SCOTUS RULE ON 2A IS MORE THAN YOU THINK. CCW INSTRUCTOR EXPLAINS
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 сер 2024
- SCOTUS RULE ON 2A IS MORE THAN YOU THINK. CCW INSTRUCTOR EXPLAINS
Gun owners across US got a gift from the Supreme Court. Its more than a Concealed Carry Case.
SUPREME COURT RULES IN FAVOR OF SECOND AMENDMENT OH GLORIOUS DAY!
June 23, 2022-The Supreme Court has issued an opinion in the long awaited NYSRPA v. Bruen case. Until this opinion, it had been 10 years of waiting for the Supreme Court to take up another Second Amendment case after the seminal Heller case which guaranteed the right of the individual to keep and bear arms.
Now, in this latest case the Court has once again sided with the Constitution and millions of gun owners who have been under the oppressive thumb of politicians passing unconstitutional laws. Basically states like California and New York were restricting your foundational rights and they got caught.
The NYSRPA case deals with two basic issues:
1) the issuance of concealed carry permits under a regulatory "proper cause" regime (CCW)
2) the standard under which a Second Amendment case is reviewed in court
The first issue is easy, the Supreme Court made it very simple. New York and the other states that have a "good cause" requirement for issuing a CCW are unconstitutional restrictions on the rights of gun owners. Justice Alito in a concurring opinion stated “[T]he inherent right of self-defense,” Heller ex[1]plained, is “central to the Second Amendment right.” Id., at 628." This what our attorneys at Michel & Associates have been arguing for decades! The California Attorney General admitted in a statement that the California process for issuing CCWs was unconstitutional under this ruling, even as Governor Newsom began threatening gun owners with new punishment and new laws because of the ruling. We will challenge those just like we did this one and we will win!
The second issue is one of standard of review. While we did not get the strict scrutiny that we hoped for, we did get a test that is devastating to most government claims that their laws can infringe on the rights of the people. In the past courts have used a two step balancing test for all Second Amendment claims. This typically viewed the Second Amendment claims in a lesser light and gave the government the ability to trample the rights of law abiding citizens. The Court here said "The Second Amendment 'is the very product of an interest balancing by the people,' and it 'surely elevates above all other interests the right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms' for self-defense. Heller, 554 U. S., at 635. Pp. 15-17. Justice Tomas went on to say “The Court has little difficulty concluding also that the plain text of the Second Amendment protects Koch’s and Nash’s proposed course of conduct-carrying handguns publicly for self-defense. Nothing in the Second Amendment’s text draws a home/public distinction with respect to the right to keep and bear arms, and the definition of “bear” naturally encompasses public carry.”
Basically the Court concluded that all Second Amendment cases should be viewed under a test of history and tradition and with an eye towards what historically existed as a restriction on the Second Amendment when the 2nd and 14th Amendments were passed. Governments now must bear the burden of proving that whatever restriction they want to place on your rights was a restriction when the Second Amendment came into being. This is a huge burden on the government and not one that will be easily met!
Michel & Associates, California Rifle & Pistol Association, and the Second Amendment Law Center have been fighting these types of unconstitutional laws for decades--and we have been winning! Now we look to the next line of cases that are currently lined up at the Ninth Circuit and Supreme Court and addressing some of the marks against the Second Amendment that states like California have had the opportunity to make over the years. Stay tuned as the Second Amendment Reckoning is just getting started.
The Second Amendment Does Not Grant Us The Right To Bear Arms.
The Second Amendment Denies The Government, The AUTHORITY To Infringe Upon Our Right To Bear Arms.
Well they ignore it so it doesn't seem to work unless we use the guns to enforce it. Which we don't, and we should
You’re exactly right. Our Constitution is a restraining order for our elected officials.
Facts but people (majority of the dems) don’t see how the gov is playing god with our rights when in-fact, we are the rulers of them.
Yes
Exactly right. The right to bear arms is granted to us by our creator.
