Get ready for the wailing and gnashing of teeth from libs along with violence

[i am herdman]

The Supreme Court just ruled that New Yorks conceal carry permit process was unconstitutional. NEW York required a reason to have a conceal carry permit outside of the home.

The ruling on Roe V Wade appears to be within days

They are going to riot

 

[Marshall Jeff]

Oh the irony if the concealed carry people of New York took care of those cry baby libs when they riot.

 

[i am herdman]

Oh the irony if the concealed carry people of New York took care of those cry baby libs when they riot.

We haven't played cowboys and libs yet

 

[wvkeeper(HN)]

Justice Thomas owned all the racist Leftists.

 

[HerdandHokies]

Concealed carry is about a 3 on the “give a shit” meter compared to RvW for the left, which is a 10.

The opinion seems odd, even if I generally agree with the overall ruling. Thomas wrote the government will have to show that any gun regulation

“is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

That doesn’t seem overly relevant for determining if a law is or isn’t constitutional, and doesn’t seem to have been much of a consideration in other cases.

 

[raleighherdfan]

Justice Thomas owned all the racist Leftists.

View embedded media

Brilliant!

 

[WV-FAN]

Mayor Adams' Statement on Bruen Supreme Court Decision

Mayor Adams' Statement on Bruen Supreme Court Decision

www1.nyc.gov

i'm sure criminals just can't wait to start conceal carrying legally.

 

[wvkeeper(HN)]

Precedent is a consideration in almost all cases.

 

[HerdandHokies]

Precedent is a consideration in almost all cases.

It may be my lack of sleep but it seemed odd to me for a self proclaimed textualist with a propensity to ignore precedent when he thinks it clashes with his interpretation of a law to create a standard that any new regulations must follow the “historical tradition of firearms regulation.”

But I think I’m overthinking it.

 

[herdfan429]

It may be my lack of sleep but it seemed odd to me for a self proclaimed textualist with a propensity to ignore precedent when he thinks it clashes with his interpretation of a law to create a standard that any new regulations must follow the “historical tradition of firearms regulation.”

But I think I’m overthinking it.

He’s saying that it’s ok to limit a felons right to own a gun.

 

[i am herdman]

hink about what libs are mad about in the NY case. NY was bascially saying that in order to carry a conceal firearm outside of your home then you must provide the state(NY) a valid reason to do so even after going through the vetting and permit process. And, the state(NY) determines the valid reasons.

That goes against the fabric of the Constitution. If I am a legal gun owner and provided you with the background why do I have to provide you a reason to partake in my constiutional right? Then, you, the state, get to determine validity of my reason. Who are you? The King?

 

[i am herdman]

Brilliant!

Thomas is a genius and brilliant man.

 

[HerdandHokies]

hink about what libs are mad about in the NY case. NY was bascially saying that in order to carry a conceal firearm outside of your home then you must provide the state(NY) a valid reason to do so even after going through the vetting and permit process. And, the state(NY) determines the valid reasons.

That goes against the fabric of the Constitution. If I am a legal gun owner and provided you with the background why do I have to provide you a reason to partake in my constiutional right? Then, you, the state, get to determine validity of my reason. Who are you? The King?

I think that whether the 2nd amendment was ever meant to cover the concealed carry of pistols is one of the more fascinating constitutional arguments. Here’s some good reading from a source you’ll probably like on the history.

Concealed Carry and the Right to Bear Arms | The Federalist Society

fedsoc.org

 

[i am herdman]

I think that whether the 2nd amendment was ever meant to cover the concealed carry of pistols is one of the more fascinating constitutional arguments. Here’s some good reading from a source you’ll probably like on the history.

Concealed Carry and the Right to Bear Arms | The Federalist Society

fedsoc.org

the argument was providing the state a valid reason and outside of the home.

 

[Sistersviille]

We haven't played cowboys and libs yet

No we starting cowboys and negra's