A simple question for gun rights folk.

Taichiliberal said:
I'll elaborate: will carrying a gun change your recreational activities? Job activities? Commuting status/situation? Food/clothes shopping? And if so, how?
Click to expand...

different question......last time you asked what the decision about the NY law changed........to the new question, .not mine.....I don't own a gun......
 
Taichiliberal said:
Repeating a dodge is no answer. You see, I am asking the question towards a new ruling that YOU endorse. In effect, the burden of proof is on YOU to explain just what carrying a gun allows you to do in society that you couldn't do before.

I'll elaborate: will carrying a gun change your recreational activities? Job activities? Commuting status/situation? Food/clothes shopping? And if so, how?
Click to expand...

the question you are asking has nothing to do with the Bruen ruling, therefore you're never going to get the answers you seek. I explained, in detail, how the ruling affects the people of New York. It's no longer my issue if you can't understand it.
 
For the average CCW carrier, activities probably won’t change much of their day to day routine … except they will be a little more prepared for defense in the case of an attack of some sort, should one occur when living and carrying out that routine. This is a right of every American citizen in good standing with the law, even in the state of New York.

I’m in St. Louis for the weekend. Everywhere I have gone and plan to go I am carrying concealed except to last night’s baseball game at Busch Stadium. I carry with no worries about repercussions from law enforcement because I have met the requirements of my state’s laws to have a CCW permit and Missouri recognizes that. Reciprocity is a good thing, and knowing the law is essential.
 
leaningright said:
For the average CCW carrier, activities probably won’t change much of their day to day routine … except they will be a little more prepared for defense in the case of an attack of some sort, should one occur when living and carrying out that routine. This is a right of every American citizen in good standing with the law, even in the state of New York.

I’m in St. Louis for the weekend. Everywhere I have gone and plan to go I am carrying concealed except to last night’s baseball game at Busch Stadium. I carry with no worries about repercussions from law enforcement because I have met the requirements of my state’s laws to have a CCW permit and Missouri recognizes that. Reciprocity is a good thing, and knowing the law is essential.
Click to expand...

Not to derail the thread but how was Busch Stadium? Never been but St. Louis is known for having pretty passionate/knowledgeable baseball fans.
 
cawacko said:
Not to derail the thread but how was Busch Stadium? Never been but St. Louis is known for having pretty passionate/knowledgeable baseball fans.
Click to expand...

Well, we got our butts whipped last night so it was pretty quiet except for the 1000 or so Dodger fans.

Seriously, it’s a great baseball venue. The fans are knowledgeable and really get involved in competitive games. I love coming here…and if I am willing to seat myself among 40,000+ people (last night’s attendance was 40,987) you know it’s got to be good.
 
Taichiliberal said:
I've asked this question on several on-line venues, and to date have not gotten a straight answer. But yet the question persists;

Given the recent SCOTUS ruling that effectively nullifies the New York City legal requirements to have a Carry Concealed Weapon permit, I would like to know from New York (or any state with similar laws) residents who own guns exactly what can they now do that they couldn't before? Where can they now travel, eat, work, socialize that carrying a gun allows them to do that they couldn't do before?

Simple question.
Click to expand...

You're a sophist commie shill scumbag.
 
goat said:
People traveling through NYC from a concealed carry state can no longer be prosecuted for being in possession of a firearm.
Click to expand...

I do not believe that is true, the law only dealt with obtaining a license to carry a concealed weapon in NY, not generalized permission for anyone to carry one
 
SmarterthanYou said:
the biggest change with the Bruen decision was forcing NY to become a shall issue state instead of a may issue. Under the 'may issue' conditions requiring a citizen to provide 'good cause' as to why it is necessary to carry a concealed weapon, it became a de facto crony privilege, not a right.

Of course new york is doing everything it can with their new law to 'comply' with the decision while thwarting it all at the same time, so it will be challenged again and NY will get spanked worse
Click to expand...

“spanked?”

They will just keep passing new laws while the gun manufacturers burn up their money challenging them, the new laws are more extensive than the one
 
archives said:
I do not believe that is true, the law only dealt with obtaining a license to carry a concealed weapon in NY, not generalized permission for anyone to carry one
Click to expand...
Then why did Hochul make NYC a gun-free zone? She knows it's unconstitutional.
 
