It is hard not to think that with the addition of Barrett, the judges in favor of granting cert became that much more certain they could get at least 5 votes to rule that the 2d Amendment does protect a right to carry arms out in public. They may have 6.

We'll never know about the vote on the cert decision, but we should know the final ruling in a year to year and a half.

quote:

Originally posted by Sigmund:
I thought that each county judge (sheriff?) set rules for issuing permits. Is it correct that Rensselaer County is "no issue?"

From the Rensselaer county website:

https://www.rensco.com/departm...riff/pistol-permits/

Pistol Permits are processed for Rensselaer County residents under New York State laws. When you have completed an application and criminal background check, final approval or denial of a permit is the decision of one of our County Court Justices.

I grew up in NJ. NJ is very much like NY where it is nearly impossible to get a carry permit. You need to demonstrate a legally recognized reason for wanting to possess or carry a firearm.

In Heller, the 5-4 majority was

Roberts (still there)
Scalia (now replaced by Gorsuch)
Kennedy (now Kavanaugh)
Alito (still there)
Thomas (still there)

That block still seems at least probable in this case, with only Roberts a possible switch, although I don't think he will.

The dissenters were:

Stevens (now Kagan)
Souter (now Sotomayor)
Breyer (still there)
Ginsburg (now Barrett)

With Barrett now in, and Ginsburg gone, I think our chances are good for a 6/3 vote, and are at least a 5/4.

quote:

Originally posted by 1967Goat:
You guys have zero faith in Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett...interesting.

Kavanaugh's votes most often match Roberts. The problem is less that he'll go the wrong way entirely but that he'll go along with Roberts in a very narrow and limiting decision. Roberts would prefer 6-3 over 5-4 but an opinion at 6-3 written to get Roberts on board will likely be watered down. As a CA resident I need less coloring between narrow lines in 2A cases. I want a no doubt about what 2A means decision not some watered down half measure to appease Roberts.

quote:

Originally posted by 1967Goat:

quote:

Originally posted by Sigmund:
I thought that each county judge (sheriff?) set rules for issuing permits. Is it correct that Rensselaer County is "no issue?"

From the Rensselaer county website:

https://www.rensco.com/departm...riff/pistol-permits/

Pistol Permits are processed for Rensselaer County residents under New York State laws. When you have completed an application and criminal background check, final approval or denial of a permit is the decision of one of our County Court Justices.

I grew up in NJ. NJ is very much like NY where it is nearly impossible to get a carry permit. You need to demonstrate a legally recognized reason for wanting to possess or carry a firearm.

I live in a county that is 5 minutes from Rensselaer and I and all my closest friends have unrestricted pistol permits. Actually, several people who work for me also have unrestricted carry permits. It’s not at all like downstate.

quote:

Originally posted by 12GA:

I live in a county that is 5 minutes from Rensselaer and I and all my closest friends have unrestricted pistol permits. Actually, several people who work for me also have unrestricted carry permits. It’s not at all like downstate.

Yeah, I know someone in New York State who also has a carry permit. Seriously, New York has got nothing on New Jersey when it comes to denying God given gun rights. Carry permit in NJ? Forget about it.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by 12GA:

I live in a county that is 5 minutes from Rensselaer and I and all my closest friends have unrestricted pistol permits. Actually, several people who work for me also have unrestricted carry permits. It’s not at all like downstate.

Yeah, I know someone in New York State who also has a carry permit. Seriously, New York has got nothing on New Jersey when it comes to denying God given gun rights. Carry permit in NJ? Forget about it.

I live in Rensselaer County and have my whole life. I had my unrestricted (full carry) permit at 21 years old. I had my carry permit several years before becoming a police officer. Rensselaer County is actually one of the most gun friendly counties in NY State.

I'm cynical and pessimistic about everything, but I'm not about this. I wouldn't say I'm confident but I'm pretty confident and happy about this news, and that's solely because of Donald Trump and how he shaped the current Supreme Court.

quote:

Originally posted by Lt CHEG:
...Rensselaer County is actually one of the most gun friendly counties in NY State.

