Image 01 Image 03

NY Gov. Hochul Loses Her Mind Over SCOTUS Ruling Striking Down Conceal Carry Law

NY Gov. Hochul Loses Her Mind Over SCOTUS Ruling Striking Down Conceal Carry Law

Your tears are delicious, Hochul.

SCOTUS ruled 6-3 against New York’s concealed carry law that said you have to give probable cause to carry your handgun outside of your house.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul thinks it’s “outrageous” that six SCOTUS justices voted in favor of you exercising your natural right to bear arms.

Cry harder, sweetheart. “Shall not be infringed.” This isn’t hard.

Safe from gun violence? Look at NYC, sweetheart.

Hochul is bound and determined to take away your right to bear arms. That Fourteenth Amendment can be pesky when it goes against you. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote:

In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. 570 (2008), and McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U. S. 742 (2010), we recognized that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect the right of an ordinary, law-abiding citizen to possess a handgun in the home for self-defense. In this case, petitioners and respondents agree that ordinary, law-abiding citizens have a similar right to carry handguns publicly for their self-defense. We too agree, and now hold, consistent with Heller and McDonald, that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Every time I see her picture I think of the Adamms Family.

taurus the judge | June 23, 2022 at 11:09 am

No, Morticia had class

See NY try to find loopholes, like carrying ammunition outside of the home in a secure purse instead of loaded in a gun. These guys will never give up.

    CommoChief in reply to Oracle. | June 23, 2022 at 11:54 am

    Maybe but there’s already precedent that prohibits that sort of restriction. The govt cannot via reg render a right meaningless. Can they make the process less than efficient? Sure. NY will no doubt try to make it hard to acquire a permit through training requirements and fees but they can only go so far or they will will get slapped down again.

    Eventually a PO SCOTUS might just envision some sort of pre clearance for NY and other jurisdictions who habitually seek to deprive Citizens of the ability to exercise their constitutional rights. We can hope.

      try to make it hard to acquire a permit through training requirements and fees
      Which sort of thing was addressed (I think) in the decision. Or perhaps in another referenced decision. You can’t put a price on a right so high it will make it class dependent.

        CommoChief in reply to GWB. | June 23, 2022 at 1:18 pm

        On a straight fee basis to issue the permit you are correct. However if they say complete X hours of training and Y of that is on the range sending rounds into targets it would be expensive from an ammunition purchase perspective but probably legal. If they require the training be conducted by private instructors with some narrow set of qualifications v NRA instructors that’s another way to impose a financial barrier that might hold up.

        Your point and mine is that there is a level of regulation and requirements that are legal but there’s also a level above that which becomes unreasonable. There is some precedent on where that point exists but I expect NY to push those boundaries.

        henrybowman in reply to GWB. | June 23, 2022 at 1:33 pm

        Topically to LI, this was once a problem in Rhode Island. There was only one approved carry course. It was given by the state. It was scheduled only once a year. There were a limited number of seats. If you didn’t “know someone,” there was never a seat for you.

        One more proof that any government power that CAN be abused, WILL be abused.

          As I recall, there was a column series once (name) Gets Her Gun (blanking on the name) where she documents every step needed to get a gun and carry concealed in her state. Things like the license office being open only one day a month, requiring an appointment, you could only buy your carry gun from one approved gun store, a week waiting period, you had to take the gun home in a locked box, etc…

          We out here in Flyover Country were baffled. Our gun purchase/carry process takes about a half-hour and most of that is checking out a good holster while the background check is processing.

          henrybowman in reply to henrybowman. | June 23, 2022 at 3:42 pm

          That was Emily Miller of the Washington Times, in DC.

      Another Voice in reply to CommoChief. | June 23, 2022 at 2:09 pm

      Not a gun owner in New York, but reside here. The law reviewed by SCOTUS was not the 1rst requirement that a side arm when purchased needs to be registered with the state or that the owner be licenced. As I read the decision it address the 2nd part of the law which states the owner needs to also be a permitted carrier of that gun outside their home. What was pointed out was only exceptional situations would qualify a person to receive that required state permit. You now need only register your gun and I do believe like hunters, need to be certified in handling and safety of that fire arm. Owning a side arm in NYS now entitles you to carry that sidearm on your person anywhere within the state.

        So, you are saying they will make training for gun handling impossible to obtain.

          Another Voice in reply to Neo. | June 23, 2022 at 8:41 pm

          Hochul is probably looking into doing something. As it stands in NY now, all hunters wanting a hunting license for game hunting, must have a certificate of qualification on gun safety to obtain a specific game license. That comes under the Dept. of Environmental Conservation. It would be hard to make a case where one is OK and the other NOT. If it were to happen it could be another case on appeals based on NYS actions to avoid having to adhere to the ruling handed down Thursday. Democrat NY “whoever” is in Albany hate being taken to the woodshed and do not hesitate litigating for any work around they come up with.

        CommoChief in reply to Another Voice. | June 23, 2022 at 5:54 pm

        As a practical matter the CT today decided that States can choose to be either:
        1. Constitutional carry
        2. Shall issue permitted carry
        They have in essence eliminated ‘may issue’ permitted carry as an option. Please consult an attorney in your area who has experience in firearms laws before deciding to act upon what you believe to be the current state of the law in NY re carrying a weapon.