Finally a ruling that burdens the govt, not the law abiding citizen👍
Really, as it looks like the licensing of a right is ok. To me, that's an unacceptable burden. For the people that are actually paying attention, this case most likely rubber stamps licensing. Also, the Nunn case out of Georgia in no way said one way or the other to carry. They specifically said concealed carry can be prohibited and open carry can't be...Corruption comes from both sides of the court, but that was the only way to work in licensing that was used to regulate the, PRIVILEGE, of carrying concealed firearms.
MURDOCK v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 319 U.S. 105 (1943)
"A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal constitution."
Bruh getting a license is still a burden. SCOTUS ruled to look at Text book history… no one had a “license” to carry back then . A gun was just like anything else that was strapped to ur body.
It doesn’t burden the government, they will just make every place a “safe space”. It still burdens the citizens more.
Turns out all of the rules burden kids in elementry schools, not criminals.
@@CobaltLobster how
I'm thinking that THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED should amount to unrestricted "open or concealed" "Constitutional Carry" for all law abiding adult citizens in all 50 states, and including those law abiding citizens who committed crimes, were incarcerated, and have paid their debt to society. (If a crime is so violent, so evil, so heinous that a debt can't be paid, make the laws of sentencing so tough that they never get released).
That would be great
It does, and anyone who goes against that is guilty of treason and should be hanged immediately.
Unrestricted as in any weapon of your choosing, be it a machine gun, supressed sbr, sawed off shotgun, etc....
It would but you know they will fight this. Especially in states like Massachusetts where I'm from. It's absolutely appalling the things state officials are saying to try and scare people into siding with them. I really hope he's right about these changes.
I am hoping for this as well.
2A is the PERMIT!
PERIOD!
Thanks for watching!
Special Forces Grandfather said, "Never forget that ARMED vigilance is the factual price of Liberty."
I understand living as a technique, the technique of getting what I want on the terms I want.
Such is the case with freedom. If we abrogate another's freedom to gain our own ends, our own freedom is thereby jeopardized. That is the cost. If we wish to assure our own freedom, we must assure all mens' freedom. That is the technique.
180 sovereign nations in the world have freedom without people wandering the streets with guns so the freedom argument is horseshit. If you need a gun for self defense you are not free. Don't get me wrong, the second amendment is what it is, and good luck with it. But remember it comes with a price, a high and deadly price paid by the kids at Uvalde, Sandy Hook, Parkland etc who laid down their lives to preserve your rights to have guns and so the gentleman in this video can profit from those rights.
@@Nesretepm Please define freedom. Because I an American see nowhere on this earth as free. We are all slaves. To here we are born to here we are bound. Want to commit suicide? it'll just be another round.
@@Nesretepm We have guns because we like them.
Kids shoot them too! People exposed to firearms at a young age dont grow up to shoot schools.
Uvalde was cartel
A fool fucked over the cds so they gave Ramos 10k to spend on weapons. Ramos went in to kill the fuckers kids.
Keep drinking the cool-aid. @nesretepm notice we use our real names , but lefties and communists use screen names? We don't need to hide behind our words.
Isn't the fact that some States require a CCW actually a 2A restriction? In my State, no permit is required.
Thanks for watching!
I’ve been a CCW holder in California for nine years. I applaud you! When I first received my CCW I had to take a 450 question psych test and meet with a psychiatrist. By the end of taking my 450 question test there was two questions left. Women fill in the blank. Men fill in the blank. I was so exhausted that I put women are the backbone of every family. Men are not my type!
Keep up the good work.
Todd, thank you so much for creating this video! This also means California's draconian suppressor law Penal Code 33410 PC is unconstitutional.
THANKS FOR WATCHING!
This has always been true. I have no idea why we have allowed them to continue for so long.
No one wants to use the second amendment to protect the second amendment..... Everyone is stuck on the first.
@@andrewmagee1666 I'm not really sure why we comply with any governmental decisions imposed upon us that aren't in our best interest 🤔.
