Supreme Court gun decision shoots down NY rule that set high bar for concealed carry licenses

Kyle

Ultra-MAGA
PREMO Member
The Supreme Court ruled in its first major gun case in more than a decade


The Supreme Court Thursday ruled 6-3 that New York’s regulations that made it difficult to obtain a license to carry a concealed handgun were unconstitutionally restrictive, and that it should be easier to obtain such a license.

The existing standard required an applicant to show "proper cause" for seeking a license, and allowed New York officials to exercise discretion in determining whether a person has shown a good enough reason for needing to carry a firearm. Stating that one wished to protect themselves or their property was not enough.

In 43 other states, Thomas noted, authorities are required to issue licenses to applicants who meet certain requirements, and officials do not have discretion to say no due to what they believe is an insufficient need.

The case, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, was the first major gun rights case before the Supreme Court in more than a decade. Thomas referenced 2010's McDonald v. City of Chicago and D.C. v. Heller in his reasoning for Thursday's ruling.

The Court's opinion also stated that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms should not be held to a lower standard than other constitutional rights.


 

Kyle

Ultra-MAGA
PREMO Member
Now, that case over and done, expect NY to do everything legal or not to ignore it and continue on their Marxist little way.
 

Kyle

Ultra-MAGA
PREMO Member
Supreme Court Strikes Down New York’s Proper Cause Requirement for Concealed Carry


The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) ruled 6-3 on June 23 that New York’s proper cause requirement for concealed carry permit issuance is unconstitutional.

New York State Rifle and Pistol Association (NYSRPA) v. Bruen centered on denials for permits under New York’s concealed carry permitting law. The NYSRPA filed suit claiming that one of its members was eligible for a permit but was denied because of New York’s requirement that concealed carry applicants prove why they need to carry a gun.


The immediate impact of the June 23 ruling is that New York’s proper cause requirement is struck down. What is yet to be seen is how this decision will impact other states–like California and New Jersey, both of which have concealed carry issuance guidelines similar to New York’s proper cause requirement–and whether the success of NYSRPA .v Bruen leads to suits against those states as well.

The case is NYSRPA v. Bruen, No. 20-843, in the Supreme Court of the United States.




They forgot to mention Maryland as a member of the obstructionist list.
 

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
Supreme Court Strikes Down New York’s Proper Cause Requirement for Concealed Carry


The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) ruled 6-3 on June 23 that New York’s proper cause requirement for concealed carry permit issuance is unconstitutional.

New York State Rifle and Pistol Association (NYSRPA) v. Bruen centered on denials for permits under New York’s concealed carry permitting law. The NYSRPA filed suit claiming that one of its members was eligible for a permit but was denied because of New York’s requirement that concealed carry applicants prove why they need to carry a gun.


The immediate impact of the June 23 ruling is that New York’s proper cause requirement is struck down. What is yet to be seen is how this decision will impact other states–like California and New Jersey, both of which have concealed carry issuance guidelines similar to New York’s proper cause requirement–and whether the success of NYSRPA .v Bruen leads to suits against those states as well.

The case is NYSRPA v. Bruen, No. 20-843, in the Supreme Court of the United States.




They forgot to mention Maryland as a member of the obstructionist list.
Expect Maryland legislature to perform some kind of fùckery to get around this.
 

dave20

New Member
The next obstacle that will be thrown in the way of law abiding gun owners will be a liability insurance requirement.
They will try to make it very expensive for people who want to carry. Besides if you survive an armed encounter some ambulance chaser will try to take everything you have anyway. I hope I'm wrong but I think not.
 

LightRoasted

If I may ...
For your considertion ...

I was about to ask what this would do for Md.
Since it's a SCOTUS ruling, Maryland's "May Issue" status is now illegal and void. There will be no need to prove a good and substantial reason anymore. Soon, once they get their act together in Annapolis, and modify the existing law, Maryland will become a "Shall Issue" State.
 

black dog

Free America
PREMO Member
Now, that case over and done, expect NY to do everything legal or not to ignore it and continue on their Marxist little way.
Just like Md has been doing. Its easier now in Md the past few years, but it should be shall issue and cost free for the citizen.
 

black dog

Free America
PREMO Member
For your considertion ...


Since it's a SCOTUS ruling, Maryland's "May Issue" status is now illegal and void. There will be no need to prove a good and substantial reason anymore. Soon, once they get their act together in Annapolis, and modify the existing law, Maryland will become a "Shall Issue" State.
It should have happened with Heller. But it didn't now did it.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
I thought it a rather cogent argument that the other rights protected in the Bill of Rights - no one puts CONDITIONS on why you need to exercise them. You don't need to show a reason why you are free to speak or express yourself, and you don't need a reason for being free to worship.
 

glhs837

Power with Control
For your considertion ...


Since it's a SCOTUS ruling, Maryland's "May Issue" status is now illegal and void. There will be no need to prove a good and substantial reason anymore. Soon, once they get their act together in Annapolis, and modify the existing law, Maryland will become a "Shall Issue" State.

Right, but the smart money says the State will throw other roadblocks in the way. Huge tax on ammo, qualification and insurance requirements, etcetera. Onerous requirements on training facilities to minimize the number of places you can get trained.
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
Right, but the smart money says the State will throw other roadblocks in the way. Huge tax on ammo, qualification and insurance requirements, etcetera. Onerous requirements on training facilities to minimize the number of places you can get trained.
You are exactly right. Our Democrats in Maryland will be burning the midnight oil trying to figure a way to screw over us.
 

frequentflier

happy to be living
My cousin is a firearms instructor in upstate NY and his classes and training courses are always packed. They offer a lot of other self defense training as well.
He posted on FB that he is doing a happy dance.
They are not training criminals- they are training law abiding citizens that want to be able to protect themselves. With the zero bail release program and the crime escalating by the day, I'd say this is quite important! I never feel safe when I go to Rochester. My step Mom's neighborhood in the city has gone from bad to worse and I hope we can convince her to move. It scares me to think she is there alone.
Anyways, I hope this goes through and that MD follows suit. I know, I know, wishful thinking!
 

my-thyme

..if momma ain't happy...
Patron
99.9% of the people in MT carry everywhere they go.

During the brief period of time that they jumped on the FED bandwagon and required masks, this is how he went shopping. And he wasnt the only one. They quickly dropped masks.

14116.jpeg
 
Top