User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/23/2022 6:25:33 PM EDT
[#1]
today’s ruling heralds a newly aggressive effort to second-guess commonsense state and local policies that save lives while accommodating both gun rights and gun safety. Really? I'm sure the good citizens of Baltimore, Austin, and Chicago would disagree. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/23/2022 7:38:12 PM EDT
[#2]
He can say whatever he wants.
I do not have high hopes for the lifespan of magazine capacity limits or 'assault weapons bans' under the 'text, history, and tradition' standard. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2022 7:19:20 AM EDT
[#3]
CT is technically a "may issue" state because of the suitability clause. It will be interesting to see if the state changes the text of the law to be "shall issue" - I don't see it happening, but it would be nice.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2022 10:58:01 AM EDT
[#4]
Fuck Lamont.
This ruling should change things for getting an out of state MA permit, though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2022 3:16:57 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: CT is technically a "may issue" state because of the suitability clause. It will be interesting to see if the state changes the text of the law to be "shall issue" - I don't see it happening, but it would be nice. There is no techincally. CT IS a "may issue" state. Even says so right in the statute's language. But in reality we're we border on shall issue because most who apply are issued a permit outside of the 11 or so prohibitions and some towns wide view of unsuitable persons. "(b) Upon the application of any person having a bona fide permanent residence within the jurisdiction of any such authority, such chief of police, warden or selectman may issue a temporary state permit to such person to carry a pistol or revolver within the state, provided such authority shall find that such applicant intends to make no use of any pistol or revolver which such applicant may be permitted to carry under such permit other than a lawful use and that such person is a suitable person to receive such permit." No doubt that at some point the legislators, likely after loosing a lawsuit, will have to go in and meddle with the permitting statutes where they'll gleefully make it harder to get issued a permit. Which of course only sets off another round of lawsuits that the state gets to fight using our tax dollars. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2022 12:17:37 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: He can say whatever he wants. I do not have high hopes for the lifespan of magazine capacity limits or 'assault weapons bans' under the 'text, history, and tradition' standard. This is the great expectation now. What remains to be seen is how exactly these restrictions will go away. Hopefully a CCDL/FPC/GOA type of lawsuit is in the works. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2022 5:44:50 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Hopefully a CCDL/FPC/GOA type of lawsuit is in the works. Somewhere in a GD thread on the SCOTUS Bruen opinion someone claimed a bunch of cases already in the legal pipeline to SCOTUS were on hold waiting for the opinion to come down. Its possible those cases may now be remanded back to the lower courts to have those courts process the cases under the new Bruen opinion. With RI getting a no grandfathering magazine ban in the past few weeks and lawsuits being filed over it I'd think the Bruen opinion would be applied to it too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/25/2022 7:34:32 PM EDT
[#8]
That's my expectation as well.
Still on the petition list and otherwise ready to go are: For magazines or AWBs Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs v. Grewal - New Jersey's magazine ban Duncan v. Bonta - California's magazine ban Bianchi v. Frosh - Maryland's AWB For other causes Young v. Hawaii - Hawaii's open carry regime Morin v. Lyver - challenging MA's handgun purchase ban for nonviolent misdemeanors Gun Owners of America v. Garland - Bumpstocks and Chevron Aposhian v. Garland - same Of those I think the first three may well be GVR'd but I don't know enough about the latter four. I can see both bumpstock challenges being of interest to the new court given their past interest in nibbling away at Chevron. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/26/2022 6:00:05 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: GVR'd For those who don't know what GVR means. From Wikipedia: Grant, vacate, remand order "A grant, vacate, remand order (GVR order) is a type of order issued by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court grants a petition for certiorari, vacates the decision of the court below, and remands the case for further proceedings (hence the acronym by which they are known). An order of this sort is typically appropriate when there has been a change in legal circumstances subsequent to the lower court or agency's decision, such as a change in the law, a precedential ruling, or a confession of error; the Supreme Court simply sends the case back to the lower court to be reconsidered in light of the new law or the new precedent. GVR orders are designed to be efficient and thus are not full explications of the law, and have no precedential effect. GVR orders are usually not explained with lengthy opinions.