Jump to content

Downtownv

Premier Member
  • Content Count

    589
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3
  • Feedback

    100%

Downtownv last won the day on December 5

Downtownv had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

388 Excellent

3 Followers

About Downtownv

  • Rank
    NJGF Regular
  • Birthday 09/15/1953

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location:
    Southern Ocean Co
  • Interests
    My 5 girls, Giants, Yankees, Harley's and the 12th St beach, LBI
  • Home Range
    Shooters

Contact Methods

  • Yahoo
    downtownv@gmail.com

Recent Profile Visitors

1,756 profile views
  1. I think the Greek Diner sale is the greatest business plan ever designed. Owner sells it to an employee $xxxx down, $xxxmonth.If he misses 2 payments original owner getsit to re sell another day. There was a diner on rt 22 in P'burg that was sold 4 times like this until the owner turned up dead. There's one in Edison that was sold multiple times and yet in between the original owner was back at work again. We you miss the payments you lose everything inventory down payment....
  2. Typical NJ Azz Hats. Intentional confusion+ Making it more difficult.
  3. Oh Oh Pablo Escabar had millions that rotted in the ground buried, he would be in great troubles, had he not gone tits-up
  4. It will certainly get you back to a respectable edge. When I see my daughter's kitchen knives I usually start off with this. The Gatco is Similar to Lansky but then rods are longer than the Lansky and allow to do 12" blades. I would recommend the knife clamp be placed in a vice for stability, however. these come 3 or 5 stone or diamond Gatco vs Lansky.docx No not on every item yet. Contact me for which ones you are interested in.
  5. https://law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/appellate-division-unpublished/2011/a1161-08-opn.html
  6. The knife business is/was fun but my time and attention is my CBD Business, which is booming due to my high quality premium products. Not the highway crap. EVERY knife in stock at or below cost to wipe them out. www.teampython.com Cold Steel Crkt Bear and Son cutlery Gatco San Mai Automatics Spring Assist Fixed Folders GATCO Sharpening systems Great Christmas Gifts!
  7. Wait til the sexual harassments come out on him. Does anyone remember????? https://www.creepsheet.com/accused/michael-bloomberg/
  8. He has only one job in this election. Bring the party candidates to a more central position. He will not nor does not want to win. Do NOT get lost in the woods!
  9. It means, the case should be heard as NY or any other state can reinstiti=ute the same law again without a clear ruling. (That's a good thing. Do not assume anything with ant SCOTUS, they are a very unpredictable bunch.
  10. But I just ordered one like this stamp for $9,99 amazon I like it, you are not limited to JUST $20 bills! My other one will only work on $20's
  11. Correct! Why would you think that when you can legally burn the American Flag?????
  12. As the Supreme Court heard oral arguments Monday morning in the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v New York City case, gun control activists rallied outside the court in support of gun restrictions, though many of them were oddly silent on the specifics of this case. Townhall.com’s Julio Rosas joined me from the Court for today’s program, and I also speak with Philip Van Cleave of the Virginia Citizens Defense League about the surge in Second Amendment Sanctuary counties across the state. I’ll have a separate post on the latest in Virginia but right now let’s talk about the Supreme Court and what it’s likely to do with the case now that justices have heard from both sides. The biggest question at the moment is whether or not the Court will dismiss the case due to mootness. Transcripts of today’s oral arguments are now now available if you want to read for yourself, but most of the press coverage of the arguments indicates that Chief Justice John Roberts might be the deciding vote on whether the case goes forward and the Court rules on the New York City gun law in question, or if the city’s attempt to moot the case by changing the law a couple of months ago (after defending the law for several years) will end the litigation. From Reuters: Not really. As former Solicitor General Paul Clement, who’s representing the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, told the court, some of the provisions of the revised law could still cause city residents to break the law if they so much as stop to get a cup of coffee on the way to the range. Clement also argued that, given the fact that the city didn’t change the law in question until after the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, there’s no reason to believe the city was acting in good faith and wouldn’t simply change the law again if the lawsuit is dismissed. Vox is claiming that Chief Justice John Roberts appeared sympathetic to the city’s position, but I would caution folks from trying to read too much into the questions asked by justices during the oral arguments. Moreover, even Vox acknowledges that if the Supreme Court decides that the New York City gun case is moot, there are other Second Amendment cases queued up and ready for the Court’s attention. That’s the good news for gun owners. The Supreme Court has been holding the Rogers case for months now, and the speculation is that the Court did so pending the outcome of NYSRPA v. NYC. If the Court does decide that the case is still a live issue, the majority opinion could have an impact on the New Jersey carry case, and they could send Rogers back to the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals with guidance directed by the NYSRPA v NYC opinion. If, on the other hand, the Court does moot the New York case, it has Rogers to pick up instead, and the Court would be dealing with a much more explicit challenge to the infringement on the right to bear arms than the New York City case presents. If the Supreme Court decides that the New York Case is moot, I’d expect a decision to come fairly quickly. If the Court does move forward with the case, expect a ruling in several months. When the oral argument transcripts are made available, you’ll be able to access them here. In the meantime, check out today’s show with Julio Rosas and VCDL’s Philip Van Cleave, and we’ll be keeping an eye on any future developments at the Supreme Court. Also on today’s show, we have an armed citizen story from Missouri, a criminal justice fail from Baltimore, and an off-duty officer who performed a very good deed in the parking lot of a fast food restaurant in the suburbs of Richmond, Virginia. Don’t forget to subscribe to the show at Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, or Townhall.com’s podcast page. We’ll have much more reaction to today’s oral arguments on tomorrow’s show, so be sure to tune in. https://bearingarms.com/came/2019/12/02/justices-hear-arguments-scotus-showdown-nyc-gun-case/?utm_source=badaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&bcid=bc1d86e1053dd21c60a121534def959c
  13. You are all wrong, this is headline news everywhere, they need to rule one way or another. Ye of such little faith...
  14. Court could bolster gun rights in NY case Does 2nd Amendment extend beyond home? Richard Wolf USA TODAY WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court may be on the verge of expanding gun rights for the first time in nearly a decade. What’s surprising is how it got there. The court on Monday will hear a challenge to an obscure New York City rule that set such rigid restrictions on transporting legally owned guns that it was repealed in July. Gun owners won without a shootout. But, it turns out that wasn’t what they really wanted. Backed by the National Rifle Association and the Trump administration, the challengers to New York’s abandoned restrictions are hoping the high court refuses to declare the case moot. That would give them a chance to win the biggest Second Amendment victory since landmark rulings a decade ago affirmed the right to keep guns at home for self-defense. Faced with a defunct ban on transporting guns outside city limits, the increasingly conservative court majority could render a decision making clear what some justices clearly believe: that the Second Amendment extends beyond the home, and that lower courts should view state and local limits on carrying guns in public with skepticism. “This would be a strange case in which to go big,” says Joseph Blocher, a professor at Duke University School of Law and co-director of the Duke Center for Firearms Law. “Yet the stakes going forward are potentially huge.” Gun rights groups were surprised in January when the high court agreed to hear the case. Gun control groups were surprised in October when the justices refused to jettison it, even after the city and state erased restrictions that were likely unconstitutional. Both actions went against the court’s recent modus operandi when it comes to guns: avoidance. Since its 2008 and 2010 rulings striking down gun restrictions in the District of Columbia and Chicago, the court has refused to hear dozens of cases challenging lesser limits on who can own what types of guns, where they can be taken, what requirements must be met, and more. During that time, lower courts have resolved more than 1,000 Second Amendment cases, ruling more than 90% of the time in favor of gun control measures, according to a study by Blocher and Southern Methodist University assistant law professor Eric Ruben. Since Connecticut’s Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in 2012 that killed 20 students and six staff members, more than 300 gun safety laws have been passed. The trend has frustrated gun rights groups as well as conservative justices who say federal and state court judges are not applying a stringent test to most gun