You have no idea why? Try thinking about the fact that the democraps for years have wanted to restrict or remove ownership of firearms by individual citizens. Also, for years, democraps have and continue to control many local and state judges by bribery
@@LaNoire27 In general I think that Americans want to do what is right, which means going through the correct process. There is something to be said for official recognition of the validity of the Constitution and how it is applied. We don't just want our rights, but we also want validation of our position. We want our opponents to be rebuked officially and to be called out on their errors. We want satisfaction.
Thanks for watching!
At the time, there was no distinction between military arms and civilian arms either. So using the history and tradition test, we should be able to buy machine guns again.
The Biden White House gave $80+ Billion worth of weapons to the Afghanistan Taliban & is handing out machine guns in Ukraine like candy.
I've personally got no particular use for 'em, but if you want one, who the hell am I to stand in your way???
@@felsinferguson1125 I have use for them.
@@700NitroXpress Then for all of me, feel free to get yerself one! Or more, if you like. Do I look like I'm trying to block your car in the driveway or something? :)
@@felsinferguson1125 no, that's what the ATF does.
I've been trying since 2018 to get a CCW in CA. I have a perfectly clean record and I'm an Army Vet. Santa Clara County simply will not issue. They claim they lost my application in 2018. Recently, I've tried again and, they won't answer the phone or return my calls. They just give you the run around and will not issue. I've gone as high as the local DA asking for help but, they won't help or do anything.. CA has no respect for the bill of rights and unfortunately, there's no governing body to force them and i don't have the money to sue.
Let’s hope Jensen wins.
Thanks for watching!
Justice Thomas is a phenomenal legal mind and his writing clearly shows such, the “text history and tradition” wording is genius.
THANKS FOR WATCHING!
Why don't they send a federal Marshall to arrest Gaven Newsom?
THANKS FOR WATCHING!
Since a person can buy a gun I'm not sure why they don't have enough good moral character to carry a gun without a bunch of test. The moral character test for CCW being put forth by California should be considered unconstitutional.
The elite class of the USA hates We the People. The elite class includes all of Congress & all Big Tech CEO's as they are Constitution hating globalist.
The California government is of low moral character so I dont believe they should be able to judge anything on the basis of morality or ethics.
@@forestchicken3302 True, they tried to stop civil rights in the last election by trying to pass a law to where they can not give people a job based on their skin color.
I completely agree.
THANKS FOR WATCHING!
Thanks Todd Cotta!
The most important thing about the NYSRPA case is that Justice Thomas set an extremely tough standard against infringements of our Second Amendment rights. That standard can be used to overturn most of the unconstitutional infringements, including new unconstitutional infringements legislatures are working on right now.
PLEASE SUPPORT THE VERY MANY LAWSUITS TO OVERTURN THE INFRINGEMENTS BY DONATING TO FUND THE LAWSUITS AND BECOMING PLAINTIFFS. CRPA, FPC, GOC, GOA, and many others are and will be suing to overturn the many unconstitutional infringements in California and similarly in other states.
P.S. We got much better than "strict scrutiny" since the court said all interest balancing tests are off the table. If a law violates the Second Amendment, it's unconstitutional. (Just like the Constitution itself says in plain text.)
P.P.S. The test is *text* as informed by history and tradition. In other words, what does the law itself say, and in what historical context. The Second Amendment prohibits infringements on the right to own and carry arms, and the history is that there were virtually no restrictions in the first century of the country's existence including the Fourteenth Amendment and not including the first unconstitutional "gun control" laws to disarm freed slaves. So almost all gun laws are unconstitutional under that standard.
P.P.P.S. "Gun control" can't be crime control when violent criminals and gang members ignore it and illegally carry illegal guns every day. Gun control only punishes the law abiding and forces them to be defenseless against crime, and this INCREASES CRIME. These infringements are also illegal under the Constitution and the Natural Rights upon which it's based.
In the words of Thomas Jefferson: "The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
CRIMINALS DO NOT FOLLOW the LAW and LAWFUL Citizens are at a DISADVANTAGE if they are DISARMED Unconstitutionally by these Unconstitutional LAWS!!!
