Jump to content
Bklynracer

Supreme Court Takes First 2A Case in a Decade

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Golf battery said:

When they make these stringent rules.  How many of you will actually qualify.   And re qualify?   Dont kid yourselves thinking it will be that easy.  

It can’t be harder than leo qualification, and that isn’t that hard. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow has my E-mail exploded. Good stuff all arouond. SCOTUS for the WIN. Me personaly I am not rushing to fill out my app. I am going to take my time with the process. Me personaly need more trainging. I feel very rusty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

https://apnews.com/article/us-supreme-court-gun-politics-new-york-violence-kathy-hochul-ebe58ea297c154a25a62650dec935529

Quote

NEW JERSEY

New Jersey residents no longer must prove “justifiable need” to carry a handgun in light of the Supreme Court’s decision Thursday, but permits are still required, the state’s top law enforcement officer said.

Acting Attorney General Matthew Platkin said in a phone interview that the high court’s ruling in the New York state case “effectively struck down” New Jersey’s requirement that residents seeking carry permits show they face significant threats and have a justifiable need to get a carry permit.

But, he added, the other requirements under New Jersey law still stand. Among them is safety training and a prohibition against certain convicts. As for how soon the change goes into effect, Platkin said he will issue guidance “imminently.”

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know we all will be going through the motions over the next few days, weeks, and months. I just wanted to do a re-cap real quick and please correct me if I am wrong. The Supremes did the following yesterday:

1. Eliminated "good cause" requirements and turned the US into a "shall issue" country.

2. Eliminated "intermediate scrutiny" so that all future gun cases will be viewed and ruled upon from the "history, text, and tradition of the 2nd amendment" possibly expanding gun rights exponentially.

 

 

3. The justices linked the 14th amendment (life liberty and the pursuit of happiness) to the 2nd amendments (right to carry a gun outside the home for self defense). The justices intentionally "supercharged" the 2nd amendment.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, marlintag said:

I know we all will be going through the motions over the next few days, weeks, and months. I just wanted to do a re-cap real quick and please correct me if I am wrong. The Supremes did the following yesterday:

1. Eliminated "good cause" requirements and turned the US into a "shall issue" country.

2. Eliminated "intermediate scrutiny" so that all future gun cases will be viewed and ruled upon from the "history, text, and tradition of the 2nd amendment" possibly expanding gun rights exponentially.

 

 

3. The justices linked the 14th amendment (life liberty and the pursuit of happiness) to the 2nd amendments (right to carry a gun outside the home for self defense). The justices intentionally "supercharged" the 2nd amendment.

 

Based on #2, why should we require anything other than a back ground check?

and I even question that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, marlintag said:

I know we all will be going through the motions over the next few days, weeks, and months. I just wanted to do a re-cap real quick and please correct me if I am wrong. The Supremes did the following yesterday:

1. Eliminated "good cause" requirements and turned the US into a "shall issue" country.

2. Eliminated "intermediate scrutiny" so that all future gun cases will be viewed and ruled upon from the "history, text, and tradition of the 2nd amendment" possibly expanding gun rights exponentially.

 

 

3. The justices linked the 14th amendment (life liberty and the pursuit of happiness) to the 2nd amendments (right to carry a gun outside the home for self defense). The justices intentionally "supercharged" the 2nd amendment.

 

The decision has also laid the smack down to (banning)‘weapons in common use’. The way I read this, I think it might have positive effects for you guys on mag restrictions and other things. 
As others have said…give this a little time to sink in before going crazy. 

Thomas was pretty thorough…and pretty direct, on his beat down of anti 2A laws. 
 

I have just started reading Alito’s concurrence. 

  • Like 1
  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, marlintag said:

I know we all will be going through the motions over the next few days, weeks, and months. I just wanted to do a re-cap real quick and please correct me if I am wrong. The Supremes did the following yesterday:

1. Eliminated "good cause" requirements and turned the US into a "shall issue" country.

2. Eliminated "intermediate scrutiny" so that all future gun cases will be viewed and ruled upon from the "history, text, and tradition of the 2nd amendment" possibly expanding gun rights exponentially.

