That's the problem. Cops SHOULD be required to protect you, even if that meam putting their own lives in harm's way. Imagine if firefighters weren't legally obligated to rush in to a burning building to rescue you, or soldiers weren't required to charge the front lines when ordered. *That's the job you signed up for!!!* (Draft excluded -- its abolition date is long overdue)
Key word that you used is "qualify". By the SCOTUS own reasoning about the "originalism" of the constitution, in overturninf Roe, the 2nd amendment should also not apply when determining gun rights because an 18 year old mass shooter is not "a well regulated militia".
I agree with this situation. I am concerned for two things though… 1:)not everyone is proficient in firearm use, and this could lead to a significant spike in accidental discharge/deaths. Also I do not believe all people are mature enough to handle a firearm. The same person driving reckless on the highway, while under the influence, now has the ability to (by law) be in my vicinity armed. Bad decision making, is bad decision making…This isn’t the Wild West, I believe 100% in 2A, but also think that common sense gun laws could do some good if initiated appropriately. (i.e. mandatory concealment training, prior to being able to CC., etc) 2.)Back to the police comment, it is no secret that not everyone is fit to be a police officer. The policemen who stood outside for an hour in Uvalde, are a perfect case of this. Now, I think of those same patrolmen pulling over “persons of interest”… This could result in I a spike in unarmed (or legally armed) citizens being gunned down, due to the officer “fearing for his life”. I am interested to hear everyone else’s thoughts?
@@aoa3163 so to respectfully respond your concerns: 1) states can still require licensing for concealed carry. My state is a Constitutional carry state (no permit required), but there is huge benefit in requiring a CCW license. Our state course covers gun safety, and more importantly, the legality of using a firearm in self defense. My instructor even said, if he was in a situation, say a robbery, where he could hide or retreat to stay safe, he's not going to be the hero. "You're not Rambo or Wyatt Earp." That kind of training is extremely valuable for anyone looking to carry. But each state needs to enact proper measures if their constituents are concerned with this. As to your hypothetical, driving reckless is illegal, driving under the influence is illegal, and possession of a firearm while under the influence, is illegal. The person driving recklessly under the influence, I imagine doesn't give af on whether possession of a firearm is illegal. That leads to the argument from many 2A advocates that you need to be prepared, armed, and ready to respond to such a threat, if you're unable to avoid it altogether. 2) the easy answer here is to have a "duty to inform" law. Again, my state is liberal with concealed carry, which to be completely transparent, I absolutely love. Other states, however, have a "duty to inform". So if I'm pulled over for speeding, or a headlight/taillight out, in those states, I am legally required to tell the officer that I have a CCW and there's a gun in the car. I make a practice to inform them anyway, whether I'm required or not. More often than not (in fact, 100% of the time thus far), they acknowledge what I've said, ask where it's at, and reply something to the effect of, "Well, you don't reach for yours, and I won't reach for mine", and the stop goes on without issue. Now, I'm half white, half Latino, and there's a whole other discussion with how that might go down with a POC, but I keep my hands on the wheel, and only proceed to get my wallet and insurance when they feel comfortable with me doing so.
"The possibility that one's intended victim is armed was evidently a concern to most of these men- the strong majority(81%)agreed that it was wise to find out in advance if one's potential victims are armed, and to avoid them if they are." 'The Armed Criminal in America- a survey of incarcerated felons' by James D. Wright and Peter H. Rossi
@@jilliancopeland6825 And the metro areas of this country where rudeness rules just happen to be the same places where gun control reigns supreme. Where I live, anybody could be packin'... and we are nice to each other.
Just watch John Stossel's video on this. He actually shows you the whole process of gaining a license there, and in all it's ridiculousness. He had to read over like 40 pages, and then pay a fee of $400 or so dollars, and then they proceeded to deny him the license anyway. Very ridiculous.
And he is a reporter with money living in nice neighborhood so just think about the single black mother who has a low income and needs to protect her self in a bad neighborhood she will never get a gun license.
