• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Now Legal to Carry in NY

LiL Guap

New member
Joined
Dec 31, 2020
Messages
13
The ignore list is a great thing. Now, back to the conversation. When the chief law enforcement officer for the county publicly says that you will not be prosecuted for carrying, that is the official green light. You don't need anything else.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,319
Location
here nc
The ignore list is a great thing. Now, back to the conversation. When the chief law enforcement officer for the county publicly says that you will not be prosecuted for carrying, that is the official green light. You don't need anything else.
Well LiL Guap, truly disappointed you continue to push such significant misinformation to members and guests about legality of carry of firearms in such a notorious state and city well known for its extreme statutory firearm carrying limits on its citizens which could result in those kind souls in the state getting into serious judicial problems with nice LE's

Further, you blatantly continue to purposely fragrantly flaunt this forum's established protocols for whatever rational which seems extremely curious for a newbie, singular oppps, "sorry didn't know" but keep ignoring those rules 8 times is truly unbelievable!!

What gives??

Finally, want to thank your for action/activities these last couple of days of proving once again my dad's adage is in fact still active and quite fascinating to watch...most gratifying...appreciate.

1656428284521.png
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,319
Location
here nc
KB, please accept my sincerest apology for questioning your pervious post.

well played 2.jpg
 
Last edited:

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,319
Location
here nc
The ignore list is a great thing. Now, back to the conversation. When the chief law enforcement officer for the county publicly says that you will not be prosecuted for carrying, that is the official green light. You don't need anything else.
per wiki, the Sheriff is an elected official and is the chief law enforcement officer of his county.

What is the difference between a Sheriff and a Police Chief?
A Sheriff is generally (but not always) the highest, usually elected, law-enforcement officer of a county. Chiefs of Police usually are municipal employees who owe their allegiance to a city. Oftentimes, Chiefs are appointed by the Mayor of a city; or, they may be appointed by or subject to the confirmation of a Police Commission.

Are there states that do not have Sheriff's Offices?
Yes. Three states that do not have Sheriff's Offices:
-Alaska. No county governments.
-Connecticut. Sheriffs have been replaced with a State Marshal System.
-Hawaii. There are no Sheriffs in Hawaii but Deputy Sheriffs serve in the Sheriff's Division of the Hawaii Department of Public Safety.


quite interesting your post isn't talking about the county sheriff...is it?
 

Firearms Iinstuctor

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
3,409
Location
northern wis
They can say anything they want.


But that doesn't stop some hard nose LEO from arresting you and punishing you by process.

I was having a conversation with a couple of Dane county Deputies (Madison Wis) area.

When Wis was going through its troubles. They said they arrest any body with a gun open carrying.

Even though the city just lost a law suit for the same thing.

It all starts at the top.

The sheriff, prosecutor saying such is a good start but it is not the law.
 

LiL Guap

New member
Joined
Dec 31, 2020
Messages
13
They can say anything they want.


But that doesn't stop some hard nose LEO from arresting you and punishing you by process.

I was having a conversation with a couple of Dane county Deputies (Madison Wis) area.

When Wis was going through its troubles. They said they arrest any body with a gun open carrying.

Even though the city just lost a law suit for the same thing.

It all starts at the top.

The sheriff, prosecutor saying such is a good start but it is not the law.
Not saying you are wrong about LEOs, however they cannot be the determining factor as to how you will behave. If you are afraid of being arrested then you have already lost the battle. I know that is easy to say when you have the resources to fight back but just know that if you are willing to go thru "the illegitimate process", you will be compensated for your troubles. The going rate for an illegal detainment in my neck of the woods is 15-25 thousand per night.

Also, trying to avoid an arrest is exactly how most people wind up either seriously injured or killed. You need to think of an arrest as a free cab ride to the courthouse where you can now work on settling whatever dispute you are involved in.