[1][2]" Some discussion of the cases that may be GVR in these archive links: Analysis: A Look at Other Pending SCOTUS Gun Cases After Bruen Members’ Newsletter: The Cases to Watch for the Full Impact of the SCOTUS Gun Ruling  National Review''s Charles Cooke Reacts to Supreme Court and Senate Gun News | Full Podcast |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/26/2022 8:31:29 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Somewhere in a GD thread on the SCOTUS Bruen opinion someone claimed a bunch of cases already in the legal pipeline to SCOTUS were on hold waiting for the opinion to come down. Its possible those cases may now be remanded back to the lower courts to have those courts process the cases under the new Bruen opinion. With RI getting a no grandfathering magazine ban in the past few weeks and lawsuits being filed over it I'd think the Bruen opinion would be applied to it too. I am also thinking these other cases that were put on hold will be sent back to the lower courts for "strict scrutiny" analysis. It's also possible, CT and other states will recognize "AWB's" and "LCM" restrictions are inevitably going away and might just drop all these restrictions altogether before any lawsuits are brought forward. If they do that, are they supposed to go public with some type of communication (e.g. law modification etc.) or can people start purchasing all these items freely? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/26/2022 10:27:31 PM EDT
[#11]
'Strict scrutiny' is not the test (which is both good and bad IMO). It's 'text, history, and tradition' - which is theoretically a higher bar but a 'history' of gun control can weigh the scales.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/26/2022 11:17:19 PM EDT
[#12]
Should we hold our breath?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/27/2022 12:00:50 AM EDT
[#13]
I feel pretty good about the odds, but I'm not a betting man and I don't know how it will go. Looking forward to the orders list tomorrow...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/27/2022 6:49:18 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I am also thinking these other cases that were put on hold will be sent back to the lower courts for "strict scrutiny" analysis. It's also possible, CT and other states will recognize "AWB's" and "LCM" restrictions are inevitably going away and might just drop all these restrictions altogether before any lawsuits are brought forward. If they do that, are they supposed to go public with some type of communication (e.g. law modification etc.) or can people start purchasing all these items freely? It isn't a "strict scrutiny" analysis. It's a single test of "constitutional text and history". From the opinion: (1) Since Heller and McDonald, the Courts of Appeals have developed a “two-step” framework for analyzing Second Amendment challenges that combines history with means-end scrutiny. The Court rejects that two-part approach as having one step too many. Step one is broadly consistent with Heller, which demands a test rooted in the Second Amendment’s text, as informed by history. But Heller and McDonald do not support a second step that applies means-end scrutiny in the Second Amendment context. Heller’s methodology centered on constitutional text and history. It did not invoke any means-end test such as strict or intermediate scrutiny, and it expressly rejected any interest-balancing inquiry akin to intermediate scrutiny. Pp. 9–15. States like NY, CT, CA, MD, NJ, MA, etc. are not going to just stand by and let their AWB's, LCM's and other gun laws be dismantled. They will fight back. They've all said as much including Biden. They'll play the game of changing the law slightly so it requires another legal challenge and drags out the gun bans. They are playing the long game. They are hoping that at some point in the future there will be enough progressive far lefties on the court to revisit Heller, Chicago, and now Bruen to overturn it all. It is entirely possible the local and state courts will choose to ignore SCOTUS, uphold the laws, and let some other court further up the food chain deal with it. We very well could see; “Clarence Thomas has made his decision, now let him enforce it.”.... (3) The test that the Court set forth in Heller and applies today requires courts to assess whether modern firearms regulations are consistent with the Second Amendment’s text and historical understanding. There are a number of issues we face in CT even if our AWB and LCM ban is struck down: What happens to all that AWB/LCM information the state collected for registration? What happens to all those who's only criminal charge/conviction is violating the AWB or LCM bans? What happens to the requirement of a permit/certificate to purchase firearms, magazines and ammunition? What happens to the very intentional delays introduced by the local issuing authorities, and the state, to the pistol permitting process? What happens to the cost of obtaining permits or certificates? What happens to bump stocks and rate of fire enhancements? Will red flag laws, violations of due process, seizure of personal property, be affected? Just to name a few There is a lot that remains to be seen along with what happens if the courts and Democrat politicians simply refuse to follow SCOTUS opinions. In CT there isn't much chance to vote out those to seek to ban guns from the law abiding peasants. And as we saw recently there are plenty of RINO's in DC who are willing to sell out our 2A rights as well. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/27/2022 10:19:17 AM EDT
