  • You had to belong to a formal range with proof of membership.
  • Had to get notarized affidavits from the range saying you were a known-to-them shooter there.
  • You were not allowed to have a loaded gun at home with the usual Target license.
  • You needed a Hunting Rider, having proved you were a licensed hunter, to use your gun for hunting outside the City.
  • A Home license let you have a loaded gun at home but you could only take it to the range a few approves times per year and had to prove you did or they would revoke your license.
  • You could not have both a Target and a Home license...
Yeah, you can get a gun in NYC. 2,000 licenses is it in a city of 7,000,000?

I'm outta breath!

Alden
Given that Alito said states and municipalities can "adjust" the regs to "social norms", I don't see what you're complaining about.

Can you phucking believe this ship? "Oh, that doesn't apply to us." Liberals love to pick and choose the laws they want to abide by yet demand we abide by theirs!

As far as I'm concerned, the social contract was broken long ago.
 

·
Diamond Member
Joined
·
13,476 Posts
I just finished read the SC decision... I think you guys that are sounding unhappy are misreading either the decision itself or are listening to the wrong news channels...

First and foremost the Supremes flat out ruled RKBA is an Individual Fundamental Right and that the 2nd Admendment applies to every town and village in the nation. That means all future laws and all existing laws have to pass strict scrutiny.. any existing law can now be challenged and have to pass that test.. especially if strict scrutiny was not applied when the law was written or challenged in the past and that is the highest standard.. same one applied to religious freedom and free speach. Alito did not say laws could be adjusted to social norms.. quite the opposite.. he said local solutions had to be formed arround the fact that it is a fundamental right just like the local folks have to get used to other fundamental rights like letting murders and rapists loose on technicalities. Alito said local social norms are not near a suffcient reason to restrict RKBA in any way... the anti's are the ones that argued social norms were enough the way they read past SC decisions based on RKBA not being a fundamental right and not subject to strict scutiny as they interpeted past SC decisions.. Alito wrote well thats just wrong, you guys can't read, thats not what we meant, let me make it clear.. fundamental right strict scutiny.. it's going back to the 7th circuit so they can rerule using that standard.

Don't care what the anti's think when they say it won't change much... that was their last wish and they blew it.. any law that did not explcitly take strict scrunity into account as the standard is presumed unconstitutional until it is tested in court... yeah the anti's will try to enforce them anyway, but almost any citizen has standing to sue and better than that almost any lawyer will take the case now as it's pretty sure win and work on commission.. about 200,000 laws are about to be challenged.

The Justices cited federal laws that they concider to be valid under strict scrutiny... state or local laws that go much beyond the Federal model , that is to say where the fundamental individual right to RKBA conflicts with another fundamental individual right like freedom of religion then some way to accomidate, both possibly by some sort of balancing and compromise is appropiate, but one cannot fully overide the other and the side who feels their right is in conflict with RKBA better have one helluva an arguement.
Brady check federal law keeping guns out of the hands of felons and mentally incompetent just like felons and the adjudicated incompetent... * that is to say, those that you could not try in court for a crime because they are unable to aid in their own defense can not vote.. but poll taxes and literacy tests were struck down because they didn't meet strict scrutiny I can see some of the more odorious and expensive gun control laws falling on those very same principles.

But the Justices also said something that I think may prove more important... The Constitution means what it says in simple language.. it has to, because it's meaning had to be obvious and clear as written when the people and the states voted to ratify it inorder for the people who voted for ratification to get exactly what they voted for... You are going to hear that one in all sorts of suits in pursuit of Liberty.. you heard that here first. That is BIG.

Geeze you guys are way to pesimistic and hard to please.. there is no higher standard for any law to meet than strict scrutiny , it is the same standard that all laws affecting any fundamental individual God Given Right in this land must pass, even the real popular noncontroversial ones, but especially the unpopular controversial ones that folks like the ACLU defend all the time, as an example. Ones that really piss off the locals and half the nation because it lets folks do what they want and annoy everybody else... well not so much now with the patriot(sic) act.. but back when we were still free. This ruling should really be upsetting all them die hard conservative States Rights Guys that put principle before personal freedom because this just took a major presumed power away from the States and made it and Individual right for the Federal Goverment to defend aginist state and local law... Interesting on how this might play with all those States that passed those 10th Admendment statements because the Supremes just trampled States Rights in the name of Individual Freedom.

This is a biggy...
 

·
Copper Bullet member
Joined
·
4,850 Posts
So ... the Bloombergs of the world will just continue to fight the war, the same as DC. Lose on one point? Simply re-write restrictive regulations until they are challenged. Lose that battle? Re-write the same restrictive regulations in different words and wait for them to be challenged. Lose again? Regulate zoning laws to ensure there is no "Gun Shop" to buy a gun or ammunition and no "range" to shoot it on.

