EKYHunter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2020
- Messages
- 1,148
You all seen this? The decision makes perfect sense I believe and is good for hunters, shooters, and gun owners in general.
Supreme Court Decision
- Thread starter EKYHunter
- Start date
- Status
AvidIndoorsman
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2015
- Messages
- 18,411
I kinda feel meh either way, the decision is so limited it doesn't make much of a difference IMHO.
www.scotusblog.com
Here is the MA question block on the application, Unrestricted is concealed carry the others are just gun ownership.
An acceptable reason for unrestricted is "ALL LAWFUL PURPOSES". In MA applications are administered by the town. Some are pro 2A and some are anti-2A and this block of text is pretty perfunctory, and not really used to decide if you get it or not. Even with this ruling the state law gives local police enough leeway to deny your application without much recourse.
I think folks want this to in effect turn all states from "may" issue to "shall issue" but that is 100% not what the ruling means.
In 6-3 ruling, court strikes down New York's concealed-carry law - SCOTUSblog
This article was updated on June 23 at 12:03 p.m. The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a New York handgun-licensing law that required New Yorkers who want to carry a handgun in public to show a special need to defend themselves. The 6-3 ruling, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, is the court
Here is the MA question block on the application, Unrestricted is concealed carry the others are just gun ownership.
An acceptable reason for unrestricted is "ALL LAWFUL PURPOSES". In MA applications are administered by the town. Some are pro 2A and some are anti-2A and this block of text is pretty perfunctory, and not really used to decide if you get it or not. Even with this ruling the state law gives local police enough leeway to deny your application without much recourse.
I think folks want this to in effect turn all states from "may" issue to "shall issue" but that is 100% not what the ruling means.
FranklinME
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2017
- Messages
- 236
I'm about to roll up to Walmart here in NJ loaded for bear.
I'll let you know how it goes.
I'll let you know how it goes.
This is my thought as well, but I will take it.
I thought their recent ruling on religion/schools was a bit more "reaching" than this ruling And the big one is yet to come, which I think will be the last one announced and then they will all leave town. Both the aforementioned rulings were 6-3 and my guess is that is what the split will be ion the abortion issue.
Willm: In Mass. what are the rules on a loaded handgun in the glove compartment and if your stopped for speeding and they ask you, do you have a gun, are you required, by law, to advise them that you do and does this change depending on whether you are stopped by a city cop or highway patrol ? Thanks
AvidIndoorsman
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2015
- Messages
- 18,411
So in MA there is "how the government says it works, versus how it works" that's a whole kettle of fish.
But I was told by the Firearms Bureau when I got my permit that they flag your license + plate so when a cop pulls you over they know whether you have a legal weapon, before they even approach. (I've never been pulled over so I'm not sure if this is true)
A gun in the glove compartment load or unload is illegal, regardless. If you have an unrestricted LTC and are carrying the gun must be under your immediate control at all times, so on your person. Maybe in the center console, in our class we were told explicitly the glove compartment is a no no.
If you don't have an unrestricted LTC then a gun must be unloaded, with a trigger lock installed case, out of your reach. If it's an AR it has to be in a locked case. If you have a sedan with a locking trunk you don't need the trigger lock.
Seems complicated, but basically when I go deer hunting I just put my shotgun in the truck unloaded with a trigger lock installed and I'm good to go.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
Not too pejorative a characterization Mr. Snoot...
Birdbander
Well-known member
Any step to the RIGHT on this subject is one in the right direction in my opinion,whether that's a shuffle step or a leap.
maybe I am reading this wrong, but hasn't this always been true ?
No, the court has been pretty good throughout history of following precedent, and leaving alone rulings they don't agree with.
RobertD
Well-known member
What?
Brown vs Board, Miranda vs Arizona, Brandenburg vs Ohio, Citizens United, Obergefell... a lot of the most impactful and well-known Supreme Court decisions actively overturned prior rulings/precedents
Thank you sir but I have to respectively disagree
I dont disagree with a lot of what Warren accomplished, but the fact remains that he used his political abilities to move the court in a direction he wanted it to go. He didn't just vote to change rulings/precedents, but worked at convincing the other members of the court to agree with him. Admittedly I was not around then so my opinion comes from speaking to those who were and case studies. As mentioned I dont even disagree with all his rulings, but in IMHO he certainly went against existing laws, members of his own bench and a lot of public sentiment at that time.
beginnerhunter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2016
- Messages
- 1,320
Good stuff.
Aside, but I hope the next conservative trifecta will be able to do something about suppressors. Would like to see their availability expanded. Maybe one day they'll come stock on tikkas, Weatherbys, etc. A boy can dream!
Aside, but I hope the next conservative trifecta will be able to do something about suppressors. Would like to see their availability expanded. Maybe one day they'll come stock on tikkas, Weatherbys, etc. A boy can dream!
Better than
www.dailymail.co.uk
Joe Rogan slams Justin Trudeau for views on guns for self defense
Podcaster Joe Rogan slammed Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for his recent comments that Canadians do not have the right to own a firearm for self-defense.
Last edited:
TheGrayRider
Well-known member
Just damn glad that we as Americans have our Constitution with its Bill of Rights including the Second Amendment and the other Amendments.
Most other countries like Canada, Australia, and New Zealand don’t have a Second Amendment equivalent in their highest law of the land.
USA still #1. Love it, baby! Wouldn’t be anywhere else (except maybe for short-term vacations and overseas hunting trips.) We are truly blessed, TheGrayRider.
Most other countries like Canada, Australia, and New Zealand don’t have a Second Amendment equivalent in their highest law of the land.
USA still #1. Love it, baby! Wouldn’t be anywhere else (except maybe for short-term vacations and overseas hunting trips.) We are truly blessed, TheGrayRider.
- Status
Similar threads