 

 

3. The justices linked the 14th amendment (life liberty and the pursuit of happiness) to the 2nd amendments (right to carry a gun outside the home for self defense). The justices intentionally "supercharged" the 2nd amendment.

 

Three is wrong. The 14th had nothing to do with life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness. The due process clause says that a citizen shall not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process. 
 

The 14th amendment is the amendment via which any particular bill of rights item from the first eight amendments is incorporated to the states.  It was applied to the 2nd in McDonald. It was reiterated by Thomas in Bruen. 
 

Additionaly, it may have been a shot across the bow of the judiciary regarding the privileges and immunities clause. That clause has been effectively mooted by the court for pretty racist reasons. The court has put out some pretty tortured logic to avoid changing that. The pretense was stare decisis but the reality was that it was a wrong ruling long enough ago that there would likely be some massive re-litigation that could potentially cripple the courts just due to case load. 

It is however the most direct path to the court insisting in reciprocity of ccws. 
 

So you have a black man who just redefined the strictest form of scrutiny. Who agreed with the majority on the leaked roe decision that is basically saying state decisis is not sacrosanct. Who may very well be threatening to burn down nearly 100 years of case history sitting on top of some incredibly racist case law if they fuck around and find out regarding his decision. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Fred2 said:

Based on #2, why should we require anything other than a back ground check?

and I even question that.

Thomas stated that a permitting system is ok…as long as it is not unreasonably restrictive. I believe it implies background checks and training requirements are acceptable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, marlintag said:

2. Eliminated "intermediate scrutiny" so that all future gun cases will be viewed and ruled upon from the "history, text, and tradition of the 2nd amendment" possibly expanding gun rights exponentially.

I think they eliminated both intermediate and strict scrutiny.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, 1LtCAP said:

is that a law somewhere?

 

It’s a logical extension of Thomas saying that bearing arms is a right of the average citizen. The police are not only empowered to bear arms defensively, but offensively. They are given the power of arrest, qualified immunity, etc. 

Setting the standards to exercise a fundamental right tobe higher than that required to exercise those extraordinary privileges would go very much as against his warnings in this case. 
 

I do not think it has really hit home just how much this ruling said fuck around and find out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Big Win. However, there will be years of future litigation regarding carry as well as other issues. As I read the opinion, the new 2A test the Court announced will impact almost every firearm regulation proposed and now existing. Expect the Administration to react by proposing new fees, very limited duration permits , extensive sensitive place restrictions, enhanced and probably burdensome training and qualification requirements, new objective disqualification requirements based upon juvenile records, quasi criminal convictions etc. Will NJ end up a concealed or open carry jurisdiction or will it remain unspecified regarding the manner of carry?  There is also a high probability that the Supreme Court will either deny cert for a while on other 2A issues and/or simply remand other pending 2A cases back to the Federal Appellate Courts for reconsideration in light of the new test---example mag limits. However intermediate and strict scrutiny is gone ! This will certainly be an interesting year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, SJG said:

Will NJ end up a concealed or open carry jurisdiction or will it remain unspecified regarding the manner of carry? 

The way I read it, states can ban EITHER open carry, or concealed carry, but not both. 
 

Statutory Prohibitions. In the early to mid-19th century, some States began enacting laws that proscribed the con- cealed carry of pistols and other small weapons. As we rec- ognized in Heller, “the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that [these] prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues.” 554 U. S., at 626. Re- spondents unsurprisingly cite these statutes16—and deci- sions upholding them17—as evidence that States were his- torically free to ban public carry.

In fact, however, the history reveals a consensus that States could not ban public carry altogether. Respondents’cited opinions agreed that concealed-carry prohibitions were constitutional only if they did not similarly prohibit open carry. 


Rest assured, NJ/NY will go down kicking and screaming, and try to make it difficult as they can get away with..

