The AR-15 follies: Here we go again!

Yah, bet your @ss. I pay taxes for others to enforce laws.

 

It's about to be done. Here it comes.

https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-guns-public-new-york-be5e3fe54da4eb3b9ca2337665974716

May issue licensing will be the first to go. Get ready for nationwide concealed carry.

 

And what happens then ? I guarantee the worse that will happen is, NY will be required to issue licenses to every law abiding citizen who applies. Guess what they will do, like DC, they will require it be renewed yearly, charge an exorbitant amount to cover charges, and insist upon training etc. not something that will change anything. They will not take away the states 10 th amendment authority to regulate beyond that of the Fed.

I also guarantee something else if the decision goes too far.
You will have sponsors providing funds to arm any poor person with a grudge and deprived homeless person on the street. You want to see a pissed off GOP ? Arm poor people, all of them.

 

As long as you have a permit, no,problem. I have mine. States will then respond with, everyone NEEDS a permit to carry, own or possess, sell or buy a firearm or ammo. No problem. Regulation will NEVER go away.

 

Reasonable fees are OK. Exorbitant fees will be struck down.

There will be a significant change. Right now some states only allow a license to carry if they feel that the person in question has a good reason to carry a gun.

The Supreme Court will require states to issue a license if there is no reason to deny it, regardless of whether the state thinks the person in question "has a good reason" to carry a gun.

If the state can come up with a good reason to deny the license (like if the person is a convicted felon) they will still be able to deny the license. But there will be no more denials based on "lack of need".

 

I am in favor of charities to help arm poor people and homeless people. They should be able to protect themselves too.

I'm even in favor of the government spending taxpayer money to ensure that everyone is armed.

It depends on the regulation. There will be more cases in addition to this one.

Laws against pistol grips and flash suppressors will soon be struck down too. And laws against .50 caliber weapons. And New Jersey's law against hollow-point ammo.

 

There are no laws against pistol grips. Where did you get that idea ? Quote it.

 

Yup. The leftist dream creating a privilege to keep and bear arms is soon to unravel.

 

22. “Assault weapon” means

(a) a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least one of the following characteristics:

(i) a folding or telescoping stock;

(ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;

(iii) a thumbhole stock;

(iv) a second handgrip or a protruding grip that can be held by the non-trigger hand;

(v) a bayonet mount;

(vi) a flash suppressor, muzzle break, muzzle compensator, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor, muzzle break, or muzzle compensator;

(vii) a grenade launcher;

https://codes.findlaw.com/ny/penal-law/pen-sect-265-00.html



A person is guilty of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree when:

(7) Such person possesses an assault weapon;

Criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree is a class D felony.

https://codes.findlaw.com/ny/penal-law/pen-sect-265-02.html

 

Wrong again. The possession of a fire arm with a pistol grip is not illegal in and of itself. Obviously, it has to be part of a list with at least two characteristics one of which is a semi automatic RIFLE with a detachable magazine. Pistol grips them selves are not illegal. Only if combined with,
a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least one of the following characteristics.

There are a variety of exceptions including tube fed or non detachable storage pods in place or pump action, bolt action firearms. A pistol grip is not in and of itself illegal. Otherwise, any pistol also would be illegal which again makes the pistol grip non prohibited unless combined with being a semi auto matic along with at least one other characteristic of an assault weapon.

Neither is it illegal if you are licensed to carry such a weapon in any state which includes all the characteristics. Regulation is legal in the United States and only qualified owners of any firearm is legal, pistolgrips or not. Your rights are not unlimited.

So, a pistol grip is not prohibitive.
It’s the same in every state with assault weapon regulations. You can run around with your little pistol grips all day long.......if that makes you happy.

 

It’s not going to affect what the vast majority of states do now. The majority of states issue carry permits to anyone who qualifies. They shall and do issue permits IF YOU QUALIFY .

Any majority opinion will reaffirm the ability of states to regulate ownership and possession of firearms by its citizenry. Like DC, regulation can be more strict as a result. Gesus, they require gun REGISTRATION. Just to have it in the home unlocked.

New York and other states that make it difficult for gun licensing will just require gun registration for all firearms and ownership permitting and continue with prohibitive weapons regulation.

I guarantee that some states that have constitutional carry will back lash and become more restrictive.

 

And again. The vast majority of states will be unaffected.

 

I've not been wrong a first time yet.

It doesn't matter. The fact that the law only outlaws pistol grips on semi-auto rifles does not change the fact that doing so is unconstitutional.

The courts will be striking down all such laws in the very near future.

The problem is, some states currently refuse to let qualified people have such licenses.

Not necessarily. Regulation is only legal if it can be justified as serving a compelling government interest.

The fact that they are not unlimited does not mean it is ok for them to be violated.

Soon I'll be able to run around with them attached to a semi-auto rifle in any state in the nation.

True. But it is going to have quite an impact on the handful of states that still insist on much more restrictive laws.

Not exactly. The next ruling is going to make clear that regulation is allowed only if that regulation can be justified as serving a compelling government interest.

True, but they will no longer be allowed to make it difficult.

Prohibitive regulation of ordinary guns will be struck down.

If so, the courts will still require them to comply with the right to keep and bear arms.

True. But it will have a big impact on the seven or eight states that still have repressive gun laws.

 

It doesn’t change one simple fact, pistol grips, not suppressors nor any of the other characteristics are necessary illegal, they are only regulated when part of a combination of items and only when on a semi auto rifle/weapon.

So, stop make up stuff and saying pistol grips are illegal. Know the laws first then debate from there. It’s a combination of these characteristics that make them inappropriate in the wrong hands and why they are regulated.

 

Again, that doesn't matter. It is still a violation of the Constitution to regulate them.

I am not making anything up. The fact that those laws only regulate pistol grips in certain combinations does not change the fact that it is unconstitutional to do so.

I am well aware of the laws in question. They are unconstitutional and will soon be struck down.

That is incorrect. There is nothing at all inappropriate about the combination of these characteristics in the wrong hands.

That is incorrect. There is zero reason for regulating them.

This kind of trick shooting has little practical use in the real world.