Because they can't live without control.. helping people means losing control over them. But this law is all about gaining control, taking people's rights, ability to resist their tyranny
Yeah...but think about how much safer everyone will be with fresh gun laws (infringements)! Because...you know...criminals ❤ gun laws!!! Keep 'em coming you inept POS's!!!
They're just going to end up in court again! Lawyers are gonna make BIG dollars! And the ONLY people that are being hassled are the people that ARE NOT THE PROBLEM!
I still want to see if the courts put these new laws under injunctions until etc matter is settled in a court opinion or are they going to continue with their stall ball tactics as they did before and then change the laws at the last minute as they have done before.
@@billalumni7760 relly everything past checking if you still have you're rights(not a felon) is a volation of 2a. im pretty shure puplic buldings canot deny 2a only privet ones as well.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!! "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). If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262. To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/ CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!! 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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers
Absolutely..they could care less about saving lives. They're far more outraged about legal firearm owners than they are the people shooting eachother in the streets every night.
Seriously, over the last few years of craziness, it looks more and more like the left wants to make the government the only armed entity. How else could they impose their will on a free people.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!! "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). If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262. To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/ CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!! 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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers USN 72-76
@@g.k.1669 In that case, parts of America are taking "The customer is always right." to insane new levels. Lol In blue states, criminals have more respect, deference and rights than the average citizen. Apparently, their right to defecate on the street, carry firearms and throw dirty needles everywhere is greater than our right not to have to walk through poop a needles. It's gotten so, SO bad, something's gotta give. These idiots keep voting them in, though.
We need red states legislatures to take the 750 million dollars from the safer communities act and direct it to CCW fees. Also to produce firearms safty classes and force the school systems to teach it. Under the FEDERAL SAFER COMMUNITIES ACT. STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN. State by state citizens who support the 2A need to demand this.
It's a lot easier to go after the firearms of law abiding citizens than it is to go after the firearms of criminals who don't obey gun laws to start with.
Without crime there's not so much need for gov to intervene hence their power decreases and they can't have that. They need to be validated to gain undeserved power over us and disarming us gives them ultimate power because then we can be physically taken over and enslaved leaving us powerLESS.
@@jimhalke I'm kinda split on it. On one hand, it is one's God given right, but on the other I do like the idea of making sure people who have a carry gun know how to be safe with it. In the end though, I'd rather it move towards Constitutional carry than gun control.
@@getthegoons especially when a right limited is only a privilege and not a right. Most people who want to carry and are unsure of themselves usually seek some kind of training and most gun shops will either train or direct them to training
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!! "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). If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262. To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/ CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!! 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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers USN 72-76
As if they have any right at all to waltz into anyone's house and look for themselves. How about WE waltz into THEIR homes and start looking around and pick apart their shit?
That one is pretty much universal in all states. It includes schools, post offices, police stations, court houses, and, I just have to add this one, welfare and social security offices. Even with Constitutional carry in my state, those places are off limits. Strangely, banks are not off limits, unless they have a sign that specifically says so.
@@geraldscott4302 Being universal doesn't make it right. Constitutional Carry. Law abiding citizens should have the right to carry wherever they may go. Being restricted by building or gun free zone actually infringes on the right to bear arms and creates greater possibility of gun loss through theft. If law abiding citizens have to lockup their guns in their car in order to not bring it in a restricted area, that un attended gun is now at greater risk of being stolen. And we've seen what happens in school shooting because they are gun free zones. Move to full Constitutional Carry and punish harshly those who commit crimes using firearms.
@@thechase-secondchance5077 The last time I was in a courthouse, I had to empty my pockets and put everything in a tray, then walk through a scanner. The tray with my stuff in it went down a conveyor belt, and a person looked through it, made sure there were no weapons or any illegal items, then let me take the stuff out of the tray and put it back in my pockets. Can you imagine what could happen if someone smuggled a gun (or any other weapon) into a police station or courthouse? Even the cops have to put their guns in a locker before entering those places. Just go into a police station. You will notice that none of the cops in there have guns. Even on military bases (I spent 4 years in the USMC, 1977-1981, and we were required to have the weapons we were issued secured at all times unless we were engaged in an exercise that required the use of weapons. No weapons were EVER allowed in the barracks, mess hall, PX, etc. The only exceptions were MPs. Remember the 2009 Fort Hood shooting, where a radical Muslim (and U.S. Army major and psychiatrist) who was supposed to be one of the good guys, killed 13 soldiers, and wounded more than 30 others? Somehow he managed to get a gun into a controlled area.
The politicians have no right to pass laws about securing guns inside one's property. What goes in my castle is my business, not the governments. They will just not give up intruding into one's personal, private business and life. Politicians do not tell us what they do in their private residents, therefore they do not have the right to get involved in my personal life.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!! "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). If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262. To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/ CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!! 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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers USN 72-76
And the CIA uses people for propaganda to make it seem like thousands of old ladies want guns stored properly. Not too many people are that stupid or ignorant i would hope but then again i just thought about it!
@John M 'Officials' ain't gonna be able ta make unannounced inspections. Or announced, for that matter - Heller overruled that 💩. This is 'Kabuki,' feel-good legislation. Theater. Virtue signaling. I don't like it either but the practical effect is.... Zero. Unless you have kids in the house - then a decent security cabinet ($250 or less) bolted to wall studs or a biometric lockbox on your bed frame is a good idea. Otherwise, eff 'em. Biggest actual impact is dis-alllowing on mass transit.
The problem with banning ccw on mass transit in NYC is that almost everyone has to travel by bus or subway at some point during their day. By banning it on mass transit you are effectively banning everyone from carrying concealed in NYC.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!! "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). If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262. To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/ CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!! 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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers USN 72-76
@@BigTomInTheBasement As SOMEONE Stated in another comment; The Criminals are the ONLY ONES that HONOUR the 2nd Amendment!!! They CARRY Regardless of the Firearm LAWS!!!
No. This isn’t right. They’re banning CCW on subway & buses on mass transit because you’re a legal law abiding citizen you’ll follow the letter of the law. Criminals don’t follow the law. You can’t legislate criminals or evil.
I am so numb from all of these stupid laws , I didn't even notice such a huge contradiction.... I mean needing a permit already makes 0 sense, literally 0. Bad guys NEVER follow CCW laws so it does nothing but make us vulnerable for nothing. We even have the 2A to idiot proof the system but NY and California go full retard.
I’ll say it again. Every officer serving in the formerly United States military is obligated to honor their oath and defend the Constitution against the domestic threat that is the government ,who ,incidentally also swear to defend the Constitution. The First Amendment protecting free speech isn’t applicable if the offenders do not abide by the Constitution. They forgo that right when they try and dismantle my beloved Bill of Rights. Hold all oath takers to the highest standards,none are worthy of praise at this juncture.
@@CORNDODGER Well,enlisted swear to follow orders from higher ranks. So technically they are living up to half what they swear to do. But I like the energy. It’s a very unpopular point of view,but if they lose Our support they may be the first military to side with the People. Spread the word.