    MattMusson in reply to Oracle. | June 23, 2022 at 12:24 pm

    An armed populice really, really has them worried.

      artichoke in reply to MattMusson. | June 23, 2022 at 12:52 pm

      that never voted for Hochul and probably thinks it would have been reasonable for her to be moderate and sort of a caretaker until and if she wins an election.

I cannot stand this woman.

2smartforlibs | June 23, 2022 at 11:49 am

unelectd trash

Now do California.

This means we don’t need to beg for our Constitutional rights, Leftists cope and seethe on schedule.

Hell, you don’t even need a permit to carry concealed in my state. The percentage of households with at least 1 firearm are up in the 70% range, and we have one of lowest violent crime rates in the country.

Literally one of the most armed and safest places to live in America. I’d say Hochul could learn something from our state, but we all know leftists aren’t capable of such a thing.

    artichoke in reply to SField. | June 23, 2022 at 12:55 pm

    I bet your state and local judicial systems are prepared to take out of circulation the very rare individual who demonstrates the inability to handle firearm ownership responsibly, and uses them to threaten other members of the public.

      henrybowman in reply to artichoke. | June 23, 2022 at 1:35 pm

      Or at the very least are prepared NOT to take out the individual who does their jobs for them and processes an occasional goblin that immediately needs to be taken out.

        SField in reply to henrybowman. | June 23, 2022 at 2:09 pm

        The laws here regarding self defense and the use of deadly force are straightforward and lean decidedly in the favor of the armed citizen/homeowner. Goblins beware.

      SField in reply to artichoke. | June 23, 2022 at 1:57 pm

      There’s a gravel pit that’s away from town that would be a great place for plinking. Good backstop, very safe. But, it’s technically within town limits.

      From time to time someone misses the sign and makes the mistake of doing some target shooting there, and the local Sheriff lets them know they can’t shoot there, and points them down the road to another pit that is outside of town limits and legal. No hassle, no problem.

      Last year two drunks got in a fight in the bowling alley parking lot, and one of them pulls out a revolver and fires a round at the other, narrowly missing him and some bystanders. That same Sheriff took him in, and that guy will be an old man by the time he gets out of prison.

      They don’t hassle people who make an honest mistake like the technicality with the gravel pit, but pull something like at the bowling alley, and they’ll drop the boom on you, as it should be. They system here still works as it was meant to.

        henrybowman in reply to SField. | June 23, 2022 at 3:44 pm

        The’ll fix that as soon as one non-white non-male whines to the DOJ that the local cops treated him with disrespect.

At the same time the “log-jam” in Washington may be coming to an end. It must be liberating for Cornyn and the other senators to be free of the shackles of the Constitution to set aside individual rights for “good public policy” of the collective. There is a lot of money to be made creating “good public policy” and earning favorable comments in WaPo , NYT and LAT! Too bad there isn’t an immediate Red Flag Law when the Constitution is threatened. It will be 4 years too late for many of the GOPe. Democrat Republicans As Now Obvious… DRANO.

Bucktooth Barbie has a lot to be mad about these days, but the only thing that’s making her happy is that our population is shedding itself of the bitter/clingers that would vote against her. Sad thing (for her) about that, is that we’re the ones who are siphoning off the public pension trough and there are fewer ones to replenish it. Oh well.
I’m taillights just as soon as I can get my sh(t together and head south.

The Supreme Court has recklessly demanded that the law be obeyed!

Imagine the nerve …

    JackinSilverSpring in reply to irv. | June 23, 2022 at 1:01 pm

    It has always amazed me how the penumbra of the Constitution had more import than a written parts of the Constitution. This wrong has now been somewhat righted.

JackinSilverSpring | June 23, 2022 at 12:55 pm

I live in the Peoples Republic of Maryland inside the Peoples district of Montgomery County (hence, Silver Spring appearing in my moniker). I wonder how the DemoncRats here will try to circumscibe this hostoric Supreme Court decision?

JackinSilverSpring | June 23, 2022 at 1:01 pm

It has always amazed me how the penumbra of the Constitution had more import than a written parts of the Constitution. This wrong has now been somewhat righted.

My condolences….50-70 years ago when I grew up in “Monkey” County, it was a great place live with some of the best public schools in the country. In those days, a trip from Bethesda/Silver Spring to Poolsville was an exotic adventure, now just a D.C. suburb.

Eat sh*t, communist. Then learn how to read and interpret plain, written English.

The spirit of Bernie Goetz lives on.

What the governor does not understand is that enforcement of the law is what holds together the civil society. If you exercise your right to carry a gun and then wave it at a driver who cut you off, you should go to jail for at least a decade — and be denied of your right to carry forever (you are a menace). That will stop that behavior in its tracks.

But when liberal prosecutors fail to prosecute gun crimes or those who committed those crimes are out of jail in a year, then gun violence will not go away. The liberal’s knee-jerk response is to excuse the criminal in deference to racism and punish the law-abiding for exercising white privilege.

Alas, poor unelected Kathy. Couldn’t get thru her signature piece of legislation. mI guess that means the libs of NY will dump her!

smalltownoklahoman | June 23, 2022 at 2:44 pm

A good decision and a great day for gun rights!

The opinion has this little gem from Thomas:

A short prologue is in order. Even before the Civil War commenced in 1861, this Court indirectly affirmed the importance of the right to keep and bear arms in public. Writing for the Court in