restrictions. When the Supreme Court refused in 2017 to second-guess an appeals court ruling that upheld California’s limits on carrying guns in public, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas summed up the frustration. “I find it extremely improbable,” Thomas wrote, “that the Framers understood the Second Amendment to protect little more than carrying a gun from the bedroom to the kitchen.” ‘Text, history and tradition’ The court has changed since then. Gone is retired Justice Anthony Kennedy, who signed on to the late Associate Justice Antonin Scalia’s 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller after ensuring it would leave the door open to state and local restrictions. In his place: Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who dissented as a federal appeals court judge from a ruling upholding the district’s subsequent ban on semi-automatic rifles and its firearms registration requirements. Kavanaugh said courts should analyze gun bans and regulations based on the Second Amendment’s “text, history and tradition.” Enter an extreme rule such as New York City’s, which barred licensed handgun owners from taking their guns beyond its five boroughs, even to second homes or shooting ranges. Federal district and appeals courts upheld the 18year-old rule, but it looked like a goner at the Supreme Court. Gun control groups such as Brady, Everytown for Gun Safety, and the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence feared something else: a decision that would expand public carryrights elsewhere, including in nine states that give law enforcement officials discretion to deny licenses. Those are California, New York, New Jersey, Massachu-setts, Maryland, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Delaware and Hawaii. Rather than fight it out in court, the city repealed the rule, and the state replaced it with a statute that permits the previously banned transportation of firearms. The two liberal-dominated governments felt that would end the case. Not so fast, the justices said. They called for oral argument on whether the case is now moot, as well as on the rule itself. The New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, which challenged the restrictions, claimed in court papers that gun owners’ rights still were limited and warned that the rule could be reimposed. The U.S. Solicitor General’s Office said gun owners still might seek damages for prior constraints. With Thomas, Kavanaugh and Associate Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch all in favor of a more robust Second Amendment, all eyes now are on Chief Justice John Roberts, the new swing vote in many areas of the law. “The NRA has been looking for a way to get the Supreme Court to endorse its dangerously extreme view of the Second Amendment,” says Eric Tirschwell, managing director of litigation at Everytown for Gun Safety. “It hasn’t succeeded, but in this case a newly constituted Supreme Court seems to be opening the door, at least a little. The stakes could not be higher.” Guns in public Despite the losses in lower courts, the gun lobby doesn’t have it so bad. In most states, law-abiding adults not only can own a gun but carry it with them. Restrictions generally deal with permits, registration, background checks, types of weapons and restrictions on youths, felons and those with mental illnesses. What’s protected is “the core of the Second Amendment — can I carry a gun around with me pretty much wherever I want?” says Clark Neily, vice president for criminal justice at the libertarian Cato Institute. “For the average person, there’s no interest in owning a fully automatic machine gun.” The biggest issue left unresolved by the Heller decision was the right to carry firearms, either concealed or openly. When that case was decided, about 40 states already permitted it, but some big ones – notably California and New York – had major limitations. They still do. “For too long, lower courts have stubbornly controverted the Supreme Court’s ruling in D.C. v. Heller,” says Jason Ouimet, executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action. “The nation’s highest court should defend all Americans — and its own precedents — in a manner that vindicates the fundamental nature of the rights enshrined within the Second Amendment.” If conservatives have their way, the court could extend Second Amendment rights beyond the home, or simply require that lower court judges demand more specific justifications for state and local restrictions. Buoyed by recent victories, gun control groups and their allies worry that what the justices say when deciding the New York case could influence lower courts to strike down other restrictions. “The court doesn’t have to look like it’s making a big change,” says Adam Winkler, a UCLA School of Law professor and Second Amendment expert. “It can make a big change by setting the foundations for future cases"
×
×
  • Create New...