Concealed carry definitely should not be outlawed on mass transit such as subways ,commuter trains, bus lines etc. Hell, that is where people have been getting get mugged, shot or knifed. if anyone ever needed to concealed carry, mass transit is at the top of the list.
Read a comment recently that they previously were allowing the handful of people that had CCW to carry on mass transit and they're going to hard difficulty adding it. If it was ok before, why not now?
@@gilbertpardo8211 The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!! "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). If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262. To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/ CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!! 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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers USN 72-76
locked up is awfully generous for the seriousness of the crime. how do they in one breath tell the public that the police is targeting people, and then say we ought to be unable to defend ourselves because of what someone else does? no excuses, don't be so nice towards someone who will spit on your corpse.
Hillbilly it probably won't happen in our lifetime.. look how long the latest supreme Court ruling took to happen.. the only people will be getting locked up or lower biting citizens can't have the criminals getting locked up who would vote for the Democrats in New York City?
NJ just updated the application form, deleting the second section where you have to justify "special need". AG quietly announced it and I only found this out from a gun range newsletter.
@w3lc0metomyl1fe I went to local PD to pick up an application, it was still on there. Just now after reading your comment, I went and looked on the state site (from state Police), still there.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!! "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). If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262. To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/ CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!! 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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers USN 72-76
I still feel like we're missing the big picture where in this constitution does it say you have the right to obtain a permit the thought of a permit is a government capitalizing on them allowing you to exercise your right which is protected under the Constitution
I moved from NY to NC 2 years ago in large part because of the firearms problem and the permitting process. I was in the middle of a months long waiting list, as I was not in a country that prioritized the permits. Some counties in NY take as little as 4-6 weeks, others took 18 months. As i waited , The virus hit, and they essentially used the virus to shut down not only the whole process, but they even did the " gun stores are not essential" crap and closed them also. After about 9 months of that, i " loaded up the truck and moved to Beverleee". I am glad to see New Yorkers finally getting some relief.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!! "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). If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262. To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/ CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!! 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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers USN 72-76
And that is the problem, they play the wait you out game. In shall issue states if they don't get back to you in days you automatically get it. I grew up in Brooklyn, NYC is a pain when it comes to law abiding citizens wanting a ccw. They don't even let you get a pepper ball gun which is a non lethal alternative. I wonder if that will change
I left NYS for TN in 2012. I had a concealed carry permit in NY since 1997. And I had a personal protection endorsement. That took nine weeks in Chautauqua County, but we had a pro gun sheriff. My wife got hers in 2008, same sheriff, 8 months. Now it’s closer to fifteen months. So glad I’m in TN with constitutional carry.
I moved out of new york (brooklynite here) to pa. in 2003, never looked back best decision ive ever made. New york is not, and has never been (what I call) a “user friendly” state. New york’s state laws are designed to take whatever money you’ve earned, and steal it back from you, one dollar at a time.
How do they keep armed criminals like Frank James from entering those gun-free zones? Require every subway/bus passenger to go through a metal detector? Or is this one of those restrictions that apply to law-abiding citizens only?
Prohibiting concealed carry on public transit is a problem for anyone who does not own their own transportation and rely on public transit for daily travel. This aspect won't pass constitutional muster because you are limiting rights on an entire class of people, namely those who use public transit.
NY resident here, so what exactly do we have to do to get permission to conceal/carry now? And does a place where 'serves alcohol' mean ANY restaurant? I mean hell, they serve beer on food trucks now.
Just learn to conceal good and ignore these stupid laws. If you don't get caught, no harm. If a bad guy comes in and you save the day, that would be interesting.
@@azurumishinji1697 That's basically how I see it now anyway, if someone knows I have it, I'm not going to care about the laws when its my life on the line.
TRAING and LEARNING the PROPER HANDLING of a FIREARM is a PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY ISSUE and SHOULD be LEFT UP to the PERSON!!! I DO however, agree with your comment. MAKING or Forcing (Law or Requirement to EXERCISE a Constitutionally PROTECTED Right) a PERSON DO ANYTHING is Unconstitutional!!! For a LOT of People it will be HARD ENOUGH just to SAVE up for the Firearm and REQUIRED ACCESSORIES. If the TRAINING can be GIVEN FREE for ALL; then it would NOT HARM(Infringe) on ANYONE, no matter their Financial Situation!!!
Reread the graphic, this law PROHIBITS carrying concealed EVERYWHERE, except in your car on the street, walking on the sidewalk and in businesses where the management explicitly grants permission (posts a sign saying you can carry a gun inside) No sign, no carry. Depending on how "business is defined in the law, places like parks, libraries, the zoo may or may not be included.
@@davidhinkley7867Probability of being over ruled is abt 98%. In the US, culturally & historically our standard is Opposite: A custom is allowed unless specifically prohibited. They tryin' to be Europe: Everything is a no-no unless explicitly allowed. They gonna piss off Judge Thomas & he'll move swiftly, I predict.
added ny to my list years ago when cops fired multiple magazines into amadeo diallo for the crime of pulling out a comb in front of plainsclothes cops who then never served a day in prison for the murder.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!! "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). If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262. To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/ CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!! 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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers ANY Business that Forbids the CARRY of Firearms in THEIR Business is RESPONSIBLE/LIABLE for the Customers SAFETY and the SAME goes for GOVERNMENT Property!!! USN 72-76
Wonder what training a non criminal, no record, never arrested, been using guns for 53 yrs???? What training would this person need? No accidents, incidents, misfires, still got all fingers n toes , no holes in the ceiling or living room walls. Kids know keep your hands off , unless your with a responsible adult showing you how.
THANK BRADEN FOR THE EXCEPTIONAL WORK YOU DO IN KEEPING US UPDATED! ALL OF THESE STATES WITH UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS AND DEMANDS TO OWN A FIREARM NEED TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE LIVES LOST TO CRIMINALS BECAUSE OF THEM!
They're being forced to become more libertarian in policy due to this decision. Perhaps at a later date the SC will take up location firearm restrictions. Hope they also rule on safer storage laws, due to buying a firearm safe being cost prohibitive, considering a lot of people can barely even afford a gun, never mind a safe.
@@finngamesknudson1457 We need red states legislatures to take the 750 million dollars from the safer communities act and direct it to CCW fees. Also to produce firearms safty classes and force the school systems to teach it. Under the FEDERAL SAFER COMMUNITIES ACT. STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN. State by state citizens who support the 2A need to demand this.
It's more cost prohibitive when your guns are stolen and you have to replace them. Also sucks if your gun ends up in the wrong hands and used to harm or kill somebody innocent. Everyone I've known that bought a gun safe says it was the one of smartest thing they ever did except when it comes time to move it. Besides safes aren't really that expensive. A good safe cost around or just a little more than a really good rifle. And can be used to store other precious things besides just guns.
Every state should have a constitutional carry law....no registration or permit needed, just the constitutional right that every US citizen has to carry a gun.
What does safe storage at home have to do with carrying a firearm in public? 🤦🏼♂️ if a New Yorker can’t afford a state approved gun safe will they be denied their permit? Wack
Don't skip over the "other businesses would have to explicitly say that they allow guns on their property." Right now in SC the default is if no sign is posted denying concealed/open carry that it is permissible. To reverse that and make it required that businesses specifically permit concealed/open carry is a HUGE burden on the public.