[#15]
None of the petitions I mentioned yesterday were mentioned in the orders released today. I don't see another Orders date on SCOTUS' calendar.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/27/2022 12:09:59 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: None of the petitions I mentioned yesterday were mentioned in the orders released today. I don't see another Orders date on SCOTUS' calendar. Yeah saw the same. No orders day officially listed on their public web calendar. However there appear to be several more opinion issuance days and one Conference / Opinion Issuance Day. In the GD thread on Young v Hawaii, NoloContendere made a post today where he stated the following: "there is another opinion/orders day on Wednesday. I suspect we will see an order in Young on Wednesday." So who knows. Maybe they'll dump the orders then. Not sure if normal that they'd hold up a number of cases, dump a big opinion that impacts those cases, then not issue orders to GVR them back to the lower court for review. Post edited. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/27/2022 12:13:17 PM EDT
[#17]
No, once they go to SCOTUS for certiorari they hang out there until SCOTUS actions them or if they become moot as far as I remember.
I'd bet there's appetite to address both and there's shopping around to see if they combine some cases or if the more conservative justices feel that they have the votes. Five justices need to agree to hear a case. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/27/2022 12:20:18 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No, once they go to SCOTUS for certiorari they hang out there until SCOTUS actions them or if they become moot as far as I remember. I'd bet there's appetite to address both and there's shopping around to see if they combine some cases or if the more conservative justices feel that they have the votes. Five justices need to agree to hear a case. I edited my post base on reading a Nolo's post in the GD young v hawaii thread. Looks like maybe Wednesday we may see something. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/27/2022 2:11:50 PM EDT
[#19]
Yep, I see that - that was just added this morning. Looks like an opinions day though and not orders, so we'll see.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/27/2022 7:15:25 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No, once they go to SCOTUS for certiorari they hang out there until SCOTUS actions them or if they become moot as far as I remember. I'd bet there's appetite to address both and there's shopping around to see if they combine some cases or if the more conservative justices feel that they have the votes. Five justices need to agree to hear a case. That would be great, but I am not raising my hopes. After Bruen and Roe with all the hate and backlash they may stay away from other confrontational cases. I am positive Thomas and Alito are game for more 2A cases, not sure about the 3 new conservatives. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/29/2022 11:31:35 AM EDT
[#21]
No "orders" from SCOTUS today.
Looks like tomorrow is another opinion day (starting at 10am).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/29/2022 3:24:30 PM EDT
[#22]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/29/2022 7:33:44 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FWbszzEXkAABKS1?format=png&name=900x900 fingers and toes double-crossed |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 10:53:48 AM EDT
[#24]
Orders just came out - NJ and CA's mag ban cases and MD's AWB were GVR'd:
"ASSN. OF NJ RIFLE, ET AL. V. BRUCK, ATT'Y GEN. OF NJ, ET AL. The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit for further consideration in light of New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U. S. ___ (2022)." DUNCAN, VIRGINIA, ET AL. V. BONTA, ATT'Y GEN. OF CA The petitions for writs of certiorari are granted. The judgments are vacated, and the cases are remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for further consideration in light of New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U. S. ___ (2022). BIANCHI, DOMINIC, ET AL. V. FROSH, ATT'Y GEN. OF MD, ET AL. The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit for further consideration in light of New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U. S. ___ (2022). Young v. Hawaii - GVR'd w/ Duncan to the 9th! |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 10:58:19 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Young v. Hawaii - no action Edit - NVM I see the post was updated to include Youg Hawaii as GVR'd. 20-1639 YOUNG, GEORGE K. V. HAWAII, ET AL. 21-1194 DUNCAN, VIRGINIA, ET AL. V. BONTA, ATT'Y GEN. OF CA The petitions for writs of certiorari are granted. The judgments are vacated, and the cases are remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for further consideration in light of New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U. S. ___ (2022). |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 11:03:52 AM EDT
[#26]
Yes it was, I read the orders list wrong, mea culpa.
Good news but now we need an AWB case from the 1st and 2nd circuits as well as mag ban cases from each and a mag ban case from the 10th circuit to address CO's stupidity. Otherwise CT's bans remain on the books. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 11:25:37 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Good news but now we need an AWB case from the 1st and 2nd circuits as well as mag ban cases from each and a mag ban case from the 10th circuit to address CO's stupidity. Otherwise CT's bans remain on the books. A lawsuit was filed six days ago over RI's new magazine ban. That could help things. Unfortunately it seems that lawsuit is focused more on the grandfathering issue (takings clause and due process violation - 5th and 14th amendment violations) rather than seeking to strike down the entire ban. Hopefully they'll rewrite/expand the complaint to fold in Bruen to make a more broad challenge beyond just grandfathering. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/rhode-island-gun-shop-gun-owners-sue-over-new-state-law-banning-large-capacity-magazines/ar-AAYPQB6 |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 2:27:14 PM EDT
[#28]
Bittersweet with the GVR's. Got to rely on those other circuits and who knows how long they will drag it out for. And there is a chance they will not fully comply which take yet another SCOTUS intervention in like 2040.
Sounds like we need our own lawsuit here in CT. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 6:49:08 PM EDT
[#29]
Where’s the nra and ccdl during all this….
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/30/2022 8:13:47 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Where’s the nra and ccdl during all this…. CCDL funded 2 of the 4 cases that were GVR'd today. Gun rights organizations fund cases across state lines when a potentially favorable ruling can have nationwide impact. Like it happened today. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/1/2022 8:14:53 AM EDT
[#31]
Lamont just recently, on the news, made a statement that there are a crazy amount of guns on the streets and everybody has a gun. Malloy's new gun laws must be working well. Lamont, like Malloy said we are so much safer with all these laws, yet says right on the news how many guns are on the streets. He contradicts himself all the time.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/2/2022 8:50:09 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There is no techincally. CT IS a "may issue" state. Even says so right in the statute's language. But in reality we're we border on shall issue because most who apply are issued a permit outside of the 11 or so prohibitions and some towns wide view of unsuitable persons. "(b) Upon the application of any person having a bona fide permanent residence within the jurisdiction of any such authority, such chief of police, warden or selectman may issue a temporary state permit to such person to carry a pistol or revolver within the state, provided such authority shall find that such applicant intends to make no use of any pistol or revolver which such applicant may be permitted to carry under such permit other than a lawful use and that such person is a suitable person to receive such permit." No doubt that at some point the legislators, likely after loosing a lawsuit, will have to go in and meddle with the permitting statutes where they'll gleefully make it harder to get issued a permit. Which of course only sets off another round of lawsuits that the state gets to fight using our tax dollars. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: CT is technically a "may issue" state because of the suitability clause. It will be interesting to see if the state changes the text of the law to be "shall issue" - I don't see it happening, but it would be nice. There is no techincally. CT IS a "may issue" state. Even says so right in the statute's language. But in reality we're we border on shall issue because most who apply are issued a permit outside of the 11 or so prohibitions and some towns wide view of unsuitable persons. "(b) Upon the application of any person having a bona fide permanent residence within the jurisdiction of any such authority, such chief of police, warden or selectman may issue a temporary state permit to such person to carry a pistol or revolver within the state, provided such authority shall find that such applicant intends to make no use of any pistol or revolver which such applicant may be permitted to carry under such permit other than a lawful use and that such person is a suitable person to receive such permit." No doubt that at some point the legislators, likely after loosing a lawsuit, will have to go in and meddle with the permitting statutes where they'll gleefully make it harder to get issued a permit. Which of course only sets off another round of lawsuits that the state gets to fight using our tax dollars. Yes, I know - technically / literally the law says "may issue" - I'm not debating that. The point I was making is that CT is sometimes lumped in with other states as "shall issue" especially in comparison articles stating there are 7 states that are "may issue" and may need to change their laws to comply with the USSC ruling. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/2/2022 11:11:37 PM EDT
[#33]
Sounds like the FPC has filed a motion with the 9th Circuit to lift the stay on "AWB" following the SCOTUS Bruen ruling. Which means the CA "AWB" is hanging from a thread. Hope we are next with a lawsuit here in CT.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2022 6:56:46 AM EDT
[#34]
New York passed a law that said if there is no "guns welcome " sign it's a felony to carry there
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2022 7:05:39 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: New York passed a law that said if there is no "guns welcome " sign it's a felony to carry there On top of that, they passed a law a couple years ago that allowed for abortion right up to the moment the baby is born...and then they celebrated its passing by lighting up the city with pink lights. That's industrial grade evil. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2022 8:43:21 AM EDT
[#36]
I wouldn't be surprised if NY style legislation will also be passed in CT. They will just wait until after the midterms.
