NY Gun Laws Suspended...

Tim said:
I've always liked that model, in theory. And I think it would do very well in a homogenous (shared values, not necessarily ethnicity) society, or at least on a smaller scale than the US. Perhaps county or even states.

One HUGE benefit of the 2 party system that always goes unnoticed, or at least uncommented on, is the gridlock that occurs. Gridlock is a GOOD thing in politics because it means that status quo pretty much rules. Businesses know what to expect, so they can plan and grow without wondering what the hell the next admin is going to pull.

With the occasional exception, neither side gets 'their' extreme policies enacted and the country just motors along with relatively little influence from the .gov. At least historically. The only things getting done are the obviously beneficial.

What's messed that up in the last decade or so is the meteoric rise in the use of Executive Orders and the bureaucracy to enact 'law' or policy. Coupled with the Legislature abdicating their authority to keep the Executive in check is a terrible combination. There's no way in hell that the President and his cabinet should have so much influence on the day to day lives of citizens.

The Legislature needs to smack the Executive back into its proper lane. That won't happen, because it would require the congresscritters to actually do their job.
Click to expand...
There should be a bureaucracy to enact a law, look at all the bullshit laws already on the books, look at all the laws that get ignored, look at all the laws we don't enforce in this country while shouting we need new laws. How about a new bureaucracy where if you want a new law, 2 of the old, similar laws need to be removed from the books first. Laws, like taxes are forever.
 
phideux said:
The only problem with that thinking is that most folks that say they aren't drinking enough to be drunk, actually do end up drunk and driving. Can't you refrain from drinking for a night when you are carrying and need to drive?
Click to expand...
The problem is that we've allowed "law" to replace personal responsibility; and no, saying no beer for you if you're carrying a gun does not equate to personal responsibility. It's BS legal doctrine mired in fear. As Massad Ayoob put it in one of his books, if you can't have a few beers and not turn into a raging a-hole then you aren't the type who should have a gun to begin with.
 
noway2 said:
The problem is that we've allowed "law" to replace personal responsibility; and no, saying no beer for you if you're carrying a gun does not equate to personal responsibility. It's BS legal doctrine mired in fear. As Massad Ayoob put it in one of his books, if you can't have a few beers and not turn into a raging a-hole then you aren't the type who should have a gun to begin with.
Click to expand...
The issue with that is some folks can drink a case of beer and be the nicest person in the world, others can and do turn into the worlds biggest ass in 2 beers, and the results are unpredictable, you can be the nice person 1 night and the ass the next. If you want to take intoxicants of any kind, put the guns down.
 
Voting RINO hoping they don't change their views once they get into office? How's that been working so far?

Losing with virtue sounds better than losing due to getting stabbed in the back.
 
Railsplitter said:
Voting RINO hoping they don't change their views once they get into office? How's that been working so far?

Losing with virtue sounds better than losing due to getting stabbed in the back.
Click to expand...
Yes, but the other side of coin is the RINO ain't stabbing you in the back. You know what he is. And he's usually a tiny bit better than the Democrat who openly admits he's a gun grabber socialist. The RINO can net you a slower decent into the leftist utopia.
If it goes slow enough I might just squeak out another 40 years of status quo before I'm too old or dead to care.
 
The author was barely able to control his contempt for liberty.
He is right that Maryland is looking to follow NY if u is upheld.
Montgomery county MD did not wait. They have a county bill pending that would make it illegal got any gun owner that lives within 100 yards of a school to take any gun beyond the threshold of a door. It bans all possession of any firearm within 100 yards of a very broad list of places. The ban creates massive gun free zones that for lawful gun carriers to weave crazy long paths and prevent good people from leaving their homes with guns. The only exception is one provided under state law. But it only applies to those without a permit. That is to go to a range (technically, I cannot even move my hardware, legally, to the new house, until I get a carry permit. I'm not on MoCo.)
MoCo is loaded with fascists.
 
phideux said:
The issue with that is some folks can drink a case of beer and be the nicest person in the world, others can and do turn into the worlds biggest ass in 2 beers, and the results are unpredictable, you can be the nice person 1 night and the ass the next. If you want to take intoxicants of any kind, put the guns down.
Click to expand...
I'll have you know i practice nightly
i'm surrounded by assorted guns, and drinking right now.
i do this every night. haven't killed my wife or kicked any pets over it yet.
 
