Top 5 "verbal lashings" from the Justices in the NY carry case… PRICELESS

For some here who has been paying attention to the lawsuits challenging NY gun laws as it relates to personal right to self defense such as CCW was being litigated at the highest level on Tuesday in SCOTUS. The arguments were pretty classic and surprisingly the chief justices were on point to challenge the solicitor Generals defending New York law Brian H Fletcher and Barbara Underwood with a epic bitch slapping that no doubt Democrats are watching in humiliation. This case is going to have huge implications going forward because based on such flimsy arguments, it doesn’t look good that New York’s law requiring stringent requirements to obtain a permit in order to possess a hand gun for self defense purposes is constitutional, something that should have been challenged a long time ago. Should the plaintiffs in this case prevail along such constitutional arguments, it will set precedent for the rest of the country going forward especially blue states like California and Illinois that will no doubt see more lawsuits coming if they decide to violate an individuals right to own a gun.

Here is the classic quotes and savor this!

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. pointed out that constitutional rights do not have to be justified, such as the Second Amendment right to bear arms. “The Constitution gives you that right,” Roberts said. “And if someone’s going to take it away from you, they have to justify it.”

Underwood had two arguments in response.

“One, if you go right to history and tradition, the history was to regulate most strenuously in densely populated places. That’s what fairs and markets are. So we have history,” she said. “But we also have a rationale for that history, which is that where there is dense population, there is also the deterrent of lots of people and there is the availability of law enforcement.”

Roberts argued that that is not always true.

“It’s paradoxical that you say a place is a high-crime area but don’t worry about it because there are a lot of police around,” he said.

“These regulations are all an effort to accommodate the right to recognize and respect the right of self-defense while regulating it to protect the public safety,” Underwood said. “The risks of harm from people who are packed shoulder-to-shoulder, all having guns, are much more acute .”

She noted then that, when one is out in the woods, there’s a different set of problems relating to self-defense. There’s often no law enforcement officer there who could help an individual.

“But how many muggings take place in the forest?” Roberts asked.

Justice Roberts said that the constitutional rights do not have to be justified. However, New York’s CCW permiting process, like all “may issue” states, require you to justify a need to carry. Thus, the “may issue” process is unconstitutional. Looks very much like a win for the 2nd! Let’s go Brandon!

Might not be many muggings in the woods, but lots of bears these days, I still need my guns. Lots of bears in the city, too from what I hear. Better keep your guns, might need them someday.

1 why is a Constitutional Right “Regulated or Licenced” at all? Privileges are regulated such as driving a car in public. You don’t need a license to “speak” or to “go to Church” as in the 1st Amendment. #2 the argument I heard was akin to you don’t need as many Fire extinguishers because you have more Firemen in the City, as apposed to out in the woods. Could NOT be more ludicrous!

Link to related article

1 Like

From one of the people who brought the case against New York appears with MTG, and explains why this case is so important!