-
Adams Arms Speaks Out on Recent U.S. Supreme Court Ruling, Says Attempt to Implement Unconstitutional Gun Registration
On January 18, 2023, [The Supreme Court rejected a bid by New York gun retailers on Wednesday to block a slew of new gun control laws in the state](https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-supreme-court-declines-block-new-york-gun-restrictions-2023-01-18/), which they argued violated their [Second Amendment rights](https://www.foxnews.com/category/us/personal-freedoms/second-amendment) and hurt their businesses.1
The new law prohibits carrying a gun to “sensitive areas,” such as stadiums, houses of worship, museums, parks, and other public places; imposes revised record-keeping and new safety requirements on retailers; and mandates background checks on all ammunition purchases.
*“We see this as an attempt to implement unconstitutional gun registration and unnecessary financial burden by requiring background checks on ammo purchases. This will not do one thing to curb gun violence as criminals don’t follow laws anyway,”* **says Jason East, President of Adams Arms***. “It will cost lives of law-abiding citizens that may no longer be able to protect themselves in certain places as a result of this ruling.”*
What do you all think about this ruling? Jason makes a valid point, to be honest.
-
3 Replies
-
The suit by firearms dealers is in very early stages and was not the case SCOTUS weighed in on. However the 2nd circuit has scheduled a hearing on March 20 where it it will hear arguments for all five of the current cases in NY against the various parts of the CCIA regarding the plaintiffs requests for injunctions. Most of them have already Ren granted either a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunctions by the lower courts but NYS has appealed to second circuit and was granted stays on all but one or two area of the CCIA mainly the designation of places of worship as a “sensitive location.” March 20 will be a big day for 2A in NY.
-
Did you guys read the article
In a statement issued with that decision, Justice Samuel Alito, joined by fellow conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, said he understood the court’s action in that instance to be procedural rather than expressing any view on the merits of the case. Alito wrote that the New York law at issue “presents novel and serious questions” under the U.S. Constitution’s provisions on gun rights and free speech.
It’s was rejected for procedural reasons nothing to do within the merits. Alito and Thomas both cited it as novel and serious questions, they are watching closely what is going on
-
NYC basically makes it impossible for anyone whose not a cop or politically connected to conceal carry a firearm
