"I don't have any social media accounts. Now give me my fucking application"
"I don't have any social media accounts. Now give me my fucking application"
Answer - I do not voluntarily surrender my 4th amendment right to unreasonable search in order to exercise my 2nd amendment right.
Answer - I do not voluntarily surrender my 4th amendment right to unreasonable search in order to exercise my 2nd amendment right.
I just have to laugh. All the ding a lings dancing in the street on this board when the SC decision came down, not to mention the YEARS The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association WASTED along with money to "win" in Court only to see Jew York do the plainly obviously thing of not only changing the rules IMMEDIATELY, but actually making them MORE onerous than before. I guess I'm the only one that saw that coming and had mine transferred out to my new state where I'm building a house to escape this VERY bullshit I've been dealing with 30 plus years,
I just have to laugh. All the ding a lings dancing in the street on this board when the SC decision came down, not to mention the YEARS The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association WASTED along with money to "win" in Court only to see Jew York do the plainly obviously thing of not only changing the rules IMMEDIATELY, but actually making them MORE onerous than before. I guess I'm the only one that saw that coming and had mine transferred out to my new state where I'm building a house to escape this VERY bullshit I've been dealing with 30 plus years,
These rules will quickly be challenged in court.
These rules will quickly be challenged in court.
Ok great. So yet ANOTHER round of court cases which WILL take years yet again so that just as soon as it MAYBE gets overturned, Jew York will just rig up NEW rules and the nonsense will continue. So what's your point? I'm not seeing it.
Ok great. So yet ANOTHER round of court cases which WILL take years yet again so that just as soon as it MAYBE gets overturned, Jew York will just rig up NEW rules and the nonsense will continue. So what's your point? I'm not seeing it.
Pretty much describes it. However, precedent is flowing down hill, so it should not need to go all the way back up to the Supreme Court. However, I agree that blue states will slow walk this through their judiciary. The SCOTUS brief specifically mentions "public". The battle will be what does that mean.
Pretty much describes it. However, precedent is flowing down hill, so it should not need to go all the way back up to the Supreme Court. However, I agree that blue states will slow walk this through their judiciary. The SCOTUS brief specifically mentions "public". The battle will be what does that mean.
(post is archived)