[Springville Shooter]

Lets start a new discussion regarding this topic so we don't pollute or cross-contaminate the other threat on the bill currently in Congress.

I agree with this ruling. As a responsible gun owner, I get so sick of my rights and privileges being threatened in the name of 'public safety'. I am absolutely NOT a public threat, in fact, I contribute greatly to public safety in many ways as both a citizen and a volunteer. I heard some commentary on this issue today that I found brilliant and it illustrates my feelings precisely:

Many on compare limiting the rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the "yelling FIRE! in a crowded theatre" example. This comparison is not analogous as the "yelling FIRE!" example has to do with an action that is already committed. The better example would be to tape everyone's mouth shut before they even entered the theatre so they wouldn't be able to yell "FIRE!"

I'm not planning on yelling "FIRE!" and I don't want my mouth taped shut. Make some laws that address the problem with CRIMINALS and I will be on board all the way.

The current ridiculous momentum is to make it hard on cops, easy on criminals, all while punishing law-abiding citizens as much as possible. -------SS

 

[Critter]

I wondered just how many criminals adhered to the law that was on NY's books of not carrying a concealed weapon when in areas that it was illegal?

As they say the gun control laws are for the law abiding citizens who will obey the law and do what the law says. The criminals just don't give a rats rear end.

As for the Supreme Courts ruling, I like it.

 

[backcountry]

At the end of the day I'm a citizen that supports SCOTUS rulings no matter which way they fall as I believe justices do their best to interpret the law & constitution honestly. I'm an individual who wishes we could craft gun control legislation that prevented much of the gun violence & I've seen research that loosening concealed carry laws could increase gun violence in a meaningful way but I'll admit I'm skeptical. I can understand why folks are concerned about concealed carry as NY will undoubtedly see a massive spike in applications. There will be more guns in public places now.

The new test is going to be extremely cumbersome and limiting. Can't say I'm a huge fan of it but it is what it is.

Will be interesting to see how the ruling will affect the similar but not identical laws in several other states. Sounds like there are already cases pending it will affect.

At this point it's tough to know the full reach of this ruling but it's clear it will affect control laws moving forward . Hard to care much now as every analysis I read predicted this type of outcome from the moment they accepted the case.

 

[2full]

Lets start a new discussion regarding this topic so we don't pollute or cross-contaminate the other threat on the bill currently in Congress.

I agree with this ruling. As a responsible gun owner, I get so sick of my rights and privileges being threatened in the name of 'public safety'. I am absolutely NOT a public threat, in fact, I contribute greatly to public safety in many ways as both a citizen and a volunteer. I heard some commentary on this issue today that I found brilliant and it illustrates my feelings precisely:

Many on compare limiting the rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the "yelling FIRE! in a crowded theatre" example. This comparison is not analogous as the "yelling FIRE!" example has to do with an action that is already committed. The better example would be to tape everyone's mouth shut before they even entered the theatre so they wouldn't be able to yell "FIRE!"

I'm not planning on yelling "FIRE!" and I don't want my mouth taped shut. Make some laws that address the problem with CRIMINALS and I will be on board all the way.

The current ridiculous momentum is to make it hard on cops, easy on criminals, all while punishing law-abiding citizens as much as possible. -------SS

This times 10.
The old saying...........
If guns are outlawed.
Only outlaws will have guns.

Does anybody really think the gang members, and repeat offenders passed the existing background checks and followed the rules and regulations to get their guns ???
I think NOT.
Make it harder on the criminals and low life's.

NOT the law abiding citizens.
All for the ruling.

 

[Ray]

It was the right call to make, should’ve been done decades ago

 

[backcountry]

It was the right call to make, should’ve been done decades ago

I think "letting it" stick for a 100 years is part of the left's and many New Yorkers criticism of the ruling. Problem is you have to have the lawsuit and the right precedent to get this outcome. It's unlikely this ruling would exist without this court's demographics, Heller & McDonald.

I think the recent back to back rulings are going to have noticeable short to long term consequences well beyond the scope of the cases.

 

[bowgy]

This times 10.
The old saying...........
If guns are outlawed.
Only outlaws will have guns.

Does anybody really think the gang members, and repeat offenders passed the existing background checks and followed the rules and regulations to get their guns ???
I think NOT.
Make it harder on the criminals and low life's.

NOT the law abiding citizens.
All for the ruling.

SURE they do, here is proof.

 

[Stickboy2]

I think the lead has been buried in all of the commentary about this SCOTUS decision. The discussion on strict scrutiny in the decision will have a much broader impact, especially for citizens behind enemy lines. It will take several more years, but there is hope mag bans, along with black rifle bans will be successfully challenged. Oh happy day!