Hey, there! Log in / Register
Is that a gun in your pocket or are you just glad Trump got to appoint all those justices?
By adamg on Thu, 06/23/2022 - 12:54pm
By exactly the 6-3 margin you'd expect, the Supreme Court today threw out a New York law that required people to prove to police why they'd need to carry a concealed weapon, saying everybody has the right to carry guns.
All states allow carrying concealed guns in public, although many require state-issued permits. Thursday's decision casts doubt on laws similar to New York’s in several other states, including California, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts and New Jersey, as well as the District of Columbia, which provide local officials with more discretion to deny requests for permits.
The ruling expands earlier Supreme Court opinions that gave people the right to keep guns at home - and potentially could be used to overturn rulings by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court letting police limit who can carry a concealed weapon.
Acting Suffolk County DA Kevin Hayden is less than thrilled:
It’s ironic, and perhaps tragic, that just as the nation’s top legislative body is formulating sensible firearm regulations, its top judicial body is undoing them. We must never forget that included in the 2nd Amendment’s establishment of citizen gun ownership are the words "well-regulated."
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Its important to remember
Anyone who is not a felon has the right to carry a gun in the U.S. We dont need a reason. This is not China.
It's important to remember ...
That's not true.
Even in the Heller decision, the court ruled that people with certain mental illnesses can be denied gun ownership.
Sigh
if they belong to a well-regulated militia or just because?
“This isn’t China.” You’re right, nutjobs in China don’t have such easy access to firearms.
That's right!
And if I want to yell fire in a crowded theater or make threats against the President's life, I have every right to do so! It doesn't say "shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech (except in a few dangerous circumstances that could cause mass panic or kill the President)". This is not China.
right wingers
They have no illusions about "good guy with a gun". Uvalde put that idea 6 feet under. This ruling will create crime and chaos, which right wingers hope will lead to cries for authoritarianism.
What Uvalde put 6 feet under
What Uvalde put 6 feet under was the notion good guys with guns twiddling their thumbs for an hour so they don't get shot at while some lunatic is murdering kids is acceptable. Had one or both of those good teachers had guns it's very possible the only dead person would have been the criminal.
In case you haven't noticed, the last couple of years of encouraging race riots, eliminating bail, refusing to prosecute crimes and generally letting violent criminals out of jail has already created vastly more crime and chaos than existed before. And as always most of the victims are poor minorities that people like you claim to care about.
That's why so many of them want to buy guns; because their putative benefactors keep doing things to get them shot and killed, to further your crackpot political ideology.
Keep it up long enough and the Dem voting base will consist entirely of white academia and Subaru drivers. Your radicalism is already losing you Hispanics and increasingly blacks.
I'd say keep it up but for all the bodies that pile up when you do.
If that's the reason
Why has the level of gun buying/stockpiling been increasing several years, way longer than your last couple of years increasing crime? Why are gun deaths higher in almost every other state than Massachusetts, where there are strong gun laws? Why don't good guys with guns stop/prevent mass shootings in Texas, etc? Oh wait, it's fallacy.
Way to go, hitting the the buzz words, though.
It’s your lucky day
The NYT just published data showing that good guys with guns are responsible for stopping precisely 5% of shooters. Which is to say that despite the fact that there are 400 million guns for 330 million men, women and children in America, good guys with gun aren’t actually a solution to gun violence.
(We can debate elsewhere whether 400 million guns for 330 million Americans is maybe a factor in our world-leading rates of firearms violence.)
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/06/22/us/shootings-police-respo...
Right wing and left wing authoritarianism
Are two sides of the same coin.
We need to repeal the
We need to repeal the incorporation doctrine.
Good
I don't want cops picking who gets to carry guns. That's terrifying.
That said, time for DA nullification for gun-carrying violence victims to be a thing, because that's literally the only thing that's going to stop someone from carrying a gun: The knowledge that their loved ones will not receive criminal justice if they die in a gunfight, and will have to try their luck at civil relief.
So...
...what's your position on red flag laws? And the boyfriend loophole?
Guns for everybody, man
It’s the only solution.
/s
They're a nice intention
That does nothing to stop guns from existing.
Congratulations
Congratulations. You've come up with the most absurdly nonsensical non sequitur of a week that's been chock full of that sort of hot air.
I too don't want cops picking who gets guns
I just want them banned outright.
That's a fine fantasy
But short of Hiroshimaing every gun maker on Earth, and every person with the institutional knowledge on how to make guns, how do you propose that?
If a Supreme Court ruling is
If a Supreme Court ruling is so horrible than a constitutional amendment should be pretty straight forward.
What would people have reached for if Trump was successful in throwing out the election.
Hmm
Do you know the process for enacting a constitutional amendment?
Do you know the last time it was done successfully?
Are you aware that this country failed to pass a constitutional amendment establishing the legal equality of women?
Had I known that at the time
I wouldn't have made the incorrect prediction that this country would have a female president before it had a Black one.
"What would people have reached for if Trump was successful"
Their severed limbs?
Have you seen what a drone strike can do?
Do you really have delusions of grandeur that one day the citizens are going to "rise up" armed to the teeth because of the 2nd Amendment and then go topple the US Armed Forces?
You couldn't even take on an APC that's been rebranded by the Watertown PD.
Check Ginnie's emails..
You know she was involved and Clarence should've recused himself and his opinion