"During my twelve-and-half years as a member of this body, I have never believed that additional gun control or federal registration of guns would reduce crime. I am convinced that a criminal who wants a firearm can get one through illegal, untraceable, unregistered sources, with or without gun control.”
- Senator Joseph Biden, July 1985
“The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials, and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.” - US Supreme Court, West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette
"The right of a citizen to keep and bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the state government. It is one of the “High Powers” delegated directly to the citizen, and is excepted out of the general powers of government. A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it because it is above the law, and independent of lawmaking”
Cockrum v State, 24Tex394 (1859).
investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/
“A law repugnant to the Constitution is void. An act of Congress repugnant to the Constitution cannot become a law. The Constitution supersedes all other laws and the individual’s rights shall be liberally enforced in favor of him, the clearly intended and expressly designated beneficiary.”
-Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)
I WILL NOT FOLLOW Unconstitutional LAWS as they are NULL and VOID!!!
Well said.
Can you show me where in the 2nd Amendment a right was created or granted? Ok, you can't that's because the 2nd Amendment confers no positive right. It recognizes a pre-existing right. to infringe upon our right to keep and bear arms, besides the fact that no authority is granted to the federal government in its limited, enumerated powers to infringe upon them in the first place. To understand why this was a BAD decision one has to understand that the constitution created a Federal system, in other words a small general government with a limited number of delegated powers, and everything else is left to the States. Chief Justice John Marshall explained the difference between the Federal Constitution and State Constitutions:
“The constitution was ordained and established by the people of the United States for themselves, for their own government, and not for the government of the individual states. Each state established a constitution for itself, and in that constitution, provided such limitations and restrictions on the powers of its particular government, as its judgment dictated." Bottom line: The Supreme Court had ZERO standing to hear this case, it should have stayed in NY.
@@timmartin6410 if you read the Constitution, you would find that there are 3 entities involved.
1. We The People
2. State Government
3. The Federal Government
Now, go read the Second Amendment. Does it say the right of the State to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed?
Maybe it says the right of the Federal Government to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed?
NO!
It says they right of the PEOPLE shall not be infringed!
Go check out the 10th Amendment, it states that the rights not allowed the federal government by the Constitution are reserved for the States or the People.
As the Second Amendment reserves the right to keep and bear arms to the people, not the government, State or federal!
All states, when they joined the Union must agree to abide (including "protect and dedend") the Constitution.
Your argument holds as much water as a seive.
Thanks for watching!
This ruling means that almost every gun law can now be challenged.
Yep
We need a new Constitutional amendment that states something to the effect of:
1. As soon as a law or series of laws are declared unconstitutional, those laws are immediately null and void.
2. Any person, gov't agent, law enforcement officer, judge, or any other gov't employee or elected office holder who enforces such laws have violated the law and are subject to arrest and prosecution.
3. The penalty for the above offense is minimum 10 years in federal prison.
That would put a stop to the enforcement of unconstitutional laws.
Yeah…these kids won’t touch the constitution.
They treat it like it’s some miracle document made of gold that can do no wrong.
This country is weak.
They think some old dudes and their 235 year old paper know better about our current situation than the current public populace.
just don't mess with it no legalese.
With regard to your point No. 1, the SCOTUS has already ruled on this, “Thus, the particular phraseology of the Constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written Constitutions, that a law repugnant to the Constitution is void, and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.” Marbury v. Madison, SCOTUS, c. 1803
@@stephaniemusick171
Anything from THIS CENTURY?!?!?!?
@@danmakintosh7002
Yeah…because they knew exactly what would going on within society 235 years into the future. 🤦🏼♂️🙄
Thank God doctors aren’t that stubborn.
For your common cold, you’d get a hole drilled into you to “release the excess black bile”.
Science, medicine, industry….EVERYTHING within our society has been allowed to progress.
Why can’t our constitution?!?
