Supreme Court strikes New York gun law in major ruling

Studies have shown that concealed weapon permit holders commit crimes at rates that even less that of law enforcement officers, so what is it you think is going to happen? Hell, I'm a concealed permit holder, and except for Army training using blanks, I've never even as much as pointed a firearm at another human being, and it's not like I prowl the streets looking for someone to kill. It's one of the very last things I ever want to do, even if I am absolutely justified in doing so.

Bad guys who wish to harm people don't stop themselves because they lack a carry permit. They carry in public whether or not they're supposed to.

This is the best SCOTUS ruling since Heller, and like Heller, they got it right. FFS, just read the 2A, it's meaning is clear to anyone who can do so.

 

The very first thing it says. "A well regulated militia BEING NECESSARY. .... to the security of a free state " which implies that as soon as the militia is done by something else, like a Standing Army, the militia is no longer necessary and the whole amendment is moot.
Standing armies were only about a century old at the time and the abuses of the British standing Army in the colonies were a main cause of he Revolution. The FF definitely didn't want one. The thought an ocean taking a hazardous and hard week to cross at best was adequate defense and that a militia would be all they'd ever need. We have since had a Standing Army since the ACW, the militia is completely unneeded nowadays, the 2nd Amendment is moot (as well as dangerously easy to misinterpret) and should be repealed

 

This is precisely what they said when the State of Florida became the first to implement "shall issue" carry permitting in 1986, give or take. Meanwhile, in the real world, none of those predictions came true, and in fact at roughly the same time, crime started plummeting, most importantly including violent crime and homicides. People with carry permits are responsible, sane, law-abiding Citizens, and they don't lost their sh*t as you have suggested here. Infact, they commit crimes at a rate about 1/6th that of even law enforcement officers.

 

Fine. If you join the militia and get complete training on the use and storage of guns then you can have one. No problem. Currently though, we have idiots with zero training, zero skills and are armed to the teeth. Therein lies the problem, idiots that do not use nor care for their weapons properly. 600,000+ legally purchased guns are stolen every year. Why? Because stupid people store their guns stupidly.

Many gun supporters look to the Swiss who "require" gun ownership. After they serve in the military. They are trained in the use of and safe storage of their weapons. Follow that modality and I have no problem with you or anyone who completes the training owning a gun. Militia training need be no more extensive than drivers license training with removal of such license for violations just like driving a car.

 

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

Re:

You're right in that certain modern firearms are very valuable to thieves.

I had some guns stolen but got all of the modern ones back with a colorful story on their recovery from the police.
I suspect that my old flintlock derringer and very early Bergman semi auto pistol (1880s) were probably tossed into a dumpster.

Unfortunately, I feel that MSM does us a disservice by grossly underreporting the frequency with which home invaders are carried out of invaded homes feet first.

Thanks,

 

Well, as a citizen and being of a certain age, we are all members of the militia. At least in the US.

 

And you don't think that the NRA magazine, among many other Gun Advocates media has no access to these records?

 

Ah, yes, the NRA and gun lobby would NEVER doctor those home invasion stats for political gain. LOL!

In reality, it seems that they were so afraid of actual stats on gun violence that they got Congress to prohibit federal funding of gun violence-related research.

 

Actually no, at the time the constitution was written, militias were state organized military groups.

 

Just imagine if states became responsible for properly training gun owners and could be held liable for unsafely stored guns that are stolen?

 

It does. Clearly.
A state cannot force someone to "show good cause" for the exercise of their rights.
Disagree?
Apply that requirement to abortions.

 

The court discarded your argument 2 decades ago.

 

I encourage them to try.

 

Unless they hand down rulings you like, of course.

 

Oh look. Your favorite post hoc fallacy.
Right on time.

 

Oddly enough, when they do hand down rulings I like it means that both sides agree so no, there's no "liberal" rulings per say.

 

I saw yesterday that >40% of this terms rulings were 9-0.

 

What good is a gun for self-defense locked away in a safe?

 

This is absolutely absurd and quite honestly extremely laughable. What historical evidence do have for this insane interpretation?

 

Hmm
This might be why a legal requirement to secure your guns violates the constitution.

 

The interpretation that people cannot be required to show some subjective "good cause" to exercise their rights?

 

Did I say that? Did I ever suggest that? Are you over exaggerating in the hope of convincing , who, yourself?

 

You know exactly what you mean by safe storage you mean locked away in a safe.

But if that's not what you mean feel free to clarify exactly what you mean

 

The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
So.... No.

 

Those are commas not periods in the 2nd amendment.