You need to make a video about the California Attorney General and his office's leaking of personal data of Concealed Carry permit owners This is horrifying, and puts them in considerable danger
I am unaware of there having been any safe storage laws in the late 1700s or early 1800s. I think that aspect of the law goes down in flames if they pass it and it gets challenged.
Court will smack them down immediately: 1) creating contrived sensitive places, and 2) onerous hurdles to acquire a CCW. No historical, textual support for these prohibited areas and requirements to obtain.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!! "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). If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262. To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/ CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!! 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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers ANY Business that Forbids the CARRY of Firearms in THEIR Business is RESPONSIBLE/LIABLE for the Customers SAFETY and the SAME goes for GOVERNMENT Property!!! USN 72-76
I’m in a quandary over the training requirement. I can see where it can be helpful but the amount of time for training sounds a bit arbitrary in this one.
Politicians need to be required to have Unconstitutional-Law-Insurance. Make it start at $10,000,000 and provide an opportunity for those who's had their rights infringed be compensated.
i 've thought in the past that if a law is passed and found unconstitutional, the ones that voted for it should be fined a year's pay. the same for every governor or president that signed it into law.
Here in Oklahoma we have constitutional carry we don’t have to get a ccw to carry a firearm like New York and I like the fact that we are a 2nd amendment sanctuary state and we are anti flag laws here in Oklahoma Missouri is like us and thank you Braden for always being here for us and keeping us updated on 2a news your the man brother
One warning, though... from a person who lived and attempted to get a permit on Long Island NY: Watch for fine details! For, example, "more extensive background check" may involve intentional traps for people and intentional loopholes to delay the process indefinitely, effectively denying the right despite on paper being compliant with the Constitution. Here is what happened to me, with not only spotless record but also some of the highest Gvt security clearances due to my job/work: 1) "Traps". Paperwork required to submit on Long Island at the time asked innumerable questions about every aspect of previous life. All known to the Gvt (where I lived, for whom I worked,...) so they didn't really needed to ask, but... With the disclaimer that ANY incorrect answer will end in automatic denial! I spent weeks dotting every i and crossing every t, hard because I lived at many places, some very short times and I worked at many places, some of which were not existing any longer, changed name/other fundamental details and so on... Questions included contacts for all those - again, some of which did not exist any more... To me, an obvious trap for me to answer wrongly or for them to claim wrong contacts,... But, I put effort for all that to be correct. Still not enough, see issue #2,... 2) "Loopholes". Process consisted of two steps - application, which Police would examine and "check my background", followed by an interview which would be followed by a period of their decision making before I would get the license. Loophole? - there were simply NO time limits and in my case Police used that as a tool to effectively deny me a permit by endlessly delaying my interview (and by the book, they could have done the same in the second step). Almost 3 years passed and I haven't received interview appointment! I called, even visited as it so happened that the Police facility in question was very near my workplace... No, NO denial, just "please wait"... At that point I moved out of State with the job... Everything in that process would satisfy SCOTUS but the devil is in details and bureaucratic will to abuse them to no end. So, beware, watch for seemingly small details...
You’re situation is what I suspect will happen over most of NY State. One thing I heard is that the “expanded background check” will now include social media. Perhaps forced to turn over your online identities and then the government reviewing all the sites you visit, everything you posted and even if you gave a post a 👍. Looks like another SCOTUS case in the future.
If people sued over the delays, then SCOTUS would not be satisfied. It might take years to get justice but it would happen eventually. Illinois now has a system where foid license and concealed carry license can both be had in 90 days but it took a lot of fighting to get here. Of course, I would rather not have to go through the process but SCOTUS has left us here.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!! "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). If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262. To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/ CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!! 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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers USN 72-76
It was naive of us to think they would accept defeat and comply. This will be a continuous fight. At least they’re on the defensive and not us. That’s a refreshing change. A guy could get used to this.
A blatant fringement is requiring to have guns stored because you're no longer bearing the gun. That's an obvious one and for those of you reading an example of bearing is bearing a child you keep them in your arms and hold them close to your body likewise you keep guns in your arms and also keep them close to your body when you bear them. To have to take bullets out and put them in one place and take a gun and lock it up in another place defeats and infringes upon the entire purpose of keeping and then being able to bear arms without infringement or delay when required in an emergency to protect life and Liberty at a moment's notice! You're welcome
I believe it was in DC where they had...meaning it was struck down...a law that required the gun to be partially disassembled and the ammo stored and locked separately. That law also allowed unannounced visits into your home by the police to ensure compliance. It was insane and took years to strike down. Fortunately it is those types of laws that led to Heller and now this. But there's no doubt they will try to repackage it all again.
mas ayoob is in favor of carrying at home as well as in public, my carry gun is off my body while i am in the shower, but is on 24/7 otherwise, i have even learned to sleep with an lcp in a belly band.
Someone who looks exactly like me suspected that NY would simply reword the policy they already had, basically making it sound different, but having the same real-world effect; and then fight the inevitable suit all the way up the chain, because it's just money and there are people to disarm.
Stricter requirements for home storage cannot be enforced without a warrant. Otherwise it’s search and seizure, which is unConstitutional. You can’t break a law to enforce an already unConstitutional law.
As long as the training isn't cost prohibitive. We in my county already do the double background check thing. One to purchase then another by local, county and state law enforcement. Training is an eight hour course. Consists of class room and range. Same place offers tactical training as well.
I don't know what you're going to do for a 12-16 hour class. I had an 8 hour class for my concealed permit and e were done in 3 hours. We spent the afternoon qualifying for the shooting test. You had to hit the target 90% of the time.
TRAING and LEARNING the PROPER HANDLING of a FIREARM is a PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY ISSUE and SHOULD be LEFT UP to the PERSON!!! I DO however, agree with your comment. MAKING or Forcing (Law or Requirement to EXERCISE a Constitutionally PROTECTED Right) a PERSON DO ANYTHING is Unconstitutional!!!
As to "Safe Storage" Laws, Heller v. D.C. clearly holds: " District of Columbia law also requires residents to keep their lawfully owned firearms, such as registered long guns, “unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock or similar device” unless they are located in a place of business or are being used for lawful recreational activities. See §7-2507.02." (Bottom of page one of decision.) "In sum, we hold that the District’s ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense." Top of page 64 As to prohibiting firearms in premises that serve alcoholic beverages, I believe that the anti-freedom demons will find faint record of prohibitions against carrying them during the Revolutionary era into taverns, but they can have fun looking! Nothing prohibits private property holders from prohibiting lawful carry on their premises. I suggest a 2 pronged approach: 1) Vote with your dollars and refuse to patronize such establishments and 2) when forced to frequent them hand the manager a card that states, 'Since this establishment is denying me my right to carry arms for self-defense, I have directed my attorneys and family members to sue this business for any and all injuries occurred on its premises that could have been avoided if I was armed. By denying me the ability to defend myself/family, you have accepted the legal responsibility of my safety."