So why was the case filed there? Wouldn't a "no issue" county be better?

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
In Heller, the 5-4 majority was

Roberts (still there)
Scalia (now replaced by Gorsuch)
Kennedy (now Kavanaugh)
Alito (still there)
Thomas (still there)

That block still seems at least probable in this case, with only Roberts a possible switch, although I don't think he will.

The dissenters were:

Stevens (now Kagan)
Souter (now Sotomayor)
Breyer (still there)
Ginsburg (now Barrett)

With Barrett now in, and Ginsburg gone, I think our chances are good for a 6/3 vote, and are at least a 5/4.

It will be interesting to see what Roberts does.

quote:

Originally posted by Sigmund:

So why was the case filed there? Wouldn't a "no issue" county be better?

Does it matter?

I think this was taken up for two reasons, one the new appointees, and second to show to the current Congress that they act as a check and balance. Not in recent history has there been a chance for on a Federal level a real threat to 2A. Right now they are trying to do away with the filibuster to side step consensus building inherent in the operation of the Senate. All this with the narrowest lead in the house and VP tie breaker.

I'm probably looking too far in this, but I think this was taken up to send a message and I think it's going to be good for us.

I’m confident the scumbags in Albany and NYC will figure out another way to infringe.

Whatever trust and optimism I had with the system and these folks has long since vanished.

I'll believe it when I see good results. Once in a while they actually do something *and* get it right.

Until then, they're all incredibly suspect, and it will take years at least before that changes, if ever...

Probably why we're going to be seeing the most absurd and defamatory fake news ever in the near future.

Case in point (get your blood pressure meds)...ahh yes...gun owner = white power. Obviously they aren't subscribers to Colion Noir's YT channel.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...1g3IgN?ocid=msedgntp

$.02 worth,
Boss

quote:

Originally posted by 46and2:
Whatever trust and optimism I had with the system and these folks has long since vanished.

I'll believe it when I see good results. Once in a while they actually do something *and* get it right.

Until then, they're all incredibly suspect, and it will take years at least before that changes, if ever...

I am of the same opinion.
Zero trust in any branch of the Government at this point.
The Supreme Court is just as suspect as DOJ and FBI.
I need proof that they believe in the Constitution.
As of late they seem to care not in the Constitution nor rule of law.

I do think any "discretionary issuing" will be struck down. As a general rule, the courts despise anything like that.

At the very least, articulated circumstances would be required.

That could/should be 8-1. (Sotomayor isn't just left, she's grossly unfit.)

I do not think they're going to come out w. "Shall issue", or "open carry is constitutional" or "concealed carry is constitutional." (I just don't see Roberts going for that/it could come down to the briefs. Lots of people act as politicians in high profile cases, rather than lawyers.)

I could see a, very, slight chance of "2nd Amendment means what is says, if you don't like it, amend the USCON."

I actually think that's a simpler position than mandating shall issue.

HOWEVER, that would, probably mean striking down any restrictions on felons, etc once they aren't on parole, and I could see many Republicans being uncomfortable with that.

Cases like this are exactly why it was so important to elect Donald Trump when we did.
His choices for the court look great and are better by a significant measure than anyone HRC would have put in there. We know that much for a fact.

I know it's hard to have faith in gov't these days, but I trust Pres. Trump's judgement.
Let's hope his court picks don't disappoint. Let's give them a chance.

quote:

Originally posted by SIGguy229:
I’m confident the scumbags in Albany and NYC will figure out another way to infringe.

This is how I see it. There is no consequence for a state or local official ignoring a SCOTUS decision. A county judge could deny the most reasonable CCW permit app after the SCOTUS makes a shall-issue ruling, and the applicant would have to spend his own huge money to work it up the court system again. Even if he won at the local level, the judge who denied his permit isn't going to face the slightest punishment.

quote:

Originally posted by gw3971:

It will be interesting to see what Roberts does.

I don't know, because I am not a dedicated court watcher, but Roberts on this question may be less "interesting" than you think. Heller seems to be a decent guide.