NY Mario Cuomo 7 Round Magazine Ban is Unconstitutional

[SmarterthanYou]

No.

I would guess that anything below six is likely to be suspect. At the same time, the courts are likely to show quite a bit of discretion to the will of the people. You know, all that talk about legislating from the bench and activist judges has an impact. Thank incoherent Republican rhetoric.

But tell me, why is ten a magical number? Also, if you argue that no limit is permissible then you are going to lose.

I don't know why ten is some magical number, but if the cops carry 15 round magazines for their 9 millimeter, I would think that's a good number to make law. as to arguing no limit, why am I going to lose? because a sappy black robed tyrant is going to tell me so?

 

[Damocles]

whats to stop NY from then reducing the amount further, to say two bullets. would THAT be an infringement or would the courts approve?

You only get one and you have to carry it in your shirt pocket.

 

[SJJRSJJS]

whats to stop NY from then reducing the amount further, to say two bullets. would THAT be an infringement or would the courts approve?

Again, you are RIGHT on the money, that is my point. If they approach the Supreme Court in the way that we have described here, the Supreme Court should rule that Cuomo is using a back door attempt at limiting our Second Amendment Rights by demanding unreasonable regulations, which would render reasonable firearms unusable.

 

[Timshel]

someone is touchy today. you said:



might want to clarify next time or work on your english

You are having a bad day, I understand.

Maybe you should learn to read, as the "you guys" indicated I was speaking in general terms.

Anyway, can we return to the point or do you feel you have sufficiently derailed the discussion and now you can just go away?

The message has been a bit unfocused and contradictory.

 

[Timshel]

as to arguing no limit, why am I going to lose? because a sappy black robed tyrant is going to tell me so?

Yeah, that will do it.

 

[Timshel]

Again, you are RIGHT on the money, that is my point. If they approach the Supreme Court in the way that we have described here, the Supreme Court should rule that Cuomo is using a back door attempt at limiting our Second Amendment Rights by demanding unreasonable regulations, which would render reasonable firearms unusable.

But then you have to sort of argue for the 10 round limit. The question for the court then becomes what's the number and who is best suited to decide? I don't think the courts are going to be comfortable deciding the number and they will defer to the legislature.

The argument that any and all limits violate the second does not really work either. The courts will not take that position and if they did I honestly think the second amendment would eventually be repealed.

 

[SJJRSJJS]

But then you have to sort of argue for the 10 round limit. The question for the court then becomes what's the number and who is best suited to decide? I don't think the courts are going to be comfortable deciding the number and they will defer to the legislature.

The argument that any and all limits violate the second does not really work either. The courts will not take that position and if they did I honestly think the second amendment would eventually be repealed.

Could Cuomo change that magazine limit to 2 rounds? If not why, and if he could, then he could also say a 1 round limit.

 

[canceled.2021.1]

But then you have to sort of argue for the 10 round limit. The question for the court then becomes what's the number and who is best suited to decide? I don't think the courts are going to be comfortable deciding the number and they will defer to the legislature.

The argument that any and all limits violate the second does not really work either. The courts will not take that position and if they did I honestly think the second amendment would eventually be repealed.

What makes the legislature qualified? Here is the thing, any objective reader of this bil knows it is an assault on gun rights. It can be I interpreted no other way.

Now if the people of NY want to bend over and take it in the ass by their state gobblement, then who am I to stop them. As I have stated on numerous occasions, this is what states rights are all about.

Now try this at a federal level and we have a fucking problem.

As for repealing the 2nd Amendment, that is just downright folly

 

[Timshel]

Could Cuomo change that magazine limit to 2 rounds? If not why, and if he could, then he could also say a 1 round limit.

As I said, I imagine the courts would become suspicious of the intent at some point, but they would be hesitant to interfere.

 

[Timshel]

What makes the legislature qualified? Here is the thing, any objective reader of this bil knows it is an assault on gun rights. It can be I interpreted no other way.

Now if the people of NY want to bend over and take it in the ass by their state gobblement, then who am I to stop them. As I have stated on numerous occasions, this is what states rights are all about.

Now try this at a federal level and we have a fucking problem.

As for repealing the 2nd Amendment, that is just downright folly

The legislature is the body representative of the people and most susceptible to democratic pressure. If the people feel the power is unjust then they can change it pretty easily.

Folly is the idea that any and all laws regulating weapons violates the constitution. My point, is if the courts took that sort of position it is quite likely the 2nd would be repealed. I mean, what if the courts had ruled that regulation of explosives violated the 2nd and al quaida had tried again, successfully, to bring down the towers with them. Bye bye 2nd amendment.

I agree, we should be more suspicious of federal power when it comes to this issue.

 

[SJJRSJJS]

whats to stop NY from then reducing the amount further, to say two bullets. would THAT be an infringement or would the courts approve?

There you go, exactly my point. Again, make sure you have enough ammo, because they will try to control ammo sales next.