The ONLY cure to many more years of continuing court battles will be a good and comprehensive Gun Rights Bill in Congress preempting state and local laws and applied under incorporation of the 14th. There are already a few Congressmen squeaking about this, along with the legislation to handle the DC problem, but we likely won't see any action until after a power shift in November.

As much as many people are against a sweeping Federal legislation, for obvious reasons, the foundation and framework for a good gun rights bill, applied to all the states and locals, is now there. With the right Congress, the right representatives and the right bill, it could become "Law of the Land" and halt all the crap. It may be an important consideration to think about next year.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,761 Posts
The real cure for NYC is to make Bloombutt and his cohorts redundant in the next election. Nothing less will suffice.
Same goes for the Duchy of Chicago.
I am not holding my breath.
New Yawk's Sullivan law? Sullivan was so corrupt he was afraid he would be SHOT OUT OF OFFICE! He died in a mental institution.
 

·
Diamond Member
Joined
·
13,476 Posts
So ... the Bloombergs of the world will just continue to fight the war, the same as DC. Lose on one point? Simply re-write restrictive regulations until they are challenged. Lose that battle? Re-write the same restrictive regulations in different words and wait for them to be challenged. Lose again? Regulate zoning laws to ensure there is no "Gun Shop" to buy a gun or ammunition and no "range" to shoot it on.

The ONLY cure to many more years of continuing court battles will be a good and comprehensive Gun Rights Bill in Congress preempting state and local laws and applied under incorporation of the 14th. There are already a few Congressmen squeaking about this, along with the legislation to handle the DC problem, but we likely won't see any action until after a power shift in November.

As much as many people are against a sweeping Federal legislation, for obvious reasons, the foundation and framework for a good gun rights bill, applied to all the states and locals, is now there. With the right Congress, the right representatives and the right bill, it could become "Law of the Land" and halt all the crap. It may be an important consideration to think about next year.

Db I got a lot of respect for you and most of what you post on Gunboards here... but on this I must disagree. We have a Gun Rights Law.. 2nd Admendment period.. yes it is going to take some work and time and effort for the citizens thru the courts and ballot to enforce that law on the federal and states goverments... but thats what free men do, they stand up for their rights and enforce the prohibitions they ratified on the goverments they form.. by law and courts or by ballot whenever possible, by blood and steel when not.

The Congress has proven worthy of every safeguard ever written in the Constitution and then some.. they cannot be trusted as a protector of the Rights of a Free People, indeed they are the main threat to Liberty as it is the common failing of all Goverments. It is the responsibility of We the People to secure our Rights and restrain the Goverment withhin the bounds of the Constitution we ratified... we dare not deligate this responsibility onto the Goverment itself.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,986 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
I just finished read the SC decision.

This is a biggy...

We know the results of this case as all the ruling did was extend the ruling of Heller vs. D.C. to the rest of the nation.

I know you saw what I posted in a previous thread as to how difficult it is for the citizens of D.C. to exercise their God Give Right to own a firearm after Heller.

I will ask you the same questions no one dares answer:

1. Does yesterday's ruling mean the Assault Weapons Bans across our nation be overturned?

2. Does this mean I can now purchase without goverment interference a full-auto weapon for the private market?

3. Can I now buy SBR or silenced weapons without getting "permission" from the government?

Let's start with those three. If you answer "no" to any of them that means the "justices" blew the "interpretation" of the Second Amendment as it was set up as a check on the power of government, not hunting or self-defense (two very good side effects mind you).
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,986 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
I

Geeze you guys are way to pesimistic and hard to please.. .
Sorry AS, I don't buy the crap the media tells me. Look at how bad the Heller vs. DC case resulted in. Can I buy an AK pistol in D.C.? No.

Look, I'm glad the vote went our way, but as we say in New Mexico, "Don't piss down my back and tell me that is rain". The 2A was setup as a check on the power of the Federal Government pure and simple.

This ruling changes nothing with respect to the original intent of the 2A.
 

·
Diamond Member
Joined
·
13,476 Posts
BR read the Decision.. the whole decision..

I'm going to borrow a quote from the Decision already posted by Clyde

"We have observed with dismay the actions of the District of Columbia in resisting the clear mandate hertofore issued in Heller. In order to make the position of this Court clear, we reverse and render. Chicago's ordinances are violative of the Constitution and are null and void."

BR you can go about ranting and fighting the part of the Battle that we have already won if you want.. it is safe to do now... the rest of us have to go work on the parts that we haven't won yet. As soon as we win some of those you will have something new and fresh to whine and bitch about.
 

·
Gold Bullet Member and Noted Curmudgeon
Joined
·
99,373 Posts
BR read the Decision.. the whole decision..

I'm going to borrow a quote from the Decision already posted by Clyde

"We have observed with dismay the actions of the District of Columbia in resisting the clear mandate hertofore issued in Heller. In order to make the position of this Court clear, we reverse and render. Chicago's ordinances are violative of the Constitution and are null and void."

BR you can go about ranting and fighting the part of the Battle that we have already won if you want.. it is safe to do now... the rest of us have to go work on the parts that we haven't won yet. As soon as we win some of those you will have something new and fresh to whine and bitch about.
Unfortunately, that was NOT in the decision. That was my suggestion as to what (instead of "reversed and remanded") the Court SHOULD have said.

However, the McDonald v Chicago decsion DOES apply to NYC, and the rest of the nation and I foresee MUCH litigation, a fair amount of which will be successful. i am NOT prepared to say just which statutes and ordinances will fail - but a lot of them.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,986 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
BR read the Decision.. the whole decision..

I'm going to borrow a quote from the Decision already posted by Clyde

"We have observed with dismay the actions of the District of Columbia in resisting the clear mandate hertofore issued in Heller. In order to make the position of this Court clear, we reverse and render. Chicago's ordinances are violative of the Constitution and are null and void."

BR you can go about ranting and fighting the part of the Battle that we have already won if you want.. it is safe to do now... the rest of us have to go work on the parts that we haven't won yet. As soon as we win some of those you will have something new and fresh to whine and bitch about.
Let's try this again, shall we? Or shall you choose to "pass" like all the other "Zippidy-doo-dahs" saying what a great ruling this has been.

Here we go, again:




1. Does yesterday's ruling mean the Assault Weapons Bans across our nation be overturned?

2. Does this mean I can now purchase without goverment interference a full-auto weapon for the private market?

3. Can I now buy SBR or silenced weapons without getting "permission" from the government?

Let's start with those three. If you answer "no" to any of them that means the "justices" blew the "interpretation" of the Second Amendment as it was set up as a check on the power of government, not hunting or self-defense (two very good side effects mind you).
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,986 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
BR read the Decision.. the whole decision..

I'm going to borrow a quote from the Decision already posted by Clyde

"We have observed with dismay the actions of the District of Columbia in resisting the clear mandate hertofore issued in Heller. In order to make the position of this Court clear, we reverse and render. Chicago's ordinances are violative of the Constitution and are null and void."

.
You say you read the decision, yet this is not in the decision. You say I'm ranting, yet I'm not making up utter bullsh*t to back a very weak case Ammo Sgt.
 

·
Diamond Member
Joined
·
13,476 Posts
Let's try this again, shall we? Or shall you choose to "pass" like all the other "Zippidy-doo-dahs" saying what a great ruling this has been.

Here we go, again:




1. Does yesterday's ruling mean the Assault Weapons Bans across our nation be overturned?

2. Does this mean I can now purchase without goverment interference a full-auto weapon for the private market?

3. Can I now buy SBR or silenced weapons without getting "permission" from the government?

Let's start with those three. If you answer "no" to any of them that means the "justices" blew the "interpretation" of the Second Amendment as it was set up as a check on the power of government, not hunting or self-defense (two very good side effects mind you).
1. Don't know yet.. got to be tested in court.. given that the Justices mentioned self defense and moral authority against tyrants I suspect it will over turn AW bans.

2.&3. Federal law is shall issue on NFA items contingent on passing a background check and $200 tax stamp.. thats not to mind permission in so far as I can pass a background check.. those that can't are SOL because the justices see the background check, just like voting rights not extending to felons and individuals not mentaly competent enough to aid in their own defense at trial as Constitutional and not a bar to law abiding leally competent citizens. I suspect when tested State AWB's will in the end conform to Federal standards.

like I said before you can list all the grievance and laws you don't like here on these forums all you want.. and you can make any claim you want about what the Decision in MacDonald says and doesn't say all you want.. but the truth remains the Decision says RKBA is a fundamental right and that strict scrutiny applies to all laws regarding a citizen and a firearm.. the laws themselves must now go thru the test process to see what the Decsions impact will be and how diligently Citizens will enforce the Decision on the States.. Neither I nor you know how each ruling on each law will come down or how many times and courts they will have to go thru to get a final ruling.

if you really care at all.. instead of whining, bitching and being negative you would be contacting and working with and donating to any number of local state and national pro gun groups getting it together to test each of the 22,000 some laws that must now be tested.

You seem to lack even the most basic knowledge of how laws are made or unmade based on a SCOTUS decision.. which implies to me you haven't actually been working on the problem with any competent group or following the ongoing legal efforts to date that have brought us to this point and to this victory. The only thing that is wrong here is your complete fantasy expectations of how the Courts Decision works and what it does and doesn't do... it is a very important step in a long process.. it is not a magic wand, it does not pop out of the butt of a unicorn and make the world exactly the way you want. Like every other Fundamental Right that rates strict scrutiny it must pass balancing tests aginst competeing Fundmental Rights that also deserve strict scutiny.
You seem to have issues with Federal Laws and not to realize the MacDonald decision was aimed primarily at State Laws.. however due to the unusually broad nature of the MacDonald ruling it will , in my opinion , in the end, impact Federal law as well.
 
1 - 20 of 91 Posts
Top