I already watched this and commented on it. You got my sub. Great job. Then I saw your comment reaction video. I could see the heart felt appreciation on your face and heard the emotion in your voice. You are a good man. And you deserve way more subs than this. I have no doubt that you will get a solid growing fan base in no time flat. Just keep up the honest and clean videos and you will always have an up vote and sub from me. Carry on.
Thanks for watching!
Cotta! Back when you were on patrol, you were among the best deputies in Fresno County. Ours and many others interactions with you were always A+. Good to see you!
Thank you! I really tried to be a good deputy respecting the public as much as possible. Thanks for the complement. tc
Maryland already changed their application process. Gov Hogan directed the state police to suspend the reason requirement on the application
Thanks for watching!
I've not heard anyone bring up how this affects open carry. If this ruling affirms the right to bear arms not just possess how can open carry bans remain in place
Bingo
THANKS FOR WATCHING!
No. We know that Thomas released a magnum opus (on his birthday!) . . . and I believe what he used is originalism (Text, history and tradition). This, IMHO is WAY better than "strict scrutiny." It means the second amendment means exactly what it meant when it was enacted and ratified.
No he didn't..You should go read Nunn v State, a George case mentioned in Heller. Both modes of carry were prohibited. The Georgia Supreme Court stated that concealed carry could be prohibited and open carry can't be prohibited. Thomas and court, concluded from that, that a state had to allow one mode or the other...Must corrupt interpretation I've ever heard from that reading. Welcome to the licensing of a right with this case.
MURDOCK v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 319 U.S. 105 (1943)
"A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal constitution."
@@MrDLRu
In the words of Thomas Jefferson: "The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
CRIMINALS DO NOT FOLLOW the LAW and LAWFUL Citizens are at a DISADVANTAGE if they are DISARMED Unconstitutionally by these Unconstitutional LAWS!!!
"During my twelve-and-half years as a member of this body, I have never believed that additional gun control or federal registration of guns would reduce crime. I am convinced that a criminal who wants a firearm can get one through illegal, untraceable, unregistered sources, with or without gun control.”
- Senator Joseph Biden, July 1985
“The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials, and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.” - US Supreme Court, West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette
"The right of a citizen to keep and bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the state government. It is one of the “High Powers” delegated directly to the citizen, and is excepted out of the general powers of government. A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it because it is above the law, and independent of lawmaking”
Cockrum v State, 24Tex394 (1859).
investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/
“A law repugnant to the Constitution is void. An act of Congress repugnant to the Constitution cannot become a law. The Constitution supersedes all other laws and the individual’s rights shall be liberally enforced in favor of him, the clearly intended and expressly designated beneficiary.”
-Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)
I WILL NOT FOLLOW Unconstitutional LAWS as they are NULL and VOID!!!
@@MrDLRu that’s all well and good, but the constitution does NOT grant rights. It acknowledges them and limits/restricts the government’s power over them.
well stated
I agree with what the Supreme Court decided regarding our 2A rights.
A shame the lower courts and some politicians cannot comprehend the FACT that an AR-15 is *NOT* an "assault weapon" and should leave that type of rifle alone. IF someone modifies their rifle to be rapid fire, then prosecute them for doing such; that's now become no different than an M16 fully automatic rifle, which does fall under the "assault weapon" category.
Thanks for watching!
I live in CT and am praying for the assault weapons ban to be declared unconstitutional...
After Newtown here in CT they really started violating the rights of citizens here... 🤞🤞
Thanks for watching!
Just an FYI: Sacramento County has been effectively "Shall Issue" for about 10 years now. There are THOUSANDS of CCW licenses issued in that County. San Francisco County, Alameda County, and Santa Clara County are among the more egregiously bad at CCW issuance. NYSRPA v. Bruen, on the "good cause" end of things, didn't change ANYTHING of note for Sacramento County.
Oh yes it did. Legally if not practically.
THANKS FOR WATCHING!
