|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
NY: New York’s current gun law violates the Second Amendment
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
In order to receive a license to carry a firearm in public for self-defense, applicants must prove that they have a proper cause.
The standard itself is vaguely defined and allows the state to reject license applications at its discretion. Most states have “shall issue” systems, which remove all arbitrary bias and discretion, while New York has a “may issue” system.
Imposing so many restrictions to obtain a license shows that the constitutional right to keep and bear arms for self-defense, as correctly affirmed in McDonald v. Chicago and District of Columbia v. Heller, is more burdened and disfavored in New York than most other civil rights. New York’s law is far too prohibitory. |
| Comment by:
xqqme
(11/14/2021)
|
Given that the average police response time in 2019 was twenty (20) minutes, it seems like the gub-mint lawyers are suggesting that all a citizen has to do is ask some violent criminal attacking them for a little time... and an officer will be by shortly to defend you.
.
"The respondents’ attorney argued that it depends on how urban or densely populated an area is, along with how many armed police officers there are." |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|