That part of the permit process was killed in court a couple of months ago. It was the process of getting a CONCEALED permit, which could easily be denied in nyc. Now you just check a box while getting a normal permit. The law in this video was a reactionary measure enacted to fight that court decision. This dumb law was only in effect for a little while and everyone knew its days were numbered. I do not know of anyone who was actually arrested due to it. I am happy to see it gone.
Law abiding citizens are not committing crimes. Criminals do not follow laws. Creating rules and laws that prevent law abiding citizens to protect themselves and their community is just stupid.
“Law abiding” and “responsible” are different. I would urge you to read some statistics on how simply owning a gun makes you more likely to be a victim of gun violence. I’m a gun owner, I spent time in the army. Civilians are too irresponsible to own guns. Hell, my last roommate got evicted for negligently discharging his weapon and nearly killing the woman in the apartment next door. The bullet went inches from her head. I cared for a dog while a college friend left for basic training, this dog had been shot through the neck by the negligent discharge of a firearm by her irresponsible boyfriend (it survived.) I don’t trust any idiot with a gun. They’re made for killing people. In a study on law enforcement it was found that only 1 of 16 shots fired under duress hit their target on average. That’s 15 bullets going beyond the target and hitting anything in their path. Law enforcement and military are taught to be aware of what’s behind their target. Civilians are not, some can’t even field strip their own weapons. More guns is more bullets flying, more bullets flying is more people dying.
@@13579Winter No one cares mr army, didn't you take an oath to uphold the constitution? If you don't like the 2A, get the votes to change it. Until then, keep huffing the copium of the pipe dream you typed above.
They should make tanks and missiles launchers way cheaper so anyone can buy one and defend themselves while in school or on the streets against a bad guy with an assault rifle
NY's law still followed the norm with regards to background checks, licensing and proper transfer when purchasing a firearm. The part struck down is that the state was mandating a citizen prove their eligibility to exercise a right. You don't have to "prove" the need for the right to vote or a right to petition or address grievances against your government or even to practice the religion you choose...thus the right to defend yourself should be treated the same and any infringements of that are unconstitutional. That's what they are saying with this ruling.
@@jeffreyhinds9317 Stop confusing voter integrity with voter suppression, you're not fooling anyone. We know you just want to be able to cheat in elections
@@jeffreyhinds9317 name one place that restricts anyone from voting……. There are absolutely none. Everyone is capable of meeting the simple basic requirements for voting. Have an ID live in the boundaries of which you are voting and be old enough. It’s pretty simple. It’s not the governments job to make sure you can get to a voting poll location, they are not required to help you do anything. Stop being so self entitled. It’s not like the government hast to put a bunch of guns in a truck and drive around to people who can’t make it to a gun store and pass them out like the ice cream man!!!🤦♂️🤷♂️😂
Criminals usually and mostly target other criminals, for simple reasons revenge and profits, what you meant to say is random attackers and premeditated murders, you don’t have to be a career criminal to commit those, having a conceal weapon can protect someone from say a knife wielding stranger in the streets.
"In my twelve and a half years as a member of this body, I have never believed that gun control or federal registration of guns would reduce crime. I am convinced that a criminal who wants a firearm can get one through illegal, nontraceable or unregistered sources, with or without gun control." -Senator Joe Biden, 1985 Senate Judiciary Committee
Just proves that out-of-touch a-holes who manipulate and alter laws in the Constitution to suit their agenda make Supreme Court judges too...keep getting U.S. laws and our so-called "rights" spoon-fed to you and the like Pecker
“That qualify?” I mean isn’t that exactly what they say? They just have a more compressed meaning of “qualify.” Once you start talking about what qualifies a private citizen to practice his rights; is when you get into the same territory that these people who make these laws are in.
Justice Alito to the attorney defending New York , "so if a woman is working late in New York City, takes the subway and then has to walk home late at night through a high crime area to get to her apartment, she would be denied a permit. Is that correct?" Response : 'That is correct, She has not demonstrated a need to have a gun."
They should make tanks and missiles launchers way cheaper so anyone can buy one and defend themselves while in school or on the streets against a bad guy with an assault rifle
I couldn't stop myself from smiling when I found out the ruling was finally made on this case. I've been waiting on the results of this case for years. Finally, states like NJ and NY cannot prohibit lawful citizens from defending themselves.
They should make tanks and missiles launchers way cheaper so anyone can buy one and defend themselves while in school or on the streets against a bad guy with an assault rifle
@@lindamaturesass Of course we know nut jobs obey the law in the first place. And innocent people have never been attacked on the streets by nut jobs prior to this.
"If you eliminate all guns in society, you will still have a criminal problem. However, if you eliminate all criminals you will no longer have a gun problem."
@@sheckyfeinstein In Japan, children learn traditions and how to deal with earthquakes. In china, they are indoctrinated with the communist party spectacular economic results. In India, they aspire to be Bollywood stars and mathematicians. In Europe, they turn to Renaissance arts. In Africa, they learn the history of their country independence. In South and Central America, they are given hope as an expedient. In the US, they learn where to hide during the mass shootings…
So when a crazy person has a gun and nobody can stop him - now someone can - the crazy person now knows that anyone can fire back and him - this is a good step.
The criminal : Judge, I was on my way to the bank when this guy came out. He was so nervous. I had the feeling my life was in danger. I had no choice. The judge : The police found his credit card in your pocket. The criminal : I don’t know how it came there, the poor man was so close to me when I met him. Thoughts and prayers for his unfortunate death. The lawyer : The supreme court gave a license to kill to my client at home and in the street. You cannot take away this right from him. The judge : The supreme court is wise, please, go in peace. The criminal : Thank you judge and thanks to all the judges in America.
@@Wargasm54 When you have nothing intellectual to say so you start throwing out buzzwords.. Because right wingers think it somehow makes them sound intelligent..
There’s two definitions of “regimes.” You’re confusing one for the other. Regime used in the context of the video is talking about “a system or planned way of doing things.” NOT to be confused with an authoritarian government. The definitions are similar but distinctly different-like the words “lay” and “lie.”
The state of New York should have to pay a high cost in damages to every single person that applied for a CCW since their illegal law was put into effect. Enough with this crap. It's time to hold dictators accountable for their crimes.
Amazingly hilarious, so happy normal people can protect themselves. The criminals don't care what the constitution, supreme court, or state laws say. Let the normal people be able to protect themselves.
Okay then remove those fences from the Supreme Court and let everyone show up with guns into the court. Ohh that's right these are people that won't allow cameras.. well they shouldn't restrict where the press goes with cameras.
My question this why are people that follow the law have an issue with people having guns ? As far as carry you have to admit there are people live in bad neighborhoods where the government does nothing to help people there do nothing wrong should not have the right to protect themsleves from having bad things happen to them ? Like me I live in suburbs not in the city but I'm lucky to have a good job where don't have to live in bad areas. For me to say or anyone lives in good area not up to me or anyone to say you cannot use 2nd A to protect yourself none of you are including me and the police going to garrentee there safety or die for them. That's the reality how society is. Even cops in school shooting in Texas decided that with the kids they decided there lives were more important than the kids. So a grown woman or man just screw in that situation. I don't believe all cops are like this but if I have a situation that happens learn from this shooting you can't count on a stranger save your life period you have to depend on yourself first. Only thing going happen to the cops let kid's die lose there job that's it. So anti gun crowd seriously look what happen with the police in that situation. I agree there got be better back round checks so on. Everyone look at whole picture how government fails as well. And people in shooters life fail to stop it also. When everything fails you need a last resort to protect yourself and family because society doesn't care if your kill tomorrow think about it for 2seconds watching the news and move on. I bet where you are now reading this someone been kill in last month in your state on the news maybe you thought about it for a few seconds just move on. That's how society is. You need to protect yourself and family as last resort. I'm glad see the ruling today.
News flash if you didn't know, they asked for protection because a leftwing psychopath had a motive to go after a Supreme Court Justice, I bet you'd have a different tune if it were a Right-winger that tried to go after that thing, or is she a woman-Jackson?
Yeah, shouldn't we just give the justices their own guns and leave it at that? Good guys with guns, right? Or maybe we should post teachers outside their homes...
Tell me again why the Supreme Court is asking for extra protection? More good people with guns isn’t that what they wanted. Judges, just arm your spouses and children. You asked for it!
“An armed society is a polite society.” Chicago with the toughest gun laws in the nation has the absolute worst gun violence in the nation. More gun laws and restrictions are not the answer, this just makes law abiding citizens less safe. The US Supreme Court rendered the correct decision today and they are to be applauded for protecting the US Constitution and consequently the natural rights of US citizens. Thank you US Supreme Court!
"and breyer says 'Well what about things that don't have an obvious historical parallel... subways and nightclubs and sports stadiums" You mean like ferries, taverns, and theatres?
Can I carry my gun on the airplane now? Why is that not allowed? What about in the courthouse? The constitution doesn’t say I am not allowed to carry it on the airplane or inside courthouse. The insanity of Supreme Court.
The opinions literally address this and say that identifying “sensitive” places which necessitate extra gun regulation is perfectly fine and consistent with the 2A
It’s also hilarious how they won’t shut up about the idea that: “NY state’s concealed carry laws provided that an applicant must show good cause that they are in ‘special need’ of self defense.” When in all actuality, that verbiage granted the constituent licensing authority the unilateral ability to arbitrarily accept or reject the applicant’s license. This is exactly you we saw many cases of individuals actually demonstrating “good cause” and being denied (for any reason). While at the same time we saw others who didn’t really show much “good cause” at all, but because of economic status, fame, ties to the licensing authority, and various other reasons; being accepted and granted their license. The entire argument of the constitutionality of the aforementioned practices is exactly what the Supreme Court decided. Stop making it sound like the state of New York had reasonable and constitutional laws that only regarded the safety of her citizens and were practiced fairly! Also, the amount of cope that these gun control activists are currently exhibiting puts a smile on my face.
This just merely puts NY and a few other minority states in line with the majority “shall issue” states. No longer does one have to have his nose shoved up some politician or Mayor’s ass to get a CCW!
Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the majority that the Constitution protects “an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home.” That right is not a “second-class right,” Thomas wrote. “We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need.”
those who have guns in those mass shooting had no license to carry they had them illegally yet they still had guns we should all carry to protect our selves and our family the subway shooting in nyc would have never happen he would have been stopped the buffalo shooting he would have been stopped
They should make tanks and missiles launchers way cheaper so anyone can buy one and defend themselves while in school or on the streets against a bad guy with an assault rifle
They should make tanks and missiles launchers way cheaper so anyone can buy one and defend themselves while in school or on the streets against a bad guy with an assault rifle
They should make tanks and missiles launchers way cheaper so anyone can buy one and defend themselves while in school or on the streets against a bad guy with an assault rifle
To be fair those aren't in the constitution. But i think the only one u should need a license are driving the rest of your examples you really shouldn't need a license.
In 1857 Mormons used flintlock and mussel loader’s to kill over 100 men women and children at the mountain meadows massacre. The evil isn’t in the gun but in the heart of the person carrying it.
They should make tanks and missiles launchers way cheaper so anyone can buy one and defend themselves while in school or on the streets against a bad guy with an assault rifle
The shooter in Texas was a law-abiding citizen, he purchased his guns legally. With any luck at all, you will have a personal encounter with a legal gun owner just like him.
@@Cappurnikus stupid comment. You have laws because the majority of people are law abiding citizens. Thus they largely obey the law and laws are useful. It becomes unuseful only when it’s counterproductive, like this specific case. You’re incorrectly equating a specific use case (which anyone can see is correct thinking) with a broad statement of “all laws”. Most laws aren’t counterproductive in practice
I moved to NC 25 years ago from NY. In NC I can defend myself. All the money I saved in taxes by moving here I used to buy weapons to defend my family.
What exactly are you afraid of that you felt the need to purchase weapons to defend your family after moving to North Carolina? I on the other hand would have purchase recreational gear maybe taken a trip and given money to my children.
@@practicalandy1976 I seriously doubt my reply was dumb. I'd just like to know why do so many Americans feel the need to arm themselves in 2022. Are we expecting some form of alien invasion? I understand their are bad people with bad intentions. I live here in Washington and had to shelter in place because those morons were trying to overthrow the government.
One subway car can easily hold 75 people. If you have 20 or 30 people shooting at one individual there will be multiple innocent people shot. Bullets inside a steel subway car will ricochet hitting even more people. The majority of gun owners are not Marksmen, I just envision a lot of bullets flying and missing the person they were aiming at.
@@jlv3x Or one armed person with a couple of 15 round magazines shooting at your 20 or 30 people…. while the car is rolling. I’ll ride on my car, you can ride on yours. You also make the common yet uneducated mistake when you assume that when a gun is introduced in self-defense the trigger is always pulled. It is not. It rarely is.
@@jlv3x This just happened like two months ago, he had a car load of helpless people to shoot at. Police only got him when he called them and turned himself in a day later. That was out of the news real quick. Also just so you know bullets don't just ricochet around like in a cartoon.
Great news! All those leftist politicians who don't like it should protest by stating they will no longer accept armed police protection. If ordinary people don't need a gun for protection, neither should they.
I have a none violent case from almost 30 years ago and I still can't get a FOID card. So that's the part the government added to the second amendment.
@@johndavidwolf4239 would you rather get shot by some thug just going to the store ? the problem is the mainstream media will never cover when a good guy with a gun saves a life ! it does not fit the democratic narrative ! That`s Fact !!!
@@integrity-ut8ff : I beg to differ, my observation is that the media often bends over backwards to report whenever the "good guy with a gun stops a bad guy". When a toddler gets their hands on a loaded gun and shoots someone, are they a "bad guy"? The number of accentual shootings is directly proportional to the number of guns in society, given the same safe carry and storage laws.
Thank God for the Supreme Court. I have legally and responsibly protected my family in this way in public for years. Unfortunately non gun people don't understand this and think it's dangerous. What those people need to understand is criminals don't care about any of the laws I am at least following them but please don't take my rights away.
Two ground breaking rulings in so many weeks. Now if only the SCOTUS could find something in the Constitution to rule that our most sacred right as a US Citizen, the right to vote, is protected by the need to show ID.
They should make tanks and missiles launchers way cheaper so anyone can buy one and defend themselves while in school or on the streets against a bad guy with an assault rifle
What’s disgusting, and INSANELY hypocritical about Clarence Thomas writing from a “broad sweep” horseshit is that HE should have no business BEING WHERE HE IS or marrying what he married…IF he TRULY harkens back to those very same sweeping days of history.🤬🤬🤬🤬
In NYS, CCL (concealed carry license) holders are a true rarity. Each county authority, usually the elected Sheriff or the appointed Police Commissioner in that county, is the final approver of that CCL. And the CCL applicant must demonstrate Special Need to that authority. Most handgun owners in NYS instead have a Sportsman License or a Target License. These Licenses require a similar 6-month background police investigation, but limit the holder to only carry their concealed handgun (loaded or unloaded) while traveling to & from the "place of specific use" as permitted on their license. For most jurisdictions, this means you are allowed to make only a minor travel deviation in route between your house and the range (destination), and then back home again. This limitation on the license is why most other states do not recognize or give reciprocity to NYS handgun license holders. The lawsuit was to try to "break" the arbitrariness of the "Special Need" declaration. It is after all a Constitutional Right.
You neglected to mention that a ccw applicant must also have 4 people who they have known for at least 5 years, which can speak to their good character
@@Tony-ex2rm Yep. Have to write letters regarding your judge of character and have it notarized. People really do not understand how involved the process is, then , even after you jump through all the hoops, the judge can be like " you can only carry on the 3rd Tuesday of the month if the sun is out " but this guy over here , he can have an unrestricted permit.
@@kc4664 The evidence brought out by the case was that the "other guy" statistically was either rich, a celebrity, a politician, a judge, or former law enforcement.
I'm in Western NY state. I had no issue getting my concealed carry permit. You have to go through a basic firearms training course (I recommend everyone get as much as possible), get a background check and get fingerprinted. Total cost was under $250. My friend in NYC cannot get one and costs over $600. They will just raise the fees to stop law abiding citizens from a God given right.
@@carljack1921 these yo-yos believe both their lawful and "imagined" rights are handed down from Yahweh himself!! This includes their half-baked political theories, sheep herd views and spoon-fed opinions
But you DON'T hear them saying that all the mass shootings were done PRIOR to this ruling. More restrictions will do nothing to reduce mass shootings because it isn't the law abiding people doing the shootings. The criminals do it because they can feel comfortable with the knowledge the places they want to shoot up will not have anyone with a gun to stop them. I am still for background checks and taking a basic firearms safety class. Just like getting a driver's license, you need to know how to operate a firearm safely. But the "JUST CAUSE" stipulation for requesting a CCW has always been too restrictive.
The shooter in Texas was a law-abiding citizen, he purchased his guns legally. With any luck at all, you will have a personal encounter with a legal gun owner just like him.
For the sake of your parents I hope you're joking because the states regulate that stuff. Impossible to tell with so many clueless zombies wandering around. 🧟🧟♀️🧟♂️
Fed law should require people read the Constitution before commenting. But of course they can't do that since the first amendment of the Constitution says they can't, and the second amendment of the Constitution says they can't do what you want them to do. You should still read it voluntarily.
The Buffalo mass murder was committed with an assault rifle. There was a security guard, a retired police officer with training, who had and used a handgun. The additional difference was that the mass murderer was wearing body armor, and the security guard with the handgun is dead.
civilians dont have access to so called assault rifles, its a stupid made up definition by the news and un-educated leftist who know nothing of firearms.
Only military is allowed armor piercing rounds because they don't want them used on police, but criminals aren't exactly known for obeying the law. He could have been blasted by a .50 cal handgun but you'd say nobody needs something that big. Just because it has 'assault' in the name doesn't make it inherently much worse than any other gun. I would much rather be shot by a rifle under 25m than a shotgun. If they were named peace rifles for self defence you 'take away your rights advocates' would sound so silly talking about how we have to get the peace rifles off the street xD. People are actually more effective at mass murder using an SUV than any firearm
The more people that legally carry a firearm outside of the home the safer things will be. Do you think criminals will be more likely or less likely to shoot up a place, if they know that there might be someone with a gun willing to stop them? That is why most shootings generally happen in gun free zones.
The 2nd amendment also says, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." I'd say gun owners NEED to be part of a WELL REGULATED MILITIA to be able to own guns.
@@billarcher1203 yea is this how you read information only pulling out parts of statements that fit your imaginary world? Read the whole thing well regulated militas and gun ownership is in the same sentence therefore it is intended to be read in the same breathe. Those two are interconnected not seperate from one another.
@@pompey333 A balanced diet, being necessary for a healthy population, the right of the people to keep and bear vegetables shall not be infringed. We have supplements now. So let's ban vegetables because they're no longer necessary for good nutrition.
Ok the fact they only had muskets is obvious. But the fact that our government now has drone planes makes the concept of you defending yourself from the government with your guns simply ridiculous. Let go of this archaic belief that guns make us safer!
They should make tanks and missiles launchers way cheaper so anyone can buy one and defend themselves while in school or on the streets against a bad guy with an assault rifle
The DOJ needs to nail Clarence Thomas and his wide Ginni to the wall! Thomas has Lied since his nomination hearings (sexual harassment against three women: ANITA HILL, Angela Wright and Sukari Hardnett) Clarence Thomas 'failed to disclose his wife's $700,000 salary from conservative think tank' The Heritage Foundation, claiming he [did not understand] Tax Laws and he didn't know how to fill out a basic disclosure form! Mr Thomas failed to comply with the Ethics in Government Act of 1978, which requires all federal judges to disclose their spouse's employer. I guess he DIDN'T KNOW THAT LAW EITHER!
Yes it was a majority, yet 3 justices decided to fall back on their Dem/leftist political views instead of being nonpartisan and doing the job of the supreme court by answering if a law is legal and within the scope of the constitution.
Finally the left will have accept that the rights of American's are not to be decided by far left ideology. American's should have the right to protect themselves. Look at the crime on the streets of New Your City and ask yourself, if someone had a gun and ended one thugs life for battering them, would it stop others thinking of doing the same thing.