Taichiliberal said:
You're avoiding the question......what can this gun carrying law allow gun owners to do in their daily functions in society that they could not do before being allowed to CCW? Simple question.
Click to expand...

The old law required applicants to justify why they needed to carry a concealed weapon in areas other than in their work, hunting, and for protection if they could prove they were in danger. Plus, the process was long including reviews by local police, character references, the whole nine yards

Currently, the existing backlog before the law was overturned was like six months, and given the new law is seemingly just as burdensome, and includes a review of social media history, time evolved will probably be longer, so the answer to your question, is little if any.
 
goat said:
Then why did Hochul make NYC a gun-free zone? She knows it's unconstitutional.
Click to expand...

Already was a gun free zone before she became Governor, has been for quite some time now, this ruling has nothing to do with NYC being a gun free zone
 
archives said:
Already was a gun free zone before she became Governor, has been for quite some time now, this ruling has nothing to do with NYC being a gun free zone
Click to expand...
The constitution gives individuals the right to bear arms in public. NYC prosecutes those who exercise that right.
 
archives said:
“spanked?”

They will just keep passing new laws while the gun manufacturers burn up their money challenging them, the new laws are more extensive than the one
Click to expand...

not so........now that Bruen is settled, new lawsuits that obviously expose gov entities trying to skirt the decision will be hit with lawsuits to recover legal fees.........and they will be granted. cities will lose money because their lawsuit insurance will refuse to pay, forcing cities to alter their budgets to cover the losses
 
archives said:
I do not believe that is true, the law only dealt with obtaining a license to carry a concealed weapon in NY, not generalized permission for anyone to carry one
Click to expand...

I believe what goat is referencing is the 86 FOPA act, which is supposed to provide protection to people traveling through states with firearms in their possession, but not being carried on their person. NY and NJ have been notorious for arresting people despite this law.
 
archives said:
The old law required applicants to justify why they needed to carry a concealed weapon in areas other than in their work, hunting, and for protection if they could prove they were in danger. Plus, the process was long including reviews by local police, character references, the whole nine yards

Currently, the existing backlog before the law was overturned was like six months, and given the new law is seemingly just as burdensome, and includes a review of social media history, time evolved will probably be longer, so the answer to your question, is little if any.
Click to expand...

I go back to my term 'spanked'.......the courts will not tolerate gov entities trying to skirt their decisions by making new terms to do the same thing before the decision.
 
Taichiliberal said:
I've asked this question on several on-line venues, and to date have not gotten a straight answer. But yet the question persists;

Given the recent SCOTUS ruling that effectively nullifies the New York City legal requirements to have a Carry Concealed Weapon permit, I would like to know from New York (or any state with similar laws) residents who own guns exactly what can they now do that they couldn't before? Where can they now travel, eat, work, socialize that carrying a gun allows them to do that they couldn't do before?

Simple question.
Click to expand...

It's a simple and valid question, true enough.

But the early leaders decided to make the United States unique in all the world by making firearms rights part and parcel of being an American citizen in good standing.
Let's not even discuss if we agree with this or not. It's what they decided to do.
And in modern, polarized conditions, amending the constitution is not possible.

No, the right to walk heavy doesn't grant anybody access to what they didn't have before.
But there isn't a fucking thing that can be done about it.

We get used to living in Westworld, or we disband the current republic.
If you're opposed to both solutions, then sorry, you're fucked.
 
archives said:
“spanked?”

They will just keep passing new laws while the gun manufacturers burn up their money challenging them, the new laws are more extensive than the one
Click to expand...

Gun manufacturers aren't bring the suit, dumbass. The NY governor is now in open contempt of court, a criminal offense.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
not so........now that Bruen is settled, new lawsuits that obviously expose gov entities trying to skirt the decision will be hit with lawsuits to recover legal fees.........and they will be granted. cities will lose money because their lawsuit insurance will refuse to pay, forcing cities to alter their budgets to cover the losses
Click to expand...

The most likely scenario.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top