But they will have to allow public carry, one way or another. 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SJG said:

A Big Win. However, there will be years of future litigation regarding carry as well as other issues. As I read the opinion, the new 2A test the Court announced will impact almost every firearm regulation proposed and now existing. Expect the Administration to react by proposing new fees, very limited duration permits , extensive sensitive place restrictions, enhanced and probably burdensome training and qualification requirements, new objective disqualification requirements based upon juvenile records, quasi criminal convictions etc. Will NJ end up a concealed or open carry jurisdiction or will it remain unspecified regarding the manner of carry?  There is also a high probability that the Supreme Court will either deny cert for a while on other 2A issues and/or simply remand other pending 2A cases back to the Federal Appellate Courts for reconsideration in light of the new test---example mag limits. However intermediate and strict scrutiny is gone ! This will certainly be an interesting year.

If you read the decision he literally says that if they go the route of burdensome fees, delays, or restrictions to sidestep this ruling that the court will take these cases. 
 

I suspect we will get a flurry of remands on the pending 2a cases at some point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, KurtC said:

Appendix A on page 35 has a typical New Jersey qualification course of fire.

https://nj.gov/lps/dcj/pdfs/dcj-firearms.pdf

While the course of fire is described using a semi-auto, you can easily meet the same time requirements using a revolver.  I've done it many times.

Thanks...I'd seen that some years ago, didn't recall where i found it at the time. There is a lot of information there...

For a quick look at what one might expect for the police handgun course (should that end up being what is required) the table below shows the requalification course of fire.  There is another variation in the document for lower-capacity handguns.  The initial qualification is a little different than the requalification, and is also described in the document, but not in a nice table form.  The requalification has to be completed twice a year, with the duty firearm and duty ammo.

So, while we're all waiting to see what exactly will be needed for us to apply for CCW in this state, you can at least hit the range and start practicing for what might be expected in the qualification course.   Or at least practice those stages that your range will allow.  I see some more dry firing practice in my future as well.

Screen Shot 2022-06-24 at 9.17.59 AM.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In California, lawmakers are amending legislation to expand the qualifications people must have to obtain a concealed carry permit and to define the places where guns would be off-limits. The revised bill will get its first hearing Tuesday, and lawmakers hope to send it quickly to Gov. Gavin Newsom, who called Thursday's Supreme Court decision shameful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just got off the phone with my firearms officer who has a package waiting for me down at the local PD station. It is said to include the qualification certificate as well as the course. I will post anything relevant online once I go down and get it.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, MartyZ said:

Just found this video on youtube. Haven't had a chance to watch it yet. But it appears to be a complete run thru of the qualifications

 

HOW DO YOU DO THAT WITH A 10 RD MAG LIMIT?????????

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just got off the phone with my local PD. A few points to note based on our conversation:

1. They recommended I not apply now but, to wait for the AG directive and changes in the process.

2. They are stunned and are trying to figure out what's going to happen from here. They are trying to figure things out like us.

3. They told me that THERE HAS BE NO CHANGE IN THE CCW PROCESS BECAUSE THEY HAVE GOT NOTHING FROM AG.

4. We talked about training qualifications, but they don't know what would satisfy NJ's new requirement and if my current level of training would satisfy the requirement. 

5. If i apply now I WILL BE DENIED NOW BECAUSE AGAIN THERE IS NO CHANGE YET. States are given time to adjust.

From this conversation I have to start agreeing with "High exposure", Displaced Texan's opinion. We have to wait 30 days or more for the dust to settle. The NJ AG said that changes are coming.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 1LtCAP said:

if they've issued ccw permits in the past, how do they not know what will suffice for qualifications?

Those qualifications are for police and security officials, not us. Even if you got qualified today, that may become invalidated once we know what the training requirements are. We may have to take the same quals, more quals, or something completely different. What you do today may be invalidated later as the AG will provide guidance to the issuing authorities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, marlintag said:

Those qualifications are for police and security officials, not us. Even if you got qualified today, that may become invalidated once we know what the training requirements are. We may have to take the same quals, more quals, or something completely different. What you do today may be invalidated later as the AG will provide guidance to the issuing authorities.

They have issued permits to carry a handgun, not many, but some. Those people have done quals. The process is established, but because everybody gets told "don't even bother, you won't get it" most PDs have never had to find out what process is acceptable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...