If Branden's graphic is correct, carrying in a private business is only permitted where the business explicitly permits it. So the default regarding carrying in a business is not permitted.
For some people in NYC, banning guns on mass transit means they can only carry in places within walking distance of home. That can be challenged in court.
I bet they will charge an arm a leg for the firearm classes! And how will they be able to mandate how you store your firearm at home? You need to have it available for use if needed in your home. It doesn't sound like these laws will stop mass shooters.
Since I have children at home, I keep the firearms locked in quick access safes all over the house. The IL law specifically requires that firearms are kept safe from children's unauthorized access.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!! "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). If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262. To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/ CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!! 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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers ANY Business that Forbids the CARRY of Firearms in THEIR Business is RESPONSIBLE/LIABLE for the Customers SAFETY and the SAME goes for GOVERNMENT Property!!! USN 72-76
TRAING and LEARNING the PROPER HANDLING of a FIREARM is a PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY ISSUE and SHOULD be LEFT UP to the PERSON!!! I DO however, agree with your comment. MAKING or Forcing (Law or Requirement to EXERCISE a Constitutionally PROTECTED Right) a PERSON DO ANYTHING is Unconstitutional!!! For a LOT of People it will be HARD ENOUGH just to SAVE up for the Firearm and REQUIRED ACCESSORIES. If the TRAINING can be GIVEN FREE for ALL; then it would NOT HARM(Infringe) on ANYONE, no matter their Financial Situation!!!
@@GmAn01 We need red states legislatures to take the 750 million dollars from the safer communities act and direct it to CCW fees. Also to produce firearms safty classes and force the school systems to teach it. Under the FEDERAL SAFER COMMUNITIES ACT. STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN. State by state citizens who support the 2A need to demand this.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!! "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). If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262. To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/ CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!! 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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers USN 72-76
Still baffles me that they work harder at denying us our rights than putting criminals behind bars.
Criminals will criminal and lefties will soy.
they only fear what they do not understand.
@@kcstott no, they fear the people
@@kcstott it's not about fear, it's about control
All they want is tol disarm the people
Amazing how fast they can get legislation through they want . But when it comes to anything that would actually benefit the people, nothing gets done.
Actually they drag their feet and obfuscate over laws that they don’t like.
Because they can't live without control.. helping people means losing control over them. But this law is all about gaining control, taking people's rights, ability to resist their tyranny
Including giving themselves pay raises!
Yeah...but think about how much safer everyone will be with fresh gun laws (infringements)! Because...you know...criminals ❤ gun laws!!! Keep 'em coming you inept POS's!!!
Many legislative bodies won't consider anything not beneficial to them.
They're just going to end up in court again! Lawyers are gonna make BIG dollars! And the ONLY people that are being hassled are the people that ARE NOT THE PROBLEM!
Ahh you figured it out lawyers are the only ones making money
I still want to see if the courts put these new laws under injunctions until etc matter is settled in a court opinion or are they going to continue with their stall ball tactics as they did before and then change the laws at the last minute as they have done before.
Government working as intended 😆
@@billalumni7760 relly everything past checking if you still have you're rights(not a felon) is a volation of 2a. im pretty shure puplic buldings canot deny 2a only privet ones as well.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!!
"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).
If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262.
To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/
CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!!
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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers
Notice we don't see any effort to go after criminals, just law abiding citizens.
SO
It should be obvious they have no interest in curbing crime.
Absolutely..they could care less about saving lives.
They're far more outraged about legal firearm owners than they are the people shooting eachother in the streets every night.
Seriously, over the last few years of craziness, it looks more and more like the left wants to make the government the only armed entity. How else could they impose their will on a free people.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!!
"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).
If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262.
To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/
CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!!
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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers
USN 72-76
Every person in jail is a customer of the state. They make cash from the entire criminal system from the point of arrest to parole.
@@g.k.1669 In that case, parts of America are taking "The customer is always right." to insane new levels. Lol
In blue states, criminals have more respect, deference and rights than the average citizen.
Apparently, their right to defecate on the street, carry firearms and throw dirty needles everywhere is greater than our right not to have to walk through poop a needles.
It's gotten so, SO bad, something's gotta give. These idiots keep voting them in, though.
I'm just so sick of these tyrants. We need to arrest them and ship them overseas.
Not worth the cost of a whole trip. Let's just ship them halfway and chuck them overboard.
For starters.
@@jackiemowery5243 😂😂 Agreed...fuel is expensive.
We need red states legislatures to take the 750 million dollars from the safer communities act and direct it to CCW fees. Also to produce firearms safty classes and force the school systems to teach it.
Under the FEDERAL SAFER COMMUNITIES ACT.
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.
State by state citizens who support the 2A need to demand this.
GITMO would be a good place.
It's a lot easier to go after the firearms of law abiding citizens than it is to go after the firearms of criminals who don't obey gun laws to start with.
Without crime there's not so much need for gov to intervene hence their power decreases and they can't have that. They need to be validated to gain undeserved power over us and disarming us gives them ultimate power because then we can be physically taken over and enslaved leaving us powerLESS.
It wasn’t leaked the communist bastards did it on purpose wake up sheep he got a wake up 1776 let’s fight wake up
100% on point.
Also, criminals are closer to typical leftist ideologies
Ohio used to be 12 hours of training then 8, now CONSTITUTIONAL CARRY, RIGHT ON
I’m praying for Pennsylvania to get constitutional carry
There's legislation to make Ohio a 2a Sanctuary state too. Although I'm not clear on how far it's really come.
@@getthegoons I hope so. I carry and it would be awesome to not need a permit anymore
@@jimhalke I'm kinda split on it. On one hand, it is one's God given right, but on the other I do like the idea of making sure people who have a carry gun know how to be safe with it.
In the end though, I'd rather it move towards Constitutional carry than gun control.
@@getthegoons especially when a right limited is only a privilege and not a right. Most people who want to carry and are unsure of themselves usually seek some kind of training and most gun shops will either train or direct them to training
Home storage regulations are definitely infringing on the rights and safety of NY state’s residents.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!!
"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).
If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262.
To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/
CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!!
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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers
USN 72-76
And already ruled unconstitutional.
Yup the Heller decision said it was unconstitutional to lock and make a firearm unusable in the home.
As if they have any right at all to waltz into anyone's house and look for themselves. How about WE waltz into THEIR homes and start looking around and pick apart their shit?
Citizens not allowed to carry guns in government buildings...the one place where we should most definitely be allowed to carry. WE OWN THE BUILDINGS!
"they" are "scared" of US!
That one is pretty much universal in all states. It includes schools, post offices, police stations, court houses, and, I just have to add this one, welfare and social security offices. Even with Constitutional carry in my state, those places are off limits. Strangely, banks are not off limits, unless they have a sign that specifically says so.
@@geraldscott4302 Being universal doesn't make it right. Constitutional Carry. Law abiding citizens should have the right to carry wherever they may go. Being restricted by building or gun free zone actually infringes on the right to bear arms and creates greater possibility of gun loss through theft. If law abiding citizens have to lockup their guns in their car in order to not bring it in a restricted area, that un attended gun is now at greater risk of being stolen. And we've seen what happens in school shooting because they are gun free zones.
