voyager9

They don’t need them to come true. They just need to make it sound like they could and let the media and sheep slurp it up.

The state admitted in court that they had no data showing CCW holders commit more crimes.

Technically it’s not precedent now that I think about it. The ruling is “as applied” so only applies to the subject of the case. It doesn’t invalidate the federal statute though can be referenced in other cases with similar challenges.

Probably because the case didn’t challenge purchase/FOID, just the possession statute he was charged with.

That is how it is now and this case doesn’t change that. The case was about possession not purchase. Illegal immigrants would be denied a purchase via FFL because they couldn’t pass the BGC. My point/question is the possession case verdict gives precedent to challenge that.

To your point, though: now that precedent has been set, could an illegal immigrant challenge IL’s FOID and Background check? Could make a case that their rights are also being denied since they can’t purchase. Cries in Red Flag laws..

The case declares the specific statute prohibiting possession. It had nothing to do with purchase.

I didn’t say I was against it. I think the Bill of Rights applies to all. They are natural rights. That isn’t necessarily true for the Constitution at large. There are powers that are afforded to citizens.. voting for example. Note that this case is for possession. It would be very interesting to apply this precedent to purchase. Someone in the country illegally cannot pass a background check. Are they being denied a right?

https://thereload.com/gun-ban-for-non-violent-illegal-immigrant-found-unconstitutional/

I thought the beginning was good. The “examples” read more like a set of test questions with no actual examples.

What an asshole.

Jinx

Reminds me I have to get some seed. Problem is the bare spots are in the shade and between flooding, kids, and dogs there is almost no soil left, just sand

Even if the technology can be used to trace a shell to a firing pin, it completely fails any realistic reliability requirement. Platkin can stick his microstamp up his macroass.

My left hand hasn’t been in such good shape since puberty.

I limit myself to 5 paint chips a day.

Arrrr Matey!

Until it is reversed en banc as usual.

Honestly NFL is the only think on live TV I can remember purposely putting on in years.

Correlation != Causation.

The reality is it shouldn’t happen at all. But with the Democrats trying to mimic Colorado in NY, CA, and somewhere else (AZ?) the republicans need to do something. At the end of the day SCOTUS needs to smack it all down as unconstitutional political BS.

The entire statement is “interesting balancing”. Something explicitly prohibited by Bruen.

How much you want to bet that the time it takes to update the NICS system is 100% equal to the time required to get a stay from the Circuit court? Also, it doesn’t vacate any state restrictions so you’re still F’d in NJ.

It sounds like they’re following the process. The court has issued a decision but the effect of that decision isn’t in force until they issue a mandate. So MD has until 12/11 to enforce the current law.

Let’s even lower the bar. Show me one suspect identified due to microstamping. The whole idea of microstamping is such a snipe hunt that it would be laughable if it weren’t being pursued. Millions to implement all the logistical, organizational, and engineering changes reduced to vapor by a $10 Dremel.