Antigun legislatures react to NYSRPA

Surprising no one. The trick is, will SCOTUS now realize that they don't care about what they say, and respond accordingly.

If they keep this up, SCOTUS should consider declaring the permitting system unconstitutional under Bruen.

I had been sad thinking about all the ways states could block the issuance of permits. But then I realized that they can't get too good at blocking permits, because if only a tiny number of permit applications are granted, then it will be obvious to the Supreme Court that they are violating the right to bear on a large scale. They can find ways to block a fair amount, but they will have to grant many permits if the Supreme Court is willing to enforce.

Does NYC allow retired cops to carry and what standard are they required to meet? What about LEOSA? Are these proposed standards more strict than either of these?

I think it should be hard for states to justify new restrictions when their old restrictions or no restrictions were just fine under existing state law for decades.

It smacks of an overt attempt to quell the exercise of a fundamental constitutional right they are now finally required to recognize. An honest court should look very questioningly at these legislatures new restrictions so suddenly contrived along with the very public statements by politicians that this is being done specifically to counter the exercise of this right and not connected to a legitimate concern about the location Restrictions which weren’t needed just a week ago.

I also suspect they’ll be numerous 14th amendment issues with how they treat retired state employees who now have no LE purpose to their possession exemptions if unequal to the general carry licenses.

Will they have to Vacate their Magazine Bans due to the Bruen Ruling Eventually?

If NY requires 15 hours of live fire,

they had better allow more ranges to open.

"how they treat retired state employees who now have no LE purpose to their possession exemptions if unequal to the general carry licenses."

If NY requires periodic retraining---so many hours per year---they'd better require it of retired peace officers too. Unless the law establishes some threshold of cumulative training that peace officers received through their careers.

Then the non-peace officer population must enjoy the rights that come with satisfying that threshold too.

Then we can discuss the cumulative training that former military members received (how many Expert badges did SSgt Jackson receive in his 8 years?) that are a matter of official government record.

That which is not permitted is forbidden?
Sounds vaguely familiar.

NY gun laws are rather complex, so please correct me on the following.
However, my understanding was that their “unrestricted” licenses, authorized on the recently overturned “proper cause” criterion, did not restrict carry in places such as bars/restaurants, private businesses, public transport, etc. In other words, those licensed under the previous criteria will be greatly restricted if this new state law is upheld.

I view this newly passed legislation to further restrict licensed carry in response to Bruen as a blatant and purposeful subversion of the Bruen ruling. Sadly, this new law will have to be challenged with future litigation. It’s like a bad game of whack-a-mole.

I expect NY to use the line: ‘How Many Divisions Does the SCOTUS Have?’

I would like to see SCOTUS now revise qualified and absolute immunity.

This will take years maybe decades to litigate. Lawyers will built their entire working life with this litigation.