Move to full Constitutional Carry and punish harshly those who commit crimes using firearms.
@@thechase-secondchance5077 The last time I was in a courthouse, I had to empty my pockets and put everything in a tray, then walk through a scanner. The tray with my stuff in it went down a conveyor belt, and a person looked through it, made sure there were no weapons or any illegal items, then let me take the stuff out of the tray and put it back in my pockets. Can you imagine what could happen if someone smuggled a gun (or any other weapon) into a police station or courthouse? Even the cops have to put their guns in a locker before entering those places. Just go into a police station. You will notice that none of the cops in there have guns. Even on military bases (I spent 4 years in the USMC, 1977-1981, and we were required to have the weapons we were issued secured at all times unless we were engaged in an exercise that required the use of weapons. No weapons were EVER allowed in the barracks, mess hall, PX, etc. The only exceptions were MPs. Remember the 2009 Fort Hood shooting, where a radical Muslim (and U.S. Army major and psychiatrist) who was supposed to be one of the good guys, killed 13 soldiers, and wounded more than 30 others? Somehow he managed to get a gun into a controlled area.
@@geraldscott4302 Sounds to me like your are an advocate for Constitutional Carry at all times, in all places. That would be good.
The politicians have no right to pass laws about securing guns inside one's property. What goes in my castle is my business, not the governments. They will just not give up intruding into one's personal, private business and life. Politicians do not tell us what they do in their private residents, therefore they do not have the right to get involved in my personal life.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!!
"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).
If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262.
To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/
CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!!
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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers
USN 72-76
And the CIA uses people for propaganda to make it seem like thousands of old ladies want guns stored properly. Not too many people are that stupid or ignorant i would hope but then again i just thought about it!
@John M 'Officials' ain't gonna be able ta make unannounced inspections. Or announced, for that matter - Heller overruled that 💩. This is 'Kabuki,' feel-good legislation. Theater. Virtue signaling. I don't like it either but the practical effect is.... Zero. Unless you have kids in the house - then a decent security cabinet ($250 or less) bolted to wall studs or a biometric lockbox on your bed frame is a good idea. Otherwise, eff 'em. Biggest actual impact is dis-alllowing on mass transit.
The problem with banning ccw on mass transit in NYC is that almost everyone has to travel by bus or subway at some point during their day. By banning it on mass transit you are effectively banning everyone from carrying concealed in NYC.
That's what they want.
The criminals have firearms on the trains anyway. Best be just as armed.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!!
"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).
If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262.
To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/
CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!!
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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers
USN 72-76
@@BigTomInTheBasement As SOMEONE Stated in another comment; The Criminals are the ONLY ONES that HONOUR the 2nd Amendment!!! They CARRY Regardless of the Firearm LAWS!!!
No. This isn’t right. They’re banning CCW on subway & buses on mass transit because you’re a legal law abiding citizen you’ll follow the letter of the law.
Criminals don’t follow the law. You can’t legislate criminals or evil.
What the hell does safer gun storage have anything to do with concealed carrying a firearm? Newyork is a joke.
I am so numb from all of these stupid laws , I didn't even notice such a huge contradiction.... I mean needing a permit already makes 0 sense, literally 0. Bad guys NEVER follow CCW laws so it does nothing but make us vulnerable for nothing. We even have the 2A to idiot proof the system but NY and California go full retard.
I’ll say it again. Every officer serving in the formerly United States military is obligated to honor their oath and defend the Constitution against the domestic threat that is the government ,who ,incidentally also swear to defend the Constitution. The First Amendment protecting free speech isn’t applicable if the offenders do not abide by the Constitution. They forgo that right when they try and dismantle my beloved Bill of Rights. Hold all oath takers to the highest standards,none are worthy of praise at this juncture.
Amen brother.
UM NO EVERY PERSON THAT HAS OR IS NOW SERVING in the United States military lets make this CLEAR
@@CORNDODGER Well,enlisted swear to follow orders from higher ranks. So technically they are living up to half what they swear to do. But I like the energy. It’s a very unpopular point of view,but if they lose Our support they may be the first military to side with the People. Spread the word.
I agree with you entirely, some will honor our Constitution, but most won't ,that's exactly why Biden had our ranks purged after the jan.6 incident
@@Hittius I Served under CARTER So I have a LOW ESTEEM For OFFICERS and HIGHER UPS JUZ SAYEN
Concealed carry definitely should not be outlawed on mass transit such as subways ,commuter trains, bus lines etc. Hell, that is where people have been getting get mugged, shot or knifed. if anyone ever needed to concealed carry, mass transit is at the top of the list.
Read a comment recently that they previously were allowing the handful of people that had CCW to carry on mass transit and they're going to hard difficulty adding it. If it was ok before, why not now?
MY THOUGHTS EXACTLY!!! AND FJB!!!!
@@gilbertpardo8211 The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!!
"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).
If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262.
To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/
CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!!
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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers
USN 72-76
I hope someone overthrows these laws and tells them they will get locked up if they enforce!
locked up is awfully generous for the seriousness of the crime. how do they in one breath tell the public that the police is targeting people, and then say we ought to be unable to defend ourselves because of what someone else does? no excuses, don't be so nice towards someone who will spit on your corpse.
Locked up? How about dead.
Hillbilly it probably won't happen in our lifetime.. look how long the latest supreme Court ruling took to happen.. the only people will be getting locked up or lower biting citizens can't have the criminals getting locked up who would vote for the Democrats in New York City?
NJ just updated the application form, deleting the second section where you have to justify "special need". AG quietly announced it and I only found this out from a gun range newsletter.
@w3lc0metomyl1fe I went to local PD to pick up an application, it was still on there. Just now after reading your comment, I went and looked on the state site (from state Police), still there.
@@blazeparabellum7325 Odd....I printed it around noon and it no longer has it. Also, the instructions were updated as well as of today.
Found it out when I printed out my ccw permit off state police website today since I messed up the first page I printed. Can't wait
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!!
"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).
If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262.
To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/
CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!!
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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers
USN 72-76
@@w3lc0metomyl1fe hmm how is that possible. You can't put a link here, can you?
I still feel like we're missing the big picture where in this constitution does it say you have the right to obtain a permit the thought of a permit is a government capitalizing on them allowing you to exercise your right which is protected under the Constitution
Very true
@TakeDeadAim the text history is shall not be infringed they've come up with some sort of work around preemption
Or background checks
@TakeDeadAim states do not have authority to enact permits for firearms.
@TakeDeadAim the Second Amendent..?
I moved from NY to NC 2 years ago in large part because of the firearms problem and the permitting process. I was in the middle of a months long waiting list, as I was not in a country that prioritized the permits. Some counties in NY take as little as 4-6 weeks, others took 18 months. As i waited , The virus hit, and they essentially used the virus to shut down not only the whole process, but they even did the " gun stores are not essential" crap and closed them also. After about 9 months of that, i " loaded up the truck and moved to Beverleee". I am glad to see New Yorkers finally getting some relief.
if they pull that now they will only be in court again.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!!
"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).
If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262.
To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/
CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!!
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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers
USN 72-76
And that is the problem, they play the wait you out game. In shall issue states if they don't get back to you in days you automatically get it. I grew up in Brooklyn, NYC is a pain when it comes to law abiding citizens wanting a ccw. They don't even let you get a pepper ball gun which is a non lethal alternative. I wonder if that will change
I left NYS for TN in 2012. I had a concealed carry permit in NY since 1997. And I had a personal protection endorsement. That took nine weeks in Chautauqua County, but we had a pro gun sheriff. My wife got hers in 2008, same sheriff, 8 months. Now it’s closer to fifteen months. So glad I’m in TN with constitutional carry.
I moved out of new york (brooklynite here) to pa. in 2003, never looked back best decision ive ever made. New york is not, and has never been (what I call) a “user friendly” state.
New york’s state laws are designed to take whatever money you’ve earned, and steal it back from you, one dollar at a time.
How do they keep armed criminals like Frank James from entering those gun-free zones? Require every subway/bus passenger to go through a metal detector? Or is this one of those restrictions that apply to law-abiding citizens only?
Frank James, the horse trainer from Chicago?
Yes. It's a restriction only applied when you exercise your right to keep and bear or your right to self defense.
SHALL NOT be infringed!
In NY making the subway a no gun zone is a severe limit on a persons right to carry and hurts the low income people the most.
File the lawsuits and bring the cases up to SCOTUS asap!
Prohibiting concealed carry on public transit is a problem for anyone who does not own their own transportation and rely on public transit for daily travel. This aspect won't pass constitutional muster because you are limiting rights on an entire class of people, namely those who use public transit.
I think we need to push the gun law makers out of office!
About time politicians were held accountable, thank you Bradon
Michael keep me updated on politicians being held accountable I've been on this earth over 75 years and I've never seen it happen....
NY resident here, so what exactly do we have to do to get permission to conceal/carry now? And does a place where 'serves alcohol' mean ANY restaurant? I mean hell, they serve beer on food trucks now.
Just learn to conceal good and ignore these stupid laws. If you don't get caught, no harm. If a bad guy comes in and you save the day, that would be interesting.
@@azurumishinji1697 That's basically how I see it now anyway, if someone knows I have it, I'm not going to care about the laws when its my life on the line.
Nothing in the Constitution say's you have to get a permit to carry a gun!!!!!!!
It's upsetting to see the stupidest thing being a issue. Shall not be infringed! Simple!!! Thank you brother for your efforts!
Working hard to suppress a constitutional right, rather than actually protecting the border and catching criminals
It's easier to disarm law abiding citizens than to round up criminals.
Historically citizens didn't need to have training to carry a firearm from the government and that is also unconstitutional!
TRAING and LEARNING the PROPER HANDLING of a FIREARM is a PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY ISSUE and SHOULD be LEFT UP to the PERSON!!! I DO however, agree with your comment. MAKING or Forcing (Law or Requirement to EXERCISE a Constitutionally PROTECTED Right) a PERSON DO ANYTHING is Unconstitutional!!!
For a LOT of People it will be HARD ENOUGH just to SAVE up for the Firearm and REQUIRED ACCESSORIES. If the TRAINING can be GIVEN FREE for ALL; then it would NOT HARM(Infringe) on ANYONE, no matter their Financial Situation!!!
I wouldn’t call the shift to the right I’d call it to the US Constitution
Question. When they nail someone for illegal carry with a stolen gun, will they face additional charges for violating the 15-20 hr training law. ?
no, they'll dismiss all those charges because the prosecutors' offices are overworked releasing all the thugs with no bail.
merely asking a criminal if they have been trained is a violation of their 5th amendment right
They will not stop until they are stopped!
thank you for your diligence in keeping us updated. I, and probably many in here appreciate what you do.
We need 50 state Const. carry. Abolish ATF, NFA, GCA and FOPA. Then we are home free like we should be.
If they could get away with it every place would be sensitive.
Oh, you can bet they will _try._ And they'll get away with it, for as long as it takes to litigate any challenges... 🙄
Reread the graphic, this law PROHIBITS carrying concealed EVERYWHERE, except in your car on the street, walking on the sidewalk and in businesses where the management explicitly grants permission (posts a sign saying you can carry a gun inside) No sign, no carry. Depending on how "business is defined in the law, places like parks, libraries, the zoo may or may not be included.
@@davidhinkley7867Probability of being over ruled is abt 98%. In the US, culturally & historically our standard is Opposite: A custom is allowed unless specifically prohibited. They tryin' to be Europe: Everything is a no-no unless explicitly allowed.
They gonna piss off Judge Thomas & he'll move swiftly, I predict.
@@larrymitchell3502 -- I fully agree with you. This appears to be a case of the government trying to be clever.
NY, NJ and CA are in the fight of their life..
I'm in NJ and the only time my guns get fresh air is when i put them on my table next to an open window.
Washington state as well. We can get cwp but they have banned HiCap magazines and are trying to ban so called assault weapons.
Add NY to the list of states I won’t be visiting.
im not allowed there, lol
added ny to my list years ago when cops fired multiple magazines into amadeo diallo for the crime of pulling out a comb in front of plainsclothes cops who then never served a day in prison for the murder.
Historically and traditionally, there was never a permit required to carry. The entire country should be constitutional carry.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!!
"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).
If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262.
To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/
CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!!
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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers
ANY Business that Forbids the CARRY of Firearms in THEIR Business is RESPONSIBLE/LIABLE for the Customers SAFETY and the SAME goes for GOVERNMENT Property!!!
USN 72-76
Wonder what training a non criminal, no record, never arrested, been using guns for 53 yrs????
What training would this person need?
No accidents, incidents, misfires, still got all fingers n toes , no holes in the ceiling or living room walls. Kids know keep your hands off , unless your with a responsible adult showing you how.
F gun control, F the ATF, FJB, and F all tyrannical government! Long live our Constitutional Republic!
It’s all about what politicians want. What ever happened to what the people want ?
It became "We The Politicians" instead of "We The People"
Seems like "a government of the people, for the people and by the people" spoken of by Abraham Lincoln is nearly dead in America!!!
*No law can tell citizens what to do with their own property in their own house, as long as it’s not contraband.*
THANK BRADEN FOR THE EXCEPTIONAL WORK YOU DO IN KEEPING US UPDATED! ALL OF THESE STATES WITH UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS AND DEMANDS TO OWN A FIREARM NEED TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE LIVES LOST TO CRIMINALS BECAUSE OF THEM!
I'm a New Yorker and this SUCKS!
They're being forced to become more libertarian in policy due to this decision. Perhaps at a later date the SC will take up location firearm restrictions. Hope they also rule on safer storage laws, due to buying a firearm safe being cost prohibitive, considering a lot of people can barely even afford a gun, never mind a safe.
Most of the safe storage laws can be satisfied with a cheap lockbox - which generally are slightly more secure than an empty tissue box.
@@finngamesknudson1457
We need red states legislatures to take the 750 million dollars from the safer communities act and direct it to CCW fees. Also to produce firearms safty classes and force the school systems to teach it.
Under the FEDERAL SAFER COMMUNITIES ACT.
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.
State by state citizens who support the 2A need to demand this.
It's more cost prohibitive when your guns are stolen and you have to replace them. Also sucks if your gun ends up in the wrong hands and used to harm or kill somebody innocent.
Everyone I've known that bought a gun safe says it was the one of smartest thing they ever did except when it comes time to move it.
Besides safes aren't really that expensive. A good safe cost around or just a little more than a really good rifle. And can be used to store other precious things besides just guns.
Heller already addresses "safe storage" laws as being unconstitutional
1st time n.y. does drive- by on suzie doe demanding see her safe / tell her they want see whats in it will be victory 4 every body xcept n. Y.
Every state should have a constitutional carry law....no registration or permit needed, just the constitutional right that every US citizen has to carry a gun.
When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.
Amen! Amen! And again amen!
"a sea of infringements", best line of the week.
What does safe storage at home have to do with carrying a firearm in public? 🤦🏼♂️ if a New Yorker can’t afford a state approved gun safe will they be denied their permit? Wack
Lost in a sea of infringements,, best quote of the day
Don't skip over the "other businesses would have to explicitly say that they allow guns on their property." Right now in SC the default is if no sign is posted denying concealed/open carry that it is permissible. To reverse that and make it required that businesses specifically permit concealed/open carry is a HUGE burden on the public.
I ignore all these rules. Except courthouses, and federal property (when I go to the VA)... when I had kids in school, I ignored that one too.
Mass transit is one of the places you would want to carry the most
We need nation wide reciprocity for CCW's
I thought home storage regulations were already deemed unconstitutional.
You need to make a video about the California Attorney General and his office's leaking of personal data of Concealed Carry permit owners
This is horrifying, and puts them in considerable danger
I am unaware of there having been any safe storage laws in the late 1700s or early 1800s. I think that aspect of the law goes down in flames if they pass it and it gets challenged.
Heller already killed storage crap.
part of what got washington dc in trouble in the heller case was their requirement that a pistol be disassembled and stored in a safe when not in use.
@@dwwolf4636 Kind of my point, as a Bruer analysis also kills it.
How I store anything in my home is nobody's business but my own. Period.
Court will smack them down immediately: 1) creating contrived sensitive places, and 2) onerous hurdles to acquire a CCW. No historical, textual support for these prohibited areas and requirements to obtain.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!!
"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).
If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262.
To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/
CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!!
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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers
ANY Business that Forbids the CARRY of Firearms in THEIR Business is RESPONSIBLE/LIABLE for the Customers SAFETY and the SAME goes for GOVERNMENT Property!!!
USN 72-76
It was only a matter of time before lawyers started looking for end runs and work arounds to the SCOTUS ruling.
Safe storage in my house means; one in the chamber, safety stowed in the off position
Our constitution applies to all 50 states and so should the
2A CONSTITUTIONAL CARRY RIGHT 💪😎🙏🇺🇸
I’m in a quandary over the training requirement. I can see where it can be helpful but the amount of time for training sounds a bit arbitrary in this one.
Thats what they publicized now lets see what gets in the bill and passes. I don't trust politicians period!!!
Politicians need to be required to have Unconstitutional-Law-Insurance. Make it start at $10,000,000 and provide an opportunity for those who's had their rights infringed be compensated.
i 've thought in the past that if a law is passed and found unconstitutional, the ones that voted for it should be fined a year's pay. the same for every governor or president that signed it into law.
The 2nd Amendment doesn’t need a permission slip.
Congrats New York Legislature- you just publicized the new Criminal Enterprise Zones. Bravo! 🤦🏼♂️
Sound like more infringing
Just put the criminals in jail , problem solved
Here in Oklahoma we have constitutional carry we don’t have to get a ccw to carry a firearm like New York and I like the fact that we are a 2nd amendment sanctuary state and we are anti flag laws here in Oklahoma Missouri is like us and thank you Braden for always being here for us and keeping us updated on 2a news your the man brother
Same here in Tennessee 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
In NY their rules say you cannot even own a gun without asking them for a permit. This is still unconstitutional.
One warning, though... from a person who lived and attempted to get a permit on Long Island NY: Watch for fine details! For, example, "more extensive background check" may involve intentional traps for people and intentional loopholes to delay the process indefinitely, effectively denying the right despite on paper being compliant with the Constitution. Here is what happened to me, with not only spotless record but also some of the highest Gvt security clearances due to my job/work: 1) "Traps". Paperwork required to submit on Long Island at the time asked innumerable questions about every aspect of previous life. All known to the Gvt (where I lived, for whom I worked,...) so they didn't really needed to ask, but... With the disclaimer that ANY incorrect answer will end in automatic denial! I spent weeks dotting every i and crossing every t, hard because I lived at many places, some very short times and I worked at many places, some of which were not existing any longer, changed name/other fundamental details and so on... Questions included contacts for all those - again, some of which did not exist any more... To me, an obvious trap for me to answer wrongly or for them to claim wrong contacts,... But, I put effort for all that to be correct. Still not enough, see issue #2,... 2) "Loopholes". Process consisted of two steps - application, which Police would examine and "check my background", followed by an interview which would be followed by a period of their decision making before I would get the license. Loophole? - there were simply NO time limits and in my case Police used that as a tool to effectively deny me a permit by endlessly delaying my interview (and by the book, they could have done the same in the second step). Almost 3 years passed and I haven't received interview appointment! I called, even visited as it so happened that the Police facility in question was very near my workplace... No, NO denial, just "please wait"... At that point I moved out of State with the job... Everything in that process would satisfy SCOTUS but the devil is in details and bureaucratic will to abuse them to no end. So, beware, watch for seemingly small details...
You’re situation is what I suspect will happen over most of NY State. One thing I heard is that the “expanded background check” will now include social media. Perhaps forced to turn over your online identities and then the government reviewing all the sites you visit, everything you posted and even if you gave a post a 👍. Looks like another SCOTUS case in the future.
If people sued over the delays, then SCOTUS would not be satisfied. It might take years to get justice but it would happen eventually. Illinois now has a system where foid license and concealed carry license can both be had in 90 days but it took a lot of fighting to get here. Of course, I would rather not have to go through the process but SCOTUS has left us here.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!!
"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).
If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262.
To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/
CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!!
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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers
USN 72-76
You should have recorded every time they made u wait. At the very least it would educate others on what REALLY goes on.
and wait'll they start dreaming up red flags!
What we need to do is take these rules and stick them in their sensative places 🤔
Thanks for all your doing Big B. Training wasn't a thing when I started hunting when I was 12. I'm 73 now. Michigan
Arrest gov and hold her in contempt of court
It was naive of us to think they would accept defeat and comply. This will be a continuous fight. At least they’re on the defensive and not us. That’s a refreshing change. A guy could get used to this.
They don't care it is not like they pay for the court costs it is us the Tax payer.
The increased home security for gun storage won't pass the courts...New Mexico threw that out and a precedent has already been set...
Sensitive Areas?
They'll ban guns in their bleeding hearts...😆
Like crunchy peanutbutter . Bleeding 💕 don't care bleed nuts .how did that go ?
🇺🇸 FREEDOM 🇺🇸
A blatant fringement is requiring to have guns stored because you're no longer bearing the gun. That's an obvious one and for those of you reading an example of bearing is bearing a child you keep them in your arms and hold them close to your body likewise you keep guns in your arms and also keep them close to your body when you bear them. To have to take bullets out and put them in one place and take a gun and lock it up in another place defeats and infringes upon the entire purpose of keeping and then being able to bear arms without infringement or delay when required in an emergency to protect life and Liberty at a moment's notice! You're welcome
Thank-you!
I believe it was in DC where they had...meaning it was struck down...a law that required the gun to be partially disassembled and the ammo stored and locked separately.
That law also allowed unannounced visits into your home by the police to ensure compliance.
It was insane and took years to strike down.
Fortunately it is those types of laws that led to Heller and now this.
But there's no doubt they will try to repackage it all again.
mas ayoob is in favor of carrying at home as well as in public, my carry gun is off my body while i am in the shower, but is on 24/7 otherwise, i have even learned to sleep with an lcp in a belly band.
Just don't let the fux into your house and they'll never know how you kept it. If they break in, well, you know what to do with an armed intruder.
Please keep the conversation and information coming
Thanks for keeping us informed brother!!! Keep up the great work!
Someone who looks exactly like me suspected that NY would simply reword the policy they already had, basically making it sound different, but having the same real-world effect; and then fight the inevitable suit all the way up the chain, because it's just money and there are people to disarm.
Thanks for sharing 👍
Don't you love it when our constitution keeps these people honest
Stricter requirements for home storage cannot be enforced without a warrant. Otherwise it’s search and seizure, which is unConstitutional. You can’t break a law to enforce an already unConstitutional law.
new york will just issue "fill in the blanks" warrant forms for their special squads to use.
We as a NATION Need to show them we are GONNA HAVE OUR RIGHTS & THEY AIN'T A DAMN THING THEY WILL DO THERE'S MORE OF US
As long as the training isn't cost prohibitive. We in my county already do the double background check thing. One to purchase then another by local, county and state law enforcement. Training is an eight hour course. Consists of class room and range. Same place offers tactical training as well.
I don't know what you're going to do for a 12-16 hour class. I had an 8 hour class for my concealed permit and e were done in 3 hours. We spent the afternoon qualifying for the shooting test. You had to hit the target 90% of the time.
TRAING and LEARNING the PROPER HANDLING of a FIREARM is a PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY ISSUE and SHOULD be LEFT UP to the PERSON!!! I DO however, agree with your comment. MAKING or Forcing (Law or Requirement to EXERCISE a Constitutionally PROTECTED Right) a PERSON DO ANYTHING is Unconstitutional!!!
I hope someone sues the hell out of them
As to "Safe Storage" Laws, Heller v. D.C. clearly holds:
" District of Columbia law also requires residents to keep their lawfully owned firearms, such as registered long guns, “unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock or similar device” unless they are located in a place of business or are being used for lawful recreational activities. See §7-2507.02." (Bottom of page one of decision.)
"In sum, we hold that the District’s ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense." Top of page 64
As to prohibiting firearms in premises that serve alcoholic beverages, I believe that the anti-freedom demons will find faint record of prohibitions against carrying them during the Revolutionary era into taverns, but they can have fun looking!
Nothing prohibits private property holders from prohibiting lawful carry on their premises. I suggest a 2 pronged approach: 1) Vote with your dollars and refuse to patronize such establishments and 2) when forced to frequent them hand the manager a card that states, 'Since this establishment is denying me my right to carry arms for self-defense, I have directed my attorneys and family members to sue this business for any and all injuries occurred on its premises that could have been avoided if I was armed. By denying me the ability to defend myself/family, you have accepted the legal responsibility of my safety."
If Branden's graphic is correct, carrying in a private business is only permitted where the business explicitly permits it. So the default regarding carrying in a business is not permitted.
Calling all criminals ,( there is no protection of the poor at bus stops )!
Love your channel!
For some people in NYC, banning guns on mass transit means they can only carry in places within walking distance of home. That can be challenged in court.
I bet they will charge an arm a leg for the firearm classes!
And how will they be able to mandate how you store your firearm at home?
You need to have it available for use if needed in your home.
It doesn't sound like these laws will stop mass shooters.
They are never intended to stop any shooting. Only to control you.
No law does
Since I have children at home, I keep the firearms locked in quick access safes all over the house. The IL law specifically requires that firearms are kept safe from children's unauthorized access.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!!
"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).
If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262.
To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/
CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!!
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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers
ANY Business that Forbids the CARRY of Firearms in THEIR Business is RESPONSIBLE/LIABLE for the Customers SAFETY and the SAME goes for GOVERNMENT Property!!!
USN 72-76
TRAING and LEARNING the PROPER HANDLING of a FIREARM is a PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY ISSUE and SHOULD be LEFT UP to the PERSON!!! I DO however, agree with your comment. MAKING or Forcing (Law or Requirement to EXERCISE a Constitutionally PROTECTED Right) a PERSON DO ANYTHING is Unconstitutional!!!
For a LOT of People it will be HARD ENOUGH just to SAVE up for the Firearm and REQUIRED ACCESSORIES. If the TRAINING can be GIVEN FREE for ALL; then it would NOT HARM(Infringe) on ANYONE, no matter their Financial Situation!!!
These are 2 miracles in America from SCOTUS
Definitely earned my subscription 🤙🏽
Welcome aboard!
The ruling. Not to be infringed
A win is a win even if we didn’t get constitutional carry, a few more citizens have more rights than before.
That's what they want you to say!
That becomes a huge win for them
@@GmAn01
We need red states legislatures to take the 750 million dollars from the safer communities act and direct it to CCW fees. Also to produce firearms safty classes and force the school systems to teach it.
Under the FEDERAL SAFER COMMUNITIES ACT.
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.
State by state citizens who support the 2A need to demand this.
@@GmAn01 Them wanting you to say it does not make it any less true. Its a win.
The Second is for We the People to PROTECT OURSELVES and OTHERS as well as the State in Which we Reside, which in turn will PROTECT the United States Federal Government in a Time of WAR or OTHER Constitutionally Authorized EMERGENCY!!! One Decision that the USSC has RULED On Several Times is that LAW ENFORCEMENT(POLICE) HAVE NO DUTY to PROTECT YOU!!! THAT Decision MEANS that YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for YOUR OWN SAFETY and LIFE!!! I and YOU and EVERY HUMAN on this EARTH HAS the RIGHT BY BIRTH to PROTECT THEMSELVES and NO ONE has the RIGHT to SAY WITH WHAT!!!
"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).
If the state converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity. Shuttles worth V. City of Birmingham Alabama,373 US 262.
To Understand How the FF THOUGHT about the 2nd Amendment go to this Site: investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/americas-founders-actually-viewed-second-amendment/
CRIMINALS CARRY CONCEALED in PUBLIC all the TIME and yet the PUBLIC SUPPOSEDLY WANTS the LAWFUL CITIZEN UNARMED!!!
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."
Do Better Research and Read the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers
USN 72-76