Bowling Ball

It's possible that Robert's didn't want NYSRPA to be a political rally point, since he thinks it IS moot at it's core. Rogers vs Grewal and Worman vs Healey hopefully will provide that political shelter in a sense, since the cases don't involve this unseen level of skullduggery as NYSRPA.

Apparently.... This will set us back years. There are 2 other cases held in reserve, hopefully with more meat on the bone.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-280_ba7d.pdf The case has been sent back to the lower courts for the litigants to seek monetary damages. Ruled as moot regarding NYC's carry laws.

With this stamp you could build a sub 26" AOW. This opens the door to other manufacturers as well. For example an MP5K with a brace and VFG would be possible if sold as an AOW if a MFR wanted to invest the time.

What laws are there preventing this? https://www.state.nj.us/njsp/info/pdf/firearms/njac-title13-ch54.pdf AOW from a receiver. AOW because: Utilize an ATF Approved Pistol Stabilizing Brace Have a Vertical Fore Grip An OAL Under 26 Inches New Jersey Compliance: Per the Statues AOWs are Not Illegal in NJ I am NOT Requesting to Build an AOW from a Rifle, Pistol or Shotgun Lower Receivers are Deemed Firearms

Not me, just somebody from Reddit that posted this. Figured I would share if anybody else was interested. This does indeed open many opportunities for further exploration of the laws that were once deemed off limits in NJ. Thank goodness for this younger generation that questions tyranny.

This is indeed interesting and worth reading. The ATF approved a form 1 tax stamp, essentially opening up the doors for other things as well. After paying the king's tax and receiving his approval, this person plans on building a sub 26" AOW.

Another problem is 'conservative' politicians not actively pushing against gun control, rather simply touting fear of gun control to get conservative voters to the polls. If there was NO WAY any anti gun measure could be passed, conservatives would lose votes. People would not be mobilized to vote conservative or they may cast their vote towards a liberal candidate, seeing as their 2A rights are secured.

I would think most DA's would prosecute, but if appealed they would drop charges hoping this doesn't go to a higher court. They would offer a plea deal first though, to save face.

They shouldn't do anything that's an infringement of 2A.

Roh would have the 80% lower ready to be milled in a cnc machine, the customer would push the 'start' button, which would finish the lower. Technically the customer buying the 80% lower was the manufacturer. About the article This is still a technicality regarding the serialization of AR15's...But one that is fixed at a congressional level, which we do not want any part of right now. JMO, if congress 'fixes' this, they would most likely serialize the upper and lower, problem solved for them.

The case was granted certiorari despite NYC claiming it's moot since they rewrote the law at the 11th hour. It's scheduled for oral argument on 12/2. I, along with many think it may reaffirm Heller, since it's obvious the circuit courts are outright playing games with intermediate scrutiny ruled in Heller. NYC's argument is if you can afford a car/ home, you can afford a second gun in your other house, therefore you don't need to transport the gun. It's the 4th 2A case EVER being granted cert, so it's a milestone in itself. If we get strict scrutiny, many current gun laws may be struck down after being challenged. We're just anticipating Murphy/Grewal's next move, thinking they'll just keep writing new laws to keep us busy fighting them in court.

I can see this happening in NJ. Although It would probably take decades of fighting to get the attention of the executive branch. On another note, FUDDS and guys wearing white New Balances are big contributors to the reasoning behind background checks and the like.

The only check when purchasing a firearm is the clerk counting my money, other than that we're losing the whole point. It's only a matter of time before you, I, we, fail passing a 'background check' based on our thoughts or political views. They consider us dangerous to society already, the only thing stopping them is there's too many of us. Another generation of these most basic infringements and we're just another Ecuador or England.

They'll just write new laws worded differently every time there's a shooting. It becomes our problem to fight them in court.

We all know the answer to that.....

Agreed, The sad part is, while we're fightingin upper courts for scrutiny to be applied to laws on the books already, Murphy will keep signing more laws in, just worded differently. It's a fight, make no mistake.

The 9th Circuit is holding Young vs Hawaii pending this case... Ask yourself, what does Open carry have to do with locked and unloaded transport in NYC? Even the 9th is thinking they will set a strict scrutiny. I'm overly optimistic, but we've been a long way since coming this close to a win! NYC doesn't stand a chance in oral arguments, they defended this law for almost a decade as constitutional.

You're correct, it is speculation to assume scrutiny being applied, although I did preface that statement with 'I believe'. I do not recall a recent 2A case being granted certiorari.

No.

The cases that were upheld at the lower courts were judged using a 'rational basis'. Based on the Heller ruling, lower courts must use an intermediate scrutiny. Virtually all cases claimed to use IS but used a 'rational basis' instead. SCOTUS is aware and I believe judge Thomas has stated his frustration with exactly this. Young vs Hawaii, the 9th circuit court used intermediate scrutiny according to Heller. This allowed open carry, since section 9 of Heller states at least one carry option must be available. Needless to say, California lost their minds since they in essence would be forced to grant open carry, the 9th circuit put it on hold pending NYSRPA. I believe to avoid circuit splits and further confusion, a 'strict scrutiny' would be applied to NYSRPA. It gives the lower courts much less wiggle room. There are a total of 5 2A cases being held by SCOTUS at this moment, a sixth possibly next week.

I doubt that. I feel this is going to be a case where we get a favorable ruling on both issues being presented. NYC spent the better part of a decade defending this law as constitutional. They will be asked for that same argument again, not on their home turf. Instead of attempting to defend this law as constitutional, they attempted to defer based on voluntary cessation. I feel this will be a landmark case.

No. The main issue about the 2A in this case is the lower courts upholding this law. They claimed to have applied intermediate scrutiny but used a rational basis instead. Their rational basis was a joke, being such it's clear to SCOTUS that there is a rebellion in the lower courts. I feel to correct this SCOTUS will issue strict scrutiny. As far as the voluntary cessation issue, i feel this could become a landmark case. NYS and NYC messed up badly.

This case may get a split ruling. Mootness is a key element here, and plays a much bigger role than most think. I feel mootness may get a unanimous verdict, and they would split on the 2A. This will become a landmark case against the government, with the mootness opinion written by RBG. Voluntary cessation is the cause of this case reaching where it did I think, the court is aware of the games NYS and NYC were/are playing. Just my opinion

Nothing will happen. The fudds don't care and this ruling only affects us with too much to lose. The NRA wants nothing to do with the real fight either. They know we won't fight. The left has nothing to lose, they get paid to get into confrontations with police and create news stories. Fool the nation into thinking everybody thinks the way they do. But to get to the point, since this goes contrary to past determinations, the BATFE wil allow a 'comment period'.