The local prosecutor publicly committing not to prosecute in a particular situation is the best thing that can happen. The public is entitled to legally rely on those statements.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,841
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Not saying you are wrong about LEOs, however they cannot be the determining factor as to how you will behave. If you are afraid of being arrested then you have already lost the battle. I know that is easy to say when you have the resources to fight back but just know that if you are willing to go thru "the illegitimate process", you will be compensated for your troubles. The going rate for an illegal detainment in my neck of the woods is 15-25 thousand per night.

Also, trying to avoid an arrest is exactly how most people wind up either seriously injured or killed. You need to think of an arrest as a free cab ride to the courthouse where you can now work on settling whatever dispute you are involved in.

The local prosecutor publicly committing not to prosecute in a particular situation is the best thing that can happen. The public is entitled to legally rely on those statements.
Apparently you don't understand the ruling. The NY licensing scheme is still in place. All that has changed is the state (and other states) may not us a "means-end” test; an "unchanneled discretion for licensing officials and the special-need requirement—in effect deny the right to carry handguns for self-defense to many “ordinary, law-abiding citizens.”'

What the court has said is NY's "may issue" is unconstitutional, "shall issue" is constitutional. The court also said in footnotes that not issuing a license in a reasonable amount of time will also violate the constitution.

I find it odd that you don't understand the government is well known for running bait and switch scams.

My question is have you ever been arrested, tossed in jail, come up with bail, and endure a lengthy trial, let alone pay an attorney to defend you?
 
Last edited:

HPmatt

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
1,467
Location
Dallas
Lots of attorneys are going to avoid the 'Biggest Recession in History of 2022' by 'helping you out' and appealing your arrest, and conviction, and appeals. Doesn't look like you'll advance to SCOTUS, they're already swatting down the various Appellate court rulings in pending cases.....from Josh Blackman a few days ago "
The Court abrogated a decade of circuit court precedent, and vitiated mountains of Second Amendment scholarship.

If you have paid attention to Second Amendment litigation over the past decade, you have become familiar with the two-step framework. Under this framework, those challenging gun control laws usually prevail at step one, and lose at step two. … And, over the past decade, there has been a mountain of scholarship that have endorsed the two-step test. During this time, the Supreme Court was asked over and over again to clarify the proper standard under Heller. …

Now, New York State Rifle & Pistol v. Bruen has bid farewell to the two-step test. And it did so very, very briskly:

In the years since, the Courts of Appeals have coalesced around a "two-step" framework for analyzing Second Amendment challenges that combines history with means-end scrutiny. Today, we decline to adopt that two-part approach. . . . Despite the popularity of this two-step approach, it is one step too many. Step one of the predominant framework is broadly consistent with Heller, which demands a test rooted in the Second Amendment's text, as informed by history. But Heller and McDonald do not support applying means-end scrutiny in the Second Amendment context. Instead, the government must affirmatively prove that its firearms regulation is part of the historical tradition that delimits the outer bounds of the right to keep and bear arms.

I haven't checked Westlaw, but this paragraph probably placed red flags on dozens of circuit court cases. And almost all Second Amendment scholarship that was premised on the two-factor test has now been vitiated.

The lower courts are going to scramble, and try to find language in the majority, and in Justice Kavanaugh's concurrence, to stick to their old ways. But it will be much tougher.

You're going to spend a lot of GUAP, not just a Lil....
 

LiL Guap

New member
Joined
Dec 31, 2020
Messages
13
Lots of attorneys are going to avoid the 'Biggest Recession in History of 2022' by 'helping you out' and appealing your arrest, and conviction, and appeals. Doesn't look like you'll advance to SCOTUS, they're already swatting down the various Appellate court rulings in pending cases.....from Josh Blackman a few days ago "
The Court abrogated a decade of circuit court precedent, and vitiated mountains of Second Amendment scholarship.

If you have paid attention to Second Amendment litigation over the past decade, you have become familiar with the two-step framework. Under this framework, those challenging gun control laws usually prevail at step one, and lose at step two. … And, over the past decade, there has been a mountain of scholarship that have endorsed the two-step test. During this time, the Supreme Court was asked over and over again to clarify the proper standard under Heller. …

Now, New York State Rifle & Pistol v. Bruen has bid farewell to the two-step test. And it did so very, very briskly:

In the years since, the Courts of Appeals have coalesced around a "two-step" framework for analyzing Second Amendment challenges that combines history with means-end scrutiny. Today, we decline to adopt that two-part approach. . . . Despite the popularity of this two-step approach, it is one step too many. Step one of the predominant framework is broadly consistent with Heller, which demands a test rooted in the Second Amendment's text, as informed by history. But Heller and McDonald do not support applying means-end scrutiny in the Second Amendment context. Instead, the government must affirmatively prove that its firearms regulation is part of the historical tradition that delimits the outer bounds of the right to keep and bear arms.

I haven't checked Westlaw, but this paragraph probably placed red flags on dozens of circuit court cases. And almost all Second Amendment scholarship that was premised on the two-factor test has now been vitiated.

The lower courts are going to scramble, and try to find language in the majority, and in Justice Kavanaugh's concurrence, to stick to their old ways. But it will be much tougher.

You're going to spend a lot of GUAP, not just a Lil....
NY passed new gun laws yesterday.I have not yet reviewed them to see if they are constitutional. My guess is at least some are not. However, the new laws beg the question "If the old laws were still in effect and constitutional, as the idiots were claiming, then why did they need to pass new laws".
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,319
Location
here nc
NY passed new gun laws yesterday.I have not yet reviewed them to see if they are constitutional. My guess is at least some are not. However, the new laws beg the question "If the old laws were still in effect and constitutional, as the idiots were claiming, then why did they need to pass new laws".
again pure hearsay w/o a viable cite whatsoever...

as of the 1 July 2022, 0842EST
"Lawmakers had hoped to have a vote on Thursday but drafting the bills continued until shortly before 1.30am on Friday and was set to resume later in the day."

One provision proposed by [Gov] Hochul, a Democrat, would ban people from carrying firearms into places of business unless owners put up signs saying guns are welcome.

New York would also set new requirements for obtaining a handgun permit, including mandating 15 hours of training at a firing range. The legislature is also primed to enact new rules around firearm storage in homes and vehicles.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jul/01/new-york-gun-control-special-legislative-session

at of 1345EST nothing otherwise on the WWW on breaking news regarding NY Special legislative session reaching consensus...

live feed video shows the 'session is standing at ease' at the moment
 

Doug_Nightmare

Active member
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Messages
696
Location
Washington Island, WISCONSIN. Out in Lake Michigan

A lot.​

JOSH BLACKMAN | 7.1.2022 11:35 PM

Earlier this evening, I shared a guest post from Professor Rob Leider, who explained that New Yorkers in rural areas may be worse off under the recently-enacted legislation. Here, I'd like to flag some changes made to the permitting process.
Let's start with the good news. New York struck the provision requiring "good cause." The rest of the statute is not-so-good news for gun owners.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,319
Location
here nc

A lot.​

JOSH BLACKMAN | 7.1.2022 11:35 PM

Earlier this evening, I shared a guest post from Professor Rob Leider, who explained that New Yorkers in rural areas may be worse off under the recently-enacted legislation. Here, I'd like to flag some changes made to the permitting process.
Let's start with the good news. New York struck the provision requiring "good cause." The rest of the statute is not-so-good news for gun owners.
extremely informative article as Dr Leider is well known for his background in SD and use of force legal points.
 
Last edited:

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,925
Location
North Carolina
You obviously don't. If you are going to quote something you should be complete. The entire quote is "We therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion."

The Court found the entire "licensing scheme" unconstitutional; not any particular law. Therefore, as things stand right now, there are no licensing laws in existence in NY and carry is legal.

If you do not believe me then see what the Bronx DA had to say on NBC News.
Research Illinois conceal carry, it took some time before a law was passed after the court set a deadline. Expect the appelate court at some time to set a deadline for new laws. Also look for the law to be as strict, or even stricter than Illinois. I have family in IL some have permits, but it is expensive, most poor people do not bother with permits, and almost every business in IL now has gun buster signs.
 
Top