Wife and I traveled South Carolina and East Tennessee this past week to learn more about both states. It felt like a different country. Happy people and freedom everywhere. We made a decision to get things in order and move down summer next year and not look back. Still debating upstate SC (Greenville area) or East Tennessee within driving distance to Knoxville for work. Both states are awesome. Today we are leaving East Tennessee and driving back to CT unfortunately  .
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2022 8:52:51 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I wouldn't be surprised if NY style legislation will also be passed in CT. They will just wait until after the midterms. Wife and I traveled South Carolina and East Tennessee this past week to learn more about both states. It felt like a different country. Happy people and freedom everywhere. We made a decision to get things in order and move down summer next year and not look back. Still debating upstate SC (Greenville area) or East Tennessee within driving distance to Knoxville for work. Both states are awesome. Today we are leaving East Tennessee and driving back to CT unfortunately .Sc has some weird ccw laws too I think. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2022 8:56:15 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I wouldn't be surprised if NY style legislation will also be passed in CT. They will just wait until after the midterms. Wife and I traveled South Carolina and East Tennessee this past week to learn more about both states. It felt like a different country. Happy people and freedom everywhere. We made a decision to get things in order and move down summer next year and not look back. Still debating upstate SC (Greenville area) or East Tennessee within driving distance to Knoxville for work. Both states are awesome. Today we are leaving East Tennessee and driving back to CT unfortunately .I feel it's not as bad as NY here, plus there is a long tradition of allowing carry. They did attempt to ban carry in public transportation this year (SB16) but once they realized they were hurting urban folks who vote for them they immediately dropped it. Agree on moving out of here one day. In my case it's too challenging as I have young kids and schools are so-so down south. The best school districts have become as expensive as where I currently live so the financial incentive is not even there any more. Had an opportunity in Florida last summer but the terms weren't optimal, and I am lukewarm about Florida. I would prefer Tennessee-Georgia-Carolinas. Or if the wife changes her stance on winter, NH and ME could be options too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2022 9:39:12 AM EDT
[#39]
Greenville SC is where I went to college and still have friends in the area. It was a GREAT place 20-30 years ago, but is getting built up like crazy now. That means more people and more liberals. We visited in February and the amount of development was unbelievable. Even saw liberal harpies protesting something on shop row.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/3/2022 10:39:06 AM EDT
[#40]
I would prefer to reverse course of this state. I have lived here longer than I haven't. I like it here except for the politics of the last 30 years. This used to be a great state until NYers and MAssholes moved in.
I really despise summer because of the heat and humidity so moving south is not my ideal situation. However, it looks like my son will end up in NC after the Navy so to be near him we will relocate. I turned down two Florida opportunities this year. One in in Pensacola and the other in Orlando. I would have to live within 30-40 miles of either place. I have a townhouse in the Orlando area and do enjoy visiting it in the winter but summers there are brutal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/4/2022 1:48:05 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Sc has some weird ccw laws too I think. I stopped at Cabela's in Greenville last week, SC and talked with one of the employees. Super nice guy. He was shocked when I told him we need a permit to buy a firearm or ammo. . Over there they run background check instantly and if you're good, you get to bring a firearm home. You can transport it to the range, etc... You have to open carry your pistol if you don't have carry permit (if I remember correctly). With a carry permit you can conceal or open carry. Interestingly people choose to conceal carry anyways. I have not seen a single person open carrying when I was down there but I could tell some people were printing lol. He said LEOs down there will not bother you when open carrying unless you're being silly. No firearms signs in businesses need to be of certain size and posted in certain location on the door where easily visible. I have seen few places with no firearms signs, mostly banks in downtown Greenville and one massive billboard sized sign outside of a warehouse entrance. He talked highly about his local county sheriff. As long as you live outside of town limits, you can shoot in your backyard. There is no acreage requirement but you need to be mindful of your neighbors. So if you don't have lots of land, just put a suppressor on a .22, build a small backstop in the backyard and you're good to go. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/4/2022 1:49:31 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I feel it's not as bad as NY here, plus there is a long tradition of allowing carry. They did attempt to ban carry in public transportation this year (SB16) but once they realized they were hurting urban folks who vote for them they immediately dropped it. Agree on moving out of here one day. In my case it's too challenging as I have young kids and schools are so-so down south. The best school districts have become as expensive as where I currently live so the financial incentive is not even there any more. Had an opportunity in Florida last summer but the terms weren't optimal, and I am lukewarm about Florida. I would prefer Tennessee-Georgia-Carolinas. Or if the wife changes her stance on winter, NH and ME could be options too. Definitely check out Greenville and Simpsonville (suburb of Greenville). My friend has a kid and they just moved there because schools in that area are good. It's affordable but he got lucky finding a house. Sold a house here and purchased one there for less. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/4/2022 1:55:01 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Greenville SC is where I went to college and still have friends in the area. It was a GREAT place 20-30 years ago, but is getting built up like crazy now. That means more people and more liberals. We visited in February and the amount of development was unbelievable. Even saw liberal harpies protesting something on shop row. Yeah, lots of development in Greenville area for sure but outside in small towns things are more quiet. I also noticed some lib types in downtown Greenville but it's like in every larger city. State predominantly is red and I don't see it changing soon. East Tennessee (Knoxville area) has much less traffic and less development. It actually felt like CT but people were obviously not the lib type (although we ran into some college students protesting abortion bans in downtown Knoxville ). That was the biggest difference between Greenville and Knoxville area. I don't think Knoxville is as popular destination for people as South Carolina. It's like a hidden gem. We stayed in Maryville and traveled through small towns within drivable distance to Knoxville. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2022 8:24:12 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Definitely check out Greenville and Simpsonville (suburb of Greenville). My friend has a kid and they just moved there because schools in that area are good. It's affordable but he got lucky finding a house. Sold a house here and purchased one there for less. Just had a look out of curiosity and both Greenville and Simpsonville have a good school area each, not the entire town district but specific areas. Not sure about the job market in the area though. Remote work has picked up and there can be opportunities. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/5/2022 9:49:54 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Just had a look out of curiosity and both Greenville and Simpsonville have a good school area each, not the entire town district but specific areas. Not sure about the job market in the area though. Remote work has picked up and there can be opportunities. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Definitely check out Greenville and Simpsonville (suburb of Greenville). My friend has a kid and they just moved there because schools in that area are good. It's affordable but he got lucky finding a house. Sold a house here and purchased one there for less. Just had a look out of curiosity and both Greenville and Simpsonville have a good school area each, not the entire town district but specific areas. Not sure about the job market in the area though. Remote work has picked up and there can be opportunities. If you can't find a job in Greenville, you are unemployable.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2022 8:43:01 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If you can't find a job in Greenville, you are unemployable. For my type of work I need a corporate headquarter to be in the area. That's a limitation in my case as I can't just pick up and go somewhere like many other people do. But I can get a remote job for a corporation that's based somewhere else - assuming they allow for fully remote work. It's a possibility nowadays. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/8/2022 8:27:17 PM EDT
[#47]
One more time I hear common sense gun laws I’m gonna shove a D-60 up that fuckers ass.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
