Supreme Court Rules New York’s Concealed
Carry Gun Law Is Unconstitutional

If GrandPa Poopy Pants can carry the Nuclear Suitcase...We The People should be able to carry whatever we want..... where-ever we want...Our Days could be numbered!....The enemy is erecting the barriers....But the barriers they erect to keep us OUT..... may be used to keep THEM IN!

I'm going to move on this quickly. I can't wait to see a denial of permit tried on me. We need to push this out of the way as fast as possible.

Imagine the rich irony the Supreme Court majority must have felt in striking down a restriction on the right to self-protection in the amidst of THE WORST mob action ever directed against Justices in their own homes, along with their family receiving death threats from abortion-psycho-leftards. Leftists are like the viper, so hungry to kill, that it ends up biting its own tail.

The simple fact of the matter is that prohibitions by states for open carry or concealed carry of firearms has been declared unconstitutional. States like California will need to rewrite their laws because current laws cannot be enforced. Other gun laws like barring felons from possession or federal laws the prohibition of short barreled rifles, machine guns etc. remain in place. If you walk into Mcdonalds tonight with "a big iron on your hip" no one will arrest you...orders of the Supreme Court.

New York's concealed carry law sounds very much like we must endure in New Jersey.

Hopefully this will convince some criminals to reconsider their career choice but it will take a few legal killings before they get the memo.

This majority opinion leaves wide open the following question: Can a government require a permit before a law-abiding citizen can lawfully carry a CONCEALED firearm? The opinion refers 80 times to "public carry" - 7 times to "open carry" and 16 times to "concealed carry." The majority opinion cites to only one opinion wherein a law court invalidated a government's prohibition of carrying concealed firearms, that being a published opinion of the Supreme Court of Kentucky (1822 in Bliss v. Commonwealth, 12 Ky, 90). The majority opinion's text includes: "To summarize: The historical evidence from antebellum America does demonstrate that the MANNER OF PUBLIC CARRY was subject to reasonable regulation." and, "Throughout modern Anglo-American history, the right to keep and bear arms in public has traditionally been subject to well-defined restrictions governing the intent for which one could carry arms, THE MANNER OF CARRY, or the exceptional circumstances under which one could not carry arms." [bold text emphasis added].

Look at the irony in the left’s arguments regarding gun control and abortion. On the former, they want the states to be able to set the rules. But for abortion the states should not be allowed to have a say.

To clarify my reply No. 7: Obviously the SC's opinion prohibits governments to require law-abiding adult citizens to acquire a permit to "open carry" handguns.

The eight states that have "may issue" are now unconstitutional. That would be California, Connecticut ,Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Rhode Island. All are have unconstitutional restrictions on people's rights. If they have a state AG with any brains, he'll write an opinion to the governor or head of the legislature saying that they need to get their laws in line with this new decision. I expect 1 or 2 at best to do this. The others will need to be sued, and WILL lose their case in the first Federal judge that hears the case, or at very worst, if the judge is exceptionally stupid and LIKES being overturned on appeal, it will be overturned at the Appellate Court level. Then the courts will require the states to rewrite their statutes to comply. Illinois went through this in 2013 when a precient judge told them that their 'may issue' CCW laws was unconstitutional. And since Illinois/Chicago had lost two recent gun cases already, they didn't appeal, and the judge stayed his own ruling for 90 days to give them time to write a new objective standards CCW law. I expect something like the Illinois pattern to be what happens to these eight states....kicking, screaming and SWEARING that "blood will run in the streets"....when the exact opposite is what will happen. Criminals will suddenly see that many "victims" are armed and willing to defend themselves. A good decision, and exciting times. The leftist angst will be what is flowing in the streets.

I just got back from a training session at the range with three women students. None seem to be interested in CCW, but want to be safe at home. Their skills are coming along nicely.

It will be interesting to check the crime rate in a couple of years. I suspect that people will become much less hostile. And random crime will decrease.

Re #4, about 40 states already permit it. This is going to relate to NY and seven other states. Going armed 'tonight' as you recommended, in NYC is a great way to become the test case to see what gets done. It'll be interesting, and EXPENSIVE.

Re #5, the NJ law is also unconstitutional and in the first case up on this topic the judge will rule it unconstitutional and it will be gone. Worst case, it goes to tge Appellate Court to be struck down. If it goes like Illinois, the judge will give the legislature 90 days to write a constitutional CCW law, which will have objective standards. Subjective standards are unconstitutional.