DrScaryGuy said:
I'll have you know i practice nightly
i'm surrounded by assorted guns, and drinking right now.
i do this every night. haven't killed my wife or kicked any pets over it yet.
Click to expand...
Both my wife and I have been imbibing. She sleeps with a gun by her dude of the bed. I sleep more soundly for it.
 
Railsplitter said:
Very confusing considering the audience here. The very definition of RINO's is those who vote contrary against their supporter's beliefs after getting voted into office (AKA, stab 2A supporters in the back). Why would someone vote for a candidate when they suspect they would get crapped on by them? "Tiny bit better" is voting for the less of two evils. Voting for the less of two evils means our kids having to deal with stuff our fathers were too lazy to deal with. Why would anyone be ok with that?
Click to expand...
When it's the only alternative to a democrat or socialist. Being pragmatic to stave off a quick slide left socks, but it happens.
 
DrScaryGuy said:
I'll have you know i practice nightly
i'm surrounded by assorted guns, and drinking right now.
i do this every night. haven't killed my wife or kicked any pets over it yet.
Click to expand...

noway2 said:
Both my wife and I have been imbibing. She sleeps with a gun by her dude of the bed. I sleep more soundly for it.
Click to expand...
But I'll bet you are both in the privacy of your own home, that is different than going out to bars, drinking, driving. carrying. I drink in my own house too. I don't drink when I go out so I don't even have to worry about drinking/driving/carrying. We went out tonight, I had Water, she had a couple of Chardonnays, I carried my 40 and drove. Now that I'm home I'm having a beverage, there are a few guns in reach.
I'm enjoying an after dinner Limoncello.
 
phideux said:
But I'll bet you are both in the privacy of your own home, that is different than going out to bars, drinking, driving. carrying.
Click to expand...
Ok, Iā€™ll give you the drinking and driving portion. Iā€™m more concerned with drunk drivers than I am with drunk gun possession.

However, I still contend that the idea that having a beer at a restaurant somehow makes you unfit to posses a gun is steeped and marinaded in the ā€œblood will run in the streetsā€ nonsense. I swear itā€™s made up by idiots that do too much projection. The concern I always hear is that theyā€™re going to start a confrontation, or their judgement will be impaired and theyā€™ll shoot someone as a result, or some other such nonsense. On that I call BS. Edit to add, casein point, in NC, if you get stopped, just make sure itā€™s openly displayed because there is no equivalent prohibition on open carry, just concealed, which I believe affirms my suspicions as to the origin.

I think if thereā€™s an impairment standard, which for alcohol is typically 0.08% for driving it should be sufficient for carrying a weapon in public too. I donā€™t and havenā€™t seen data suggesting otherwise or that imbibing moderately causes a problem with gun possession.
 
Last edited:
phideux said:
But I'll bet you are both in the privacy of your own home, that is different than going out to bars, drinking, driving. carrying. I drink in my own house too. I don't drink when I go out so I don't even have to worry about drinking/driving/carrying. We went out tonight, I had Water, she had a couple of Chardonnays, I carried my 40 and drove. Now that I'm home I'm having a beverage, there are a few guns in reach.
I'm enjoying an after dinner Limoncello.
Click to expand...
that's my secret, cap
i'm always armed

home or outside of the home, either i have something on me or i have easy access to it.
 
Tim said:
Published this afternoon:

www.reuters.com

U.S. judge suspends many of New York's new gun restrictions

A federal judge in New York temporarily suspended many parts of the state's new gun restrictions on Monday to allow members of a gun-owners' rights group to continue their lawsuit challenging the new law as unconstitutional.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com

No more Jim Crow like provisions...
- "Good Moral Character"
- Review of Social Media accounts
- Details on ALL adults in the home.
etc.
Click to expand...
All gun permit laws are rooted in Jim Crow.
The NC pick purchase permit is another one. I called out my NC state rep as a racist for opposing repeal of the PPP. But the order following Democrat just responded with the BS safety talking points.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom