Is NYC turning into California?

[OyCrumbler]

Originally Posted by Airborneguy

Anyone who doesn’t think NY and CA violate the 2nd Amendment is either lying or dumb. One doesn’t have to be a Constitutional attorney to understand this.

That’s something someone who doesn’t understand constitutional law would definitely believe. The more accurate position is that it’s somewhat complicated and unfortunately ambiguois which should be obvious given the constant debate over it.

[Airborneguy]

Originally Posted by OyCrumbler

That’s something someone who doesn’t understand constitutional law would definitely believe. The more accurate position is that it’s somewhat complicated and unfortunately ambiguois which should be obvious given the constant debate over it.

No, it's not ambiguous.

Heller and Mcdonald were pretty damned clear in stating that law-abiding Americans most definitely have the right to at least own a handgun within their homes, and neither state allows that without the citizen overcoming extremely expensive and stringent hurdles which arbitrarily exclude many from enjoying this birthright.

So even if one does not ascribe to the same view of the 2nd Amendment as I, the fact remains that both CA and NY (and you can throw in NJ and HI as well) CLEARLY violate the 2nd Amendment by making it impossible for most of their residents to own a handgun within their home as SCOTUS has said forms the basis of the RIGHT.

There is a long record of case law clearly outlining the scope of the 2nd Amendment. The fact that YOU don't know this (and that certain states ignore it all), doesn't make me ignorant. I'm quite certain that my knowledge on this topic FAR exceeds yours.

Start by reading United States v Miller (1939), keep going at least until you get to Heller, then get back to me and I will give you cases from prior to Miller to read. THEN we will talk and we'll see if you still call me uninformed when I say that the NYC requirement to have a permit to even TOUCH a handgun or own a long gun is unconstitutional.

(And yes, I am quite aware that you will not read any of those court decisions.)

[Mr.Retired]

Opinions:
Thank the Lord for Our Founding Fathers. It is our duty as a free nation to respect
and uphold with our lives these well thought out words written by quill onto parchment.

If an apex predator like a bear charges me unarmed I'll buy some time with a few
objects at hand and a couple of quick shuffles until eventually falling prey to the predator.
If that same bear charges me armed while I'm on my phone and drinking coffee
odds are that I will take down the threat ,hang up the phone finish my breakfast and take
on a new assignment of preparing for a wonderful evening banquet featuring Bear backstraps
as the main menu.

Control the People by controlling the guns. Control the Government by arming the people.
Maintaining the balance of this finest of lines drawn requires consistent monitoring.
If it sways to far to either side we risk loosing government or its' people.

[OyCrumbler]

Originally Posted by Airborneguy

No, it's not ambiguous.

Heller and Mcdonald were pretty damned clear in stating that law-abiding Americans most definitely have the right to at least own a handgun within their homes, and neither state allows that without the citizen overcoming extremely expensive and stringent hurdles which arbitrarily exclude many from enjoying this birthright.

So even if one does not ascribe to the same view of the 2nd Amendment as I, the fact remains that both CA and NY (and you can throw in NJ and HI as well) CLEARLY violate the 2nd Amendment by making it impossible for most of their residents to own a handgun within their home as SCOTUS has said forms the basis of the RIGHT.

There is a long record of case law clearly outlining the scope of the 2nd Amendment. The fact that YOU don't know this (and that certain states ignore it all), doesn't make me ignorant. I'm quite certain that my knowledge on this topic FAR exceeds yours.

Start by reading United States v Miller (1939), keep going at least until you get to Heller, then get back to me and I will give you cases from prior to Miller to read. THEN we will talk and we'll see if you still call me uninformed when I say that the NYC requirement to have a permit to even TOUCH a handgun or own a long gun is unconstitutional.

(And yes, I am quite aware that you will not read any of those court decisions.)

Did that about a decade ago. Clearly it’s still ambiguous (lol), despite my own disagreeing with how the 2nd amendment is interpreted in NYC and CA.