Fed judge says no 2nd ammendment right to concealed carry

[RB87]

New Yorkers don't anyway.

U.S. Court Rejects Challenge to State's Concealed Gun Law

via

Federal judge: No Second Amendment right to concealed carry « Hot Air Headlines


"New Yorkers do not have a constitutional right to carry a concealed handgun in public, a federal judge ruled yesterday.

In a case brought by four New Yorkers challenging the denial of "concealed carry" gun permits by four state judges, Southern District Judge Cathy Seibel said she found persuasive the reasoning of the Illinois' Court of Appeals in People v. Marin, 795 N.E.2d 958 (2003), that the overriding purpose of gun statutes should be to prevent innocent people from being victimized by gun violence.

As such, Judge Seibel ruled, that granting licenses to carry concealed firearms is a matter of discretion to be decided by state authorities and is not a right."

Read More

 

[Father of four]

Those Judges should be removed from the bench.

They are incompetent of understanding the rights of the people.

There should be an immediate ban of any further rulings from them.

The People of New York should fire them right away!!!!!

 

[Father of four]

"The judges, who were represented by the office of New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, argued that the "proper cause" provision of the state law served as a valid basis of the denial of gun permits and did not violate the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment guarantee of the right to bear arms."

Complete BS!!!!

 

[Father of four]

Quoting Marin, Judge Seibel said, "The underlying activity of possessing or transporting an accessible and loaded weapon is itself dangerous and undesirable, regardless of the intent of the bearer since it may lead to the endangerment of public safety." Marin also held that transporting a loaded weapon on a public street "creates a volatile situation vulnerable to spontaneous lethal aggression in the event of road rage or any other disagreement or dispute."

"For all these reasons, I hold that the state has an important government interest in promoting public safety and preventing crime," Judge Seibel said in Kachalsky. v. Cacace, 10-cv-05413.

Your fear of safety does not supersede our rights!

 

[Father of four]

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg similarly praised Judge Seibel for her ruling.

"Common-sense restrictions like the one the court upheld today do nothing to infringe on the rights of law-abiding Americans, but are essential to fighting gun crime on our streets," he said in a statement.

BS. Its Common sense to understand our rights are being violated with your restrictions!

 

[civilian75]

That's why I will never voluntarily move to NY and any other state infected with this virus.

 

[Grunwald]

That's why I will never voluntarily move to NY and any other state infected with this virus.

There are many other reasons to stay out of New York state besides gun rights. It does however follow their pattern of viewing their residents as nothing more than subjects.
Then again, I used to joke 25 years ago that we should use NYC as a nuclear testing ground.

 

[2506]

Another activist judge, legislating from the bench...

 

[Correctthought]

That's why I will never voluntarily move to NY and any other state infected with this virus.

And that's why I'm glad I left that state /city, even though Orygun has not been a real picnic for economically.

 

[tkdguy]

I grew up there. It was an oppressive pit hole when I left in '65, and now, it is simply cancerous. The folks within governement and much of the uncivilized population (which is a large percentage in southern NY State) along with the general population of ethnocentric and other repressive types, make living there unbearable. This gun ruling serves as objective evidence of the narrow minded and dictorial government idealogues that run the state. Citing Illinois decisions as usefuly only serves to compare two cesspool states with one another and two malignant legal decisions that will hurt and harm more than protect the citizens.

 

[Jamie6.5]

The antis in Florida said the same thing as this idiot judge. Blood would "run in the streets" over simple things like traffic accidents and "road rage."
The lawyers blew it.
They should have pointed to the Florida statistics showing how crime went down, especially assault, after shall issue was passed into law.

 

[Grunwald]

The antis in Florida said the same thing as this idiot judge. Blood would "run in the streets" over simple things like traffic accidents and "road rage."
The lawyers blew it.
They should have pointed to the Florida statistics showing how crime went down, especially assault, after shall issue was passed into law.

These judges need to be thrown off the bench for complete disregard of the Constitution. Even if all their concerns were true they do not have the authority to override the Constitution. That is why some things are IN the Constitution, so that neither judges not legislature can create laws (or pass judgements) that are opposed to it. If they wish to change what is the supreme law of the nation, there is a mechanism for that.
The problem for them is that they know they could never get the change the right way, so they just blatantly violate their oath because they know there are no repercussions for their actions.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

Southern District Judge Cathy Seibel said she found persuasive the reasoning of the Illinois' Court of Appeals in People v. Marin, 795 N.E.2d 958 (2003), that the overriding purpose of gun statutes should be to prevent innocent people from being victimized by gun violence.

As such, Judge Seibel ruled, that granting licenses to carry concealed firearms is a matter of discretion to be decided by state authorities and is not a right."

The purpose of censorship laws is to prevent innocent people from having their feelings hurt. Therefore, free speech is not a right.

The purpose of random house to house searches is to prevent innocent people from being victimized by crime. Therefore, being secure from illegal search and seizure is not a right.

Etc, etc, etc.....

 

[Dell_dude]

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg similarly praised Judge Seibel for her ruling.

"Common-sense restrictions like the one the court upheld today do nothing to infringe on the rights of law-abiding Americans, but are essential to fighting gun crime on our streets," he said in a statement.

That's most definitely BS.

The only thing it DOES do is ensure that law-abiding Americans are unarmed.

 

[deen_ad]

That's most definitely BS.

The only thing it DOES do is ensure that law-abiding Americans are unarmed.

I guess we might as well become criminals since they don't have to declare that they have weapons as it's a tool of the trade and declaring it violates their constitutional (fifth Amendment) rights!

In Haynes v U.S. (1968), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that felons do not have to register illegally possessed guns, because the Fifth Amendment protects them against self-incrimination.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

The good news is that WI will be Shall Issue in November!

I suspect the possible repeat of the mass black attacks against innocent white fair goers that happened this year will have a different outcome next year, as well as a lot of street thugs, rapists and others being made an example of...

 

[Dell_dude]

Everyone should also be contacting their reps about H.R. 822—the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011.

While it doesn't necessary solve the problem for people living in places that illegally refuse to issue permits, it would certainly make things easier for those who can obtain their permit in their home state.

 

[slowstang11]

These judges probably carry themselves when out and about. I know that several anti-gun personalities actually have armed bodyguards.

 

[deen_ad]

This is exactly why the NRA stays out of some suits, it sets a bad precedence for the rest of the US. It should have been tried in a different circuit court where there was a better chance of a good decision and then carried to other courts. Now this will make it harder to win.

 

[Spad]

Watch out this Bloomberg has presidential asperations, and his "subjects" will vote for him, he is a real slicky boy. Notice the way he got another term. We seem to be infected with people in the legal community who are above the law, and make thier own law. New York City is an example of what is in store for us as these people move west and bring thier brand of interpetation of the Constitution and Amendments and our Bill of Rights. Spad