Posts Tagged new york

Pros and Cons of Mandatory Firearms Insurance

From Ammoland:

Anti-gun politicians in New York are proposing mandatory liability insurance for some firearms owners. Let me give you the pitch and let’s see how you react. Yes, this is a test of sorts, so you might want to have some coffee before you dive in.

The theory is that honest gun owners cause crime. The law holds gun owners liable for everything that happens. Gun stores and gun manufacturers are held liable too. They are even liable for the actions of criminals who steal guns until the guns are reported stolen. I didn’t see any first party indemnification, so if you try and stop a robber who is stealing your guns and he shoots you with one of your own guns then you might be held liable. To sum up the theory, society would be safer because criminals will be disarmed after honest gun owners lock up their guns. The politicians say we would finally have peace on our streets, and who could object to that.

, , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Restitution Should Be A Remedy For Unconstitutional Prosecutions

From The Truth About Guns:

An individual should not be punished for noncompliance with an unconstitutional law. If they were unjustly punished, then they deserve restitution. So far, only a few people have applied for restitution in DC. There is a larger class action lawsuit that needs to be filed against the district.

, , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Interview with Sharone Mitchell Jr. of the Cook County Public Defenders on NY Gun Case

From Slate’s What Next podcast:

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Six Takeaways From The NY Gun Case

From The Federalist:

While New York conceded the Second Amendment applies beyond one’s threshold, Solicitor General Barbara Underwood quickly forgot that the Bill of Rights protects rights—it doesn’t define privileges. For instance, in discussing the regulation of firearms outside the home, Underwood started to say that “these regulations are all an effort to accommodate the right,” but then backtracked, saying the regulations seek to “respect the right of self-defense.”

The slip of the tongue was telling, however: It means New York state doesn’t truly view the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms as a right, but as a privilege it will accommodate — when governmental officials deem it appropriate.

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Mom Schools Reporter On Guns

From The Federalist:

“Do we really want a whole bunch of Cheryls running around with pistols in the grocery store?” Dwyer asked.

“Yeah, we probably do because Cheryl is trained,” Apple replied indignantly. “I feel proficient with my weapon, I feel secure with my weapon, and I feel confident with my weapon. I don’t think the Cheryls are the one[s] out there that are hurting people and committing the crimes and being unsafe with their guns.”

, , , , , , ,

No Comments

What Will The NY Gun Case Mean For California?

From Cam and Company:

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

NY Passes Ban on DIY Guns

From Guns.com:

The two bills addressing self-completed firearms, S.13A/A.2666A and S.7152/A.6522, in tandem outlaw the possession of unfinished frames or receivers by anyone other than a licensed gunsmith or firearms dealer and prohibit the sale of such items. Further, the new laws require gunsmiths and FFLs to register such incomplete guns in their possession. Violations run from Class D to Class E felonies, the latter of which can bring five years in prison and is on the same level as some manslaughter convictions. 

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

The Effect Of Dread Scott On The New York Gun Case

From The Federalist:

Dred Scott has several implications for the Bruen case. First, it affirms that the Second Amendment right to bear arms is a normal individual right, like the other individual rights listed in the case, such as free exercise of religion, freedom of speech and of the press, jury trial, and so on.

Dred Scott refutes the notion that bans on bearing arms were the norm in the United States (or in any State). According to Dred Scott, American citizens have always had the right “to keep and carry arms wherever they went”—so recognizing blacks as citizens would mean recognizing their right to bear arms.

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

We The People Podcast Discusses SCOTUS NY Gun Case

From The National Constitution Center:

On this week’s episode, host Jeffrey Rosen is joined by two legal scholars who filed briefs on opposing sides of the case—Judge J. Michael Luttig who filed in support of Bruen, and David Kopel who filed in support of the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association. They detail the arguments they made in their briefs as well as what’s at stake in this case, and debate how to interpret the text, history, and meaning of the Second Amendment in light of whether the Court should uphold the New York law.

, , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

New York’s Gun Restrictions Are Modern Jim Crow

From Reason:

Next week the Supreme Court will consider a challenge to a New York law similar to the Alabama statute that empowered local officials like Butler to decide who could exercise the constitutional right to bear arms. The briefs urging the Court to overturn New York’s statute include several from African-American organizations that emphasize the long black tradition of armed self-defense, the racist roots of gun control laws, and their disproportionate impact on racial and ethnic minorities.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments