Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I would imagine the NYC police would be the biggest group against citizens carrying guns regularly. NYC is a small tightly confined area with Millions of people, and tight confined public transportation, it's a zoo of people daily.
I would not want to be the cop that has to figure out who the good guy is during an active shooting where 100s are pulling guns at the same time. I would be curious what the NYC Police Union and police Chief thinks of this ruling or the potential for millions more persons carrying guns in NYC.
Have to see what NY law looks like after this ruling, not a lawyer here so I am still getting an understanding of what this changes. I support the 2nd Amendment but I also support states' rights too especially when addressing a unique location like NYC (its not like any other US city).
The conservative majority said it violates due process and the second amendment. I haven’t read the whole opinion yet.
Excerpts from the Opinion written by Clarence Thomas.
(In Heller) we looked to history because “it has always been widely understood that the Second Amendment . . . codified a pre-existing right.” The Amendment “was not intended to lay down a novel principle but rather codified a right inherited from our English ancestors.”
After surveying English history dating from the late 1600s, along with American colonial views leading up to the founding, we found “no doubt, on the basis of both text and history, that the Second Amendment conferred an individual right to keep and bear arms.
We therefore turn to whether the plain text of the Second Amendment protects Koch’s and Nash’s proposed course of conduct — carrying handguns publicly for self-defense. We have little difficulty concluding that it does.
Nothing in the Second Amendment’s text draws a home/public distinction with respect to the right to keep and bear arms.
Heller further confirmed that the right to “bear arms” refers to the right to “wear, bear, or carry . . . upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose . . . of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person.”
This definition of “bear” naturally encompasses public carry.
Most gun owners do not wear a holstered pistol at their hip in their bedroom or while sitting at the dinner table. Although individuals often “keep” firearms in their home, at the ready for self-defense, most do not “bear” (i.e., carry) them in the home beyond moments of actual confrontation. To confine the right to “bear” arms to the home would nullify half of the Second Amendment’s operative protections.
Moreover, confining the right to “bear” arms to the home would make little sense given that self-defense is “the central component of the [Second Amendment] right itself.
After all, the Second Amendment guarantees an “individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation,” Heller, 554 U. S., at 592, and confrontation can surely take place outside the home.
Although we remarked in Heller that the need for armed self-defense is perhaps “most acute” in the home, we did not suggest that the need was insignificant elsewhere. Many Americans hazard greater danger outside the home than in it. “[A] Chicagoan is a good deal more likely to be attacked on a sidewalk in a rough neighborhood than in his apartment on the 35th floor of the Park Tower”.
The text of the Second Amendment reflects that reality.
The Second Amendment’s plain text thus presumptively guarantees petitioners Koch and Nash a right to “bear” arms in public for self-defense.
The constitutional right to bear arms in public for self-defense is not “a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.” We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need. That is not how the First Amendment works when it comes to unpopular speech or the free exercise of religion. It is not how the Sixth Amendment works when it comes to a defendant’s right to confront the witnesses against him. And it is not how the Second Amendment works when it comes to public carry for self-defense.
New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment in that it prevents law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms. We therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand the case for further pro- ceedings consistent with this opinion.
Excerpts from the Opinion written by Clarence Thomas.
The constitutional right to bear arms in public for self-defense is not “a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.” We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need. That is not how the First Amendment works when it comes to unpopular speech or the free exercise of religion. It is not how the Sixth Amendment works when it comes to a defendant’s right to confront the witnesses against him. And it is not how the Second Amendment works when it comes to public carry for self-defense.
I would imagine the NYC police would be the biggest group against citizens carrying guns regularly. NYC is a small tightly confined area with Millions of people, and tight confined public transportation, it's a zoo of people daily.
I would not want to be the cop that has to figure out who the good guy is during an active shooting where 100s are pulling guns at the same time. I would be curious what the NYC Police Union and police Chief thinks of this ruling or the potential for millions more persons carrying guns in NYC.
Have to see what NY law looks like after this ruling, not a lawyer here so I am still getting an understanding of what this changes. I support the 2nd Amendment but I also support states' rights too especially when addressing a unique location like NYC (its not like any other US city).
An armed society is a polite society. I bet crime drops in NY now that the criminals don't know who might fight back or get assistance.
I would not want to be the cop that has to figure out who the good guy is during an active shooting where 100s are pulling guns at the same time.
The usual hysterical ranting that comes nowhere close to reality.
If the 2nd amendment were actually upheld and enforced as written, and all law-abiding adults were freely allowed to carry a gun, most still wouldn't bother. But a few would.
And a criminal planning to rob a store, shoot up an office, or murder or rape someone in the street, shoot up a school etc., would know that there was a pretty good chance that some of the people in the crowd or campus were armed, and knew how to use their weapons.
Some of the crazier criminals might go ahead and commit their crimes anyway. But a number of them would consider the increased risk to himself, and decide not to commit it, than do nowadays.
Presto, a mass shooting prevented, all without a shot being fired.
And today's leftists bend over backward to keep that deterrence from happening.
It is my understanding, this ruling only impacts New York. More lawsuits will be needed for other states.
Directly, yes, it only impact NY as NY was the only state party to the state. More broadly speaking, the Supreme Court opinion applies to 2nd Amendment jurisprudence nationwide based on the tribunal that issued it. But, yes, formal lawsuits will have to be filed in the other states to see this ruling implemented, but, in theory, that should be an easy task and courts should make quick work in invalidating the different restrictions across CA, NJ, MD, HI, etc.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
