User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/15/2022 5:35:20 PM EDT
[#1]
Layman’s terms?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2022 6:45:54 PM EDT
[#2]
Throw all sorts of bullshit up against the wall to see what sticks.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2022 9:15:20 PM EDT
[#3]
@Nolocontendere
So it seems they came up with a metric shit ton of "examples" of analogous laws. I'm sure almost all are total bullshit arguments...but I defer to you obviously. Eta...I read it. They basically cherry picked a bunch of random historical laws to support their position...but those laws are absolutely not demonstrating a long standing tradition of those kinds of laws throughout the nation. Just because a couple places in NJ and NYC passed crazy gun laws in the 18th and 19th centuries doesn't make those laws widespread enough to consider them anywhere near a tradition of a law. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2022 11:23:59 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: @Nolocontendere So it seems they came up with a metric shit ton of "examples" of analogous laws. I'm sure almost all are total bullshit arguments...but I defer to you obviously. Eta...I read it. They basically cherry picked a bunch of random historical laws to support their position...but those laws are absolutely not demonstrating a long standing tradition of those kinds of laws throughout the nation. Just because a couple places in NJ and NYC passed crazy gun laws in the 18th and 19th centuries doesn't make those laws widespread enough to consider them anywhere near a tradition of a law. Most of their examples are rooted in racist policies. Prohibitions on Native Americans, immigrants, Catholics… Citing laws from the English King who sought to disarm the populace. Concur, throwing shit against the wall hoping something sticks. My personal take on things is the judge allowed the extra time to file a response and exceed the page limit because he does not want them to be able to argue on appeal that they were hamstrung in responding. I also think the fact that he refused to extend the response deadline past the effective date is indicative of the fact he believes that an injunction is likely warranted and that there will be harm if the law is allowed to go into effect. Of course I could just be projecting in that analysis. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2022 7:42:27 AM EDT
[#5]
Anyone else find this part interesting?
C. Plaintiff Antonyuk Has Not Alleged An Injury-in-fact 1. Because Plaintiff Antonyuk’s License Does Not Expire, He Will Never Be Subject To The Interview, Social Media Disclosure, or Training Requirements He Is Challenging Plaintiff Antonyuk cannot demonstrate an injury-in-fact from the CCIA’s key revisions to New York’s licensing laws, including the interview, social media disclosure, and training provisions, because these provisions will never be applied to him. These provisions are part of N.Y. Penal Law § 400.00(1), which applies whenever a license is “issued or renewed.” See 2022 N.Y. Laws ch. 371 § 1. Case 1:22-cv-00734-GTS-CFH Document 19 Filed 08/15/22 Page 29 of 80 16 But as a current holder of a Schenectady County unrestricted carry permit, see Compl. ¶ 1, Plaintiff Antonyuk will not be required to have his license re-issued or renewed, and therefore will never be subject to any of these application requirements. Renewal of a license is governed by N.Y. Penal Law § 400.00(10), under which the renewal period is every three years for licenses issued in New York City, and every five years for licenses from Nassau, Suffolk, or Westchester Counties. See N.Y. Penal Law § 400.00(10). But “elsewhere than in the city of New York and the counties of Nassau, Suffolk and Westchester, any license to carry or possess a pistol or revolver, issued at any time pursuant to this section . . . and not previously revoked or cancelled, shall be in force and effect until revoked.” Id. Plaintiff Antonyuk avers that his license “has never been revoked or suspended.” Compl. ¶ 106. Accordingly, he will never need to renew his license, never need to have an interview, never need to disclose his social media, and never need to go through the training required for new applicants or renewals.3 The way I read that, there are saying that there are still different requirements for different parts of the State. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2022 10:05:32 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Anyone else find this part interesting? C. Plaintiff Antonyuk Has Not Alleged An Injury-in-fact 1. Because Plaintiff Antonyuk’s License Does Not Expire, He Will Never Be Subject To The Interview, Social Media Disclosure, or Training Requirements He Is Challenging Plaintiff Antonyuk cannot demonstrate an injury-in-fact from the CCIA’s key revisions to New York’s licensing laws, including the interview, social media disclosure, and training provisions, because these provisions will never be applied to him. These provisions are part of N.Y. Penal Law § 400.00(1), which applies whenever a license is “issued or renewed.” See 2022 N.Y. Laws ch. 371 § 1. Case 1:22-cv-00734-GTS-CFH Document 19 Filed 08/15/22 Page 29 of 80 16 But as a current holder of a Schenectady County unrestricted carry permit, see Compl. ¶ 1, Plaintiff Antonyuk will not be required to have his license re-issued or renewed, and therefore will never be subject to any of these application requirements. Renewal of a license is governed by N.Y. Penal Law § 400.00(10), under which the renewal period is every three years for licenses issued in New York City, and every five years for licenses from Nassau, Suffolk, or Westchester Counties. See N.Y. Penal Law § 400.00(10). But “elsewhere than in the city of New York and the counties of Nassau, Suffolk and Westchester, any license to carry or possess a pistol or revolver, issued at any time pursuant to this section . . . and not previously revoked or cancelled, shall be in force and effect until revoked.” Id. Plaintiff Antonyuk avers that his license “has never been revoked or suspended.” Compl. ¶ 106. Accordingly, he will never need to renew his license, never need to have an interview, never need to disclose his social media, and never need to go through the training required for new applicants or renewals.3 The way I read that, there are saying that there are still different requirements for different parts of the State. Lol...all of the bolded parts NY is talking about are absolute bullshit. If NY doesn't get smacked down here, you can guarantee they will institute those requirements for every gun owner within the year. NY loves doing this in their arguments..."Oh NY would never subject gun owners to this or this or this...so plaintiff has no standing" 3 months later..."yeah we said that in the court argument but we changed our minds...we do want to have every gun owner in NY re-apply with all these new requirements. What we said in the argument was only true at the time." |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2022 10:17:41 AM EDT
[#7]
Problem is nothing stops them from revoking you.
So you may not need to renew/recertify but if you don't they will revoke you. How do these people look in the mirror at night? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2022 10:40:15 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Most of their examples are rooted in racist policies. Prohibitions on Native Americans, immigrants, Catholics… Citing laws from the English King who sought to disarm the populace. Concur, throwing shit against the wall hoping something sticks. My personal take on things is the judge allowed the extra time to file a response and exceed the page limit because he does not want them to be able to argue on appeal that they were hamstrung in responding. I also think the fact that he refused to extend the response deadline past the effective date is indicative of the fact he believes that an injunction is likely warranted and that there will be harm if the law is allowed to go into effect. Of course I could just be projecting in that analysis. Yeah it could just as easily be the judge throwing gun owners a fake bone, so we don't call foul...he kinda has to decide the case before the law goes into effect...that's the point of an injunction. It's a total toss up...if the judge is honest he will realize that NONE of NYs crazy laws are reflective of the history of gun laws as a whole in the US. Hell...Most states had NO gun laws whatsoever. Not a single one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2022 10:47:36 AM EDT
[#9]
This is the first I've heard people issued licenses outside of downstate don't have to renew ever? I thought the safe act eliminated all that?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2022 11:33:31 AM EDT
[#10]
Sure seems like they are pushing the standing argument pretty hard. They even tripped over the actual legislation and contradicted some of what we've heard initially from several county clerks...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2022 11:41:42 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Sure seems like they are pushing the standing argument pretty hard. They even tripped over the actual legislation and contradicted some of what we've heard initially from several county clerks... The first thing you attack is standing so that you don't have to address the merits of the case at all. They know they'll get bitch slapped hard on the law, so they are hoping to unrail the complaint before it is really heard. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2022 11:44:33 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is the first I've heard people issued licenses outside of downstate don't have to renew ever? I thought the safe act eliminated all that? I think they are saying that most counties don't require you to renew from scratch every few years like some places do...NYC, Nassau, Westchester etc. The recertification online is not really a renewal. It's just a way for NY to keep their records straight because they screwed it up so bad the past 100yrs they needed us to do it for them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2022 11:45:19 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The first thing you attack is standing so that you don't have to address the merits of the case at all. They know they'll get bitch slapped hard on the law, so they are hoping to unrail the complaint before it is really heard. If Bruen isn't the right person to sue, then why was he the right person to sue with the NYSRPA vs. Bruen SCOTUS case? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2022 12:17:09 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If Bruen isn't the right person to sue, then why was he the right person to sue with the NYSRPA vs. Bruen SCOTUS case? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The first thing you attack is standing so that you don't have to address the merits of the case at all. They know they'll get bitch slapped hard on the law, so they are hoping to unrail the complaint before it is really heard. If Bruen isn't the right person to sue, then why was he the right person to sue with the NYSRPA vs. Bruen SCOTUS case? In my opinion Bruen is the right person to sue as the local clerks and judges don't develop training requirements or issue other guidance, that comes from the State Police. Also, the State Police are the largest (outside NYPD) agency that will be tasked with enforcing these laws and in many municipalities they may be the only law enforcement agency servicing other than the county sheriff. So they will have more say in how these laws are enforced than any other entity. Again, they are reaching and grasping at straws. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2022 1:29:25 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think they are saying that most counties don't require you to renew from scratch every few years like some places do...NYC, Nassau, Westchester etc. The recertification online is not really a renewal. It's just a way for NY to keep their records straight because they screwed it up so bad the past 100yrs they needed us to do it for them. They still don't get it right. I put new pistols on my permit months ago and NYSP still doesn't have them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2022 10:10:13 PM EDT
[#16]
Unless I'm missing something, it would appear the rebuttal is addressing Handgun Licenses as though CCIA only applies to NYC, which it does not. Do the words "recertify" and "renewal" interchange?
If I were exempted as a non-NYC issued Licensee then why did the NYSP send a Letter requiring a List of all currently owned Firearms and subsequently almost five years later require another recertification? Hopefully my questioning isn't a stupid move of disclosure for the 'tards that wrote this. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2022 10:12:47 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: They still don't get it right. I put new pistols on my permit months ago and NYSP still doesn't have them. They are YEARS behind in processing P-12's (form Dealers use every time a firearm comes in or out a detailed copy has to be sent to the NYSP in Albany) So fucked up and antiquated was their database before un_SAFE that the "recertification" was written in demanding a list so they could straighten some of it out. BTW: Your County has record, and the viability of your Licenses and Handguns listed IS available through Dispatch. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2022 6:58:46 AM EDT
[#18]
This is called, in plain English, lying. It’s a common lawyer tactic I’ve seen in court many times. The garbage party’s lawyer simply lies. It’s up to the good party’s lawyer to prove them wrong. The judge can then do what he wants with it- use it to support his personal opinion, or decide based on the merits of the argument and ignore what he knows to be true. It’s a free tactic; even when I’ve heard or even read in the decision that the garbage lawyer is lying (“facts don’t support the argument “) no punishment is handed down to the lawyer.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2022 12:50:54 PM EDT
[#19]
The Reload has an article on New York's filing today as forwarded by the 2 Amendment Rights email. Basically outlines the information above and kind of ridicules it. Of course, IF a judge goes along with it as history and tradition then it will be a long road. It is kind of hard to deny it as history and tradition even if it is racist. If they are willing to overlook the racist angles, who knows? After all, the Sullivan Law was passed to disarm the Italian and Jewish gangs so that the Big Tim's Irish gang would not have any competition.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2022 12:56:18 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Reload has an article on New York's filing today as forwarded by the 2 Amendment Rights email. Basically outlines the information above and kind of ridicules it. Of course, IF a judge goes along with it as history and tradition then it will be a long road. It is kind of hard to deny it as history and tradition even if it is racist. If they are willing to overlook the racist angles, who knows? After all, the Sullivan Law was passed to disarm the Italian and Jewish gangs so that the Big Tim's Irish gang would not have any competition. SCOTUS was pretty clear that single instances here and there are not history and tradition. If it is tradition than it is a practice that would be mirrored as it would be reflective of the values of society as a whole. I don't think they did themselves any favors pointing out violations of rights based on racism and bigotry. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2022 1:51:28 PM EDT
[#21]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2022 2:17:29 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryThat's not gonna buff out. Hard to argue it is a public safety issue and not just totalitarianism when one of the largest LE groups in the nation calls you out! |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2022 2:37:14 PM EDT
[#23]
So- violating peoples civil rights, including the Fourteenth Amendment, et al, based on their race or skin color is now...a historical tradition and basis for denying them their Second Amendment rights? Did I get that sophism right?
That's a bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see if it pays off for them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2022 2:42:22 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So- violating peoples civil rights, including the Fourteenth Amendment, et al, based on their race or skin color is now...a historical tradition and basis for denying them their Second Amendment rights? Did I get that sophism right? That's a bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see if it pays off for them. Yup I was laughing my ass off on that one. Note this is sarcasm - our nation has a long tradition of slavery, so a law that says you can enslave your political opponents would be OK because political thought is not a protected class like race is. Essentially that is what they are arguing. The bans on guns they cite are historical but could not fly today because the groups targeted by those bans are protected classes today - but so long as we don't discriminate in our civil liberties violations it is OK. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2022 9:40:04 PM EDT
[#25]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2022 8:01:28 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The bans on guns they cite are historical but could not fly today because the groups targeted by those bans are protected classes today - but so long as we don't discriminate in our civil liberties violations it is OK. I realize you are speaking sarcastically but I suspect that argument could very well be taken up by the leftist judges who want to keep gun control laws in place, whatever it takes. I could very well imagine something like this coming out of the court: "We have a tradition of gun bans and restrictions. While banning guns from Native Americans, Blacks, Japanese, Jews, Italians, Catholics, etc. is a violation of civil rights under todays laws, the fact remains such bans were accepted as legal at the time they were passed and are a part of our history. As long as the current reasons for banning guns are palatable to current thinking and do not discriminate against a particular class of people then they are consistent with Bruen"  I honestly would not be surprised to something along those lines coming out of the 2nd and 9th courts. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2022 8:40:02 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryHoly cow, what are all those briefs submitted in the last 48 hours? What is all that, every anti-gun group that has an opinion just submits something to the judge? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2022 3:02:48 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I realize you are speaking sarcastically but I suspect that argument could very well be taken up by the leftist judges who want to keep gun control laws in place, whatever it takes. I could very well imagine something like this coming out of the court: "We have a tradition of gun bans and restrictions. While banning guns from Native Americans, Blacks, Japanese, Jews, Italians, Catholics, etc. is a violation of civil rights under todays laws, the fact remains such bans were accepted as legal at the time they were passed and are a part of our history. As long as the current reasons for banning guns are palatable to current thinking and do not discriminate against a particular class of people then they are consistent with Bruen" I honestly would not be surprised to something along those lines coming out of the 2nd and 9th courts. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The bans on guns they cite are historical but could not fly today because the groups targeted by those bans are protected classes today - but so long as we don't discriminate in our civil liberties violations it is OK. I realize you are speaking sarcastically but I suspect that argument could very well be taken up by the leftist judges who want to keep gun control laws in place, whatever it takes. I could very well imagine something like this coming out of the court: "We have a tradition of gun bans and restrictions. While banning guns from Native Americans, Blacks, Japanese, Jews, Italians, Catholics, etc. is a violation of civil rights under todays laws, the fact remains such bans were accepted as legal at the time they were passed and are a part of our history. As long as the current reasons for banning guns are palatable to current thinking and do not discriminate against a particular class of people then they are consistent with Bruen" I honestly would not be surprised to something along those lines coming out of the 2nd and 9th courts. They may well... Thomas would have something to say about that though... as would the conservative Catholics on the Court. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/19/2022 3:03:47 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Holy cow, what are all those briefs submitted in the last 48 hours? What is all that, every anti-gun group that has an opinion just submits something to the judge? Quote HistoryQuoted: Holy cow, what are all those briefs submitted in the last 48 hours? What is all that, every anti-gun group that has an opinion just submits something to the judge? I read some of their briefs last night... pure garbage. The best one was filed by the National Police Association saying they support police but not a police state. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2022 7:54:46 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: They may well... Thomas would have something to say about that though... as would the conservative Catholics on the Court. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2022 8:57:12 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: They may well... Thomas would have something to say about that though... as would the conservative Catholics on the Court. Thomas is a conservative Catholic 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2022 5:55:09 PM EDT
[#32]
Hello my New Yorker friends. I’m here. See y’all soon.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2022 5:59:35 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Hello my New Yorker friends. I’m here. See y’all soon. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2022 6:23:44 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Hello my New Yorker friends. I’m here. See y’all soon. Welcome and God Bless! I'm too far to join you in Syracuse but I'll be there in spirit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2022 7:33:33 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Hello my New Yorker friends. I’m here. See y’all soon. Very much looking forward to it!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2022 9:01:19 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Hello my New Yorker friends. I’m here. See y’all soon. Looking forward to meeting you and the rest of the guys as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2022 9:40:01 PM EDT
[#37]
Please give us an after action report!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2022 9:54:16 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Please give us an after action report! Watch the news
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2022 3:13:41 AM EDT
[#39]
I don’t trust anything that I hear on the news. I’d rather hear it from someone who is there.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2022 12:04:12 PM EDT
[#40]
I will be with you all in spirit.
FKH |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2022 5:32:26 PM EDT
[#41]
Good luck!
|
|
|
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.