The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Asking for or requiring a permit to carry concealed or un-concealed is still unconstitutional. The right to KEEP and BEAR. I just don't understand why people can't get it. Stop asking for your rights. They are yours. The government doesn't give them to you. The Constitution affirms that they are and were your rights even before the government was here. Period, end of story.
Thanks for watching!
While this is good it is not enough. Requiring a CCW is still requiring a "license" for a right. This is not a privilege.
Thanks for watching!
Permit = taxation
Taxation = theft
Thanks for watching!
The scotus 2A decision last week.
1. SCOTUS made reciprocity in all 50 states and territories legal.
2. Expanded concealed carry rights to all law abiding Americans.
3. Legalized open carry in all 50 states and territories.
But here's the really good one
4. It made non resistance concealed carry permits legitimate in all 50 states and territories because if you have one, you passed the background process by that state and see item 1.
Thanks for watching!
This is very encouraging, but having judges that can't define what a woman is, and politicians that believe that men can get pregnant, does not lead me to believe that politicians that show pride in violating their oath of office will stop violating the constitution, or not use unlawful means to circumvent the rule of law.
Thanks for watching!
The whole misdemeanor domestic violence rule needs to go. If its not a felony there should be NO DENIAL OF RIGHTS PERIOD!
Thanks for watching!
From SAN DIEGO
I’m so happy to hear this! I’m going to go buy a small gun and get my ccw right away
Thanks for watching!
Remember, at the time of the writing of the Second Amendment the word arms had a definition. It was weapons of war. Short and sweet.
Slight correction..... Arms meant and still means any weapon that can be used in offense or defense.
Thanks for watching!
Remove California's governor asap!! Jail himnow!!
Thanks for watching!
Over 100 years we have been disenfranchised in New Yorkistan and now we are being punished because they are mad that they got caught with their pants 👖 down. This is so wrong and someone needs to step up and protect citizens from abuse from their government.
Thanks for watching!
So, shall not be infringed………
Isn’t requiring a permit, and charging money for it, an infringement?
Talk amongst yourselves.
Thanks for watching!
(And shall not be infringed) VERY CLEAR NO MATTER WHAT AMENDMENT OR OPINION OF ANY DISTRICT OR STATE. PERIOD.
Thanks for watching!
I am from Africa and believe me if you take away guns crime will flood your country.....We in South Africa see this everyday. We have the toughest gun laws but we have the highest crime rates in the World.
I totally agree! Thanks for commenting. Hitler removed guns from Germany before he exterminated the Jews. It is been proven by history.
If it's a constitional right why as for permission? Weird.
Thanks for watching!
They will not stop , they are relentless and their quest for control will not stop .
I know....and exactly like laws, in general. I say REMOVE ALL LAW'S - let The People govern themselves!
Thanks for watching!
I have never been comfortable with my name having to be on a government list to CCW.
Thanks for watching!
The a Problem is, just because someone has been convicted of a felony, should not deny them of their rights, excepting perhaps some exceptional circumstances.
Thanks for watching!
no free people should have to ask permission to exercise a constitutional right. ! the 2nd amendment is a restriction on government not on the citizens.
Thanks for watching!
The next step should be the elimination of permits altogether. You do NOT need to have PERMISSION from any government to exercise your Constitutional tights.
Thanks for watching!
The rule of law, let’s follow it!
Thanks for watching
Excellent lecture/informing, Mr Cotta.
Much appreciated.
Subscribed just now.
Awesome, thank you!
A great step forward is;
Not needing a permit. That's a defacto gun registry and tax on a right.
Not requiring people get permits to get insurance. How does that make any sense? That's basically just saying that you're going to take government money to give the illusion of freedom.
You would make more money by getting rid of that requirement
Thanks for watching!
When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people, there is Liberty.-THOMAS JEFFERSON
I find it comical how people claiming the right to bear arms is a ‘right’… but then begin to list people that don’t have this right, making it a privilege.
Thanks for watching!
I'm never giving up my guns. They can pry them from my cold stiff dead hands..
Thanks for watching!
All gun laws that do not address direct and immediate danger or harm… are unconstitutional.
Yes, laws that prevent a felon from owning a gun are unconstitutional.
Thanks for watching!
Newsom said he will not abide by the ruling. Toss him in jail under contempt of court. Let him sit in GP, in jail... Also, Shall not be infringed means I can carry open or concealed without permission from the government, period.
Thanks for watching!
The new scrutiny is text based on history, even higher than strict scrutiny.
THANKS FOR WATCHING!
That's the best explanation of the ruling I've heard. GOOD JOB!
Thanks for watching!
NY state has just passed the Concealed Carry Improvement Act making it extremely difficult to qualify to own a gun AND making it illegal to carry your "legal" gun practically everywhere.
Now what?
I think it's a contest between California and New York. Who can make the most restrict gun laws faster. I wish that the supreme Court had some sort of hammer that could hammer these good governors and legislators with to put them in jail forever for even attempting to say the word gun control.
@@ToddCotta So it sounds to me like New Yorkers are not only back to square one, they've gone a few steps even farther back. The laws just passed are ridiculous. There would be almost no way to have and use your gun for self defense and not end up being a felon.
Thanks for commenting. I will be uploading a reaction video to your comment in a few minutes. It is criminal what they are doing.
After reading comments on calguns and seeing other videos saying they will just make it harder to get a ccw l was getting disappointed but your video has given me some hope. I hope you are right.
THANKS FOR WATCHING!
OK, now let’s work on reopening that office in DC that can restore an old non-violent Fed felon’s 2A rights!
Thanks for watching!
I think all states should honor the constitution. I can agree that felons and simular clarifications should be banned but otherwise everywhere should be a no permit needed state. Anything less is a violation of 2A.
Thanks for watching
We all have to follow the constitution, ALL of us.
Thanks for watching!
Thank you..
Thanks for watching!
Now all gun permits should be recognized in ALL states. We live in one United States so we should be able to take our guns to All states.
Thanks for watching!
YOU WANT TO CLEAN THE B.S.UP......F.......VOTE THEM OUT.
We in Central Cal want to vote them out but San Jose, SF, Oakland and Los Angeles keep pulling us down. Maybe we should split the state. But that is a whole other issue. Thanks for commenting!
In New York State you do not need a license for a long gun. Only in New York City. There is an “assault weapons” & large capacity magazine ban. Police officers [retired & active] are exempted from the large cap mag ban. Sale of any assault weapon in NY State is illegal, but ones possessed before 2013 are grandfathered in & must be registered with the NYSP. In the 2nd Federal District [upstate NY] the large cap mag ban was overturned. So in NY state there are 2 different sets of rules in effect, which doesn’t make any sense legally.
this ruling nullifies NYC gun laws
Thanks for watching!
What's wrong with legalizing drugs? What right does the government have to use force against people who chose to ingest chemicals?
The librarian approach is good for the most part but the same logic would apply to motorcycle helmets, pool fencing, drivers license, business permits etc. Where I stop is when these dope addicts victimize others by stealing and harassing the dope free people. Thanks for watching!
Good to know
Thanks for watching!
So if my only conviction EVER, was a low-grade misdemeanor DUI, and Sac County has denied my application because of that, is that reasonable?
Any luck since the post? It should be easier now.
I haven't heard this part of the ruling before. I hope some news agency reports on this. I think it is a bigger story than the elimination of having to prove a need for a license.
Thanks for watching!
Ridiculous to bring up transporting firearms on airplanes and across state lines since states have laws for the personal transport of.
Thanks for watching
"shall not be infringed ", should not require a permit .
Thanks for watching
It will still be up to the state to decide what the criteria is.
For instance they could require you to carry liability insurance and take a gun safety course 4 times a year in order to get a CCW. They just can't ask you if you have a reason for it.
Thanks for watching!
Marbury vs. MADISON: ANY LAW that is repugnant to the constitution are null and void.
Thanks for watching!
Next up, the Right to keep and bear arms is futile if the law will not recognize their lawful use. Expect more prosecution of lawful self defense in the offending states.
Thanks for watching!
ABOLISH THE NFA (1934) AND THE HUGHES ACT (1986) !!
Thanks for watching!
Do you have to pay a fee for your free speech?Do you have to pay a fee to practice your religion?Then why do i have to pay for my right to carry a gun?????????????
Thanks for watching
The next logical step.... If the government MUST issue a permit... why is there a permit process at all?
It is already established that if you are a felon you cannot even possess a firearm. The permitting process now become a violation of the 4th amendment and 5th.
The 2nd is excruciatingly clear.... SHALL NOT be infringed.
And for the anitgunners out there. The government is not empowered to infringe upon MY RIGHTS to address an issue with another.
Thanks for watching!
I like how he carefully defined the 2a ruling then referred to the roe decision in derogatory and misleading way.
why do you say he referred to RvW in a deragatory manner?
Thanks for watching!
If they try to pass this firearms ban....what will happen? Y’all gonna comply? I’m not.
Most people probably would say the same.
@@ToddCotta
I don’t know what most people will do. I know what I will do.
What about you?
The new gun law they just passed in Washington with red flag and age requirements should be looked at. Also the government restrictions on ammunition sales.
Thanks for watching!
So the only state that didn’t violate the constitution was Vermont
Thanks for watching
Newsome belongs in prison and everyone convicted of a felony for carrying a gun in NY needs to have their record expunged.
Thanks for watching!
If the 2nd allows me to carry, why do I still need a permit from the govt????
Thanks for watching!
This is outright legislating from the bench. Period.
Thanks for watching
Licenses are revenue-generating policies to feed a small army of civil servants working so diligently on our behalf.
Yup
God i hope and pray what you are saying is correct. We the people will be much safer for it.
Thanks for watching
so maybe now they will also change all the other states to a permitless ccw as we are here in alabama
Thanks for watching!
This is great information.
Thank you.
Glad it was helpful!
California, & new York :
What part of " shall not be infringed" don't you understand ?
Thanks for watching!
I don't understand why the criminals aren't being targeted but law abiding people are. They seem to want and welcome criminals
Thanks for watching!
Got a sub from me :) I definitely want to come do a ccw class with you guys in Hanford
Thanks for watching!
NYC is Different from NY I have my unrestricted permit and my biggest problem is I can’t carry in NYC
I believe this ruling is huge and make every state at least shall
Yes I understand, It is just difficult to talk about the city and not the state and keep it straight. Us Pacific folks don't have all of the east cost vernacular down quite yet. Thanks for watching.
Since you don't want to abide by the rules of the government (Federal) don't ask for federal money.
Thanks for watching!
Now the people denied the right… can sue.
Thanks for watching!
How will the ruling affect carrying knives and such? Other arms.
Thanks for watching!
Will this ruling affect the California requirement to keep the firearm separate from the ammo in an automobile? If I can carry in public in California, may I also carry loaded in an automobile?
Thanks for watching!
This is Cool California CCW, and hopefully our roster improves soon.
Thanks for watching!
So sad We the People and Law biding Citizens have to put up with such 🐄💩.
Thanks for watching!
WHY DO YOU EVEN NEED A PERMISSION SLIP…ASKING FOR PERMISSION MAKES IT A PRIVILEGE
Thanks for watching!
The long gun permit only pertains to NYC as does the pistol permit and traveling through the TSA, ( LaGuardia and JFK) people who travel with a pistol usually take travel through westchester airport in Westchester county, outside of NYC in the rest of the state, most counties issue Full carry permits which are valid in the entire state except the 5 Boroughs of NYC. This case was a big win not just for NY but for all of our brothers and sisters around the country.
Thanks for watching!
It should be a concern that Newscum takes the attitude of screw'm we will do what we (him) want in CA. Remember his goal is the be president. Another political hemorrhoid
THANKS FOR WATCHING!
this ruling means nothing. there seems no way for the supreme court to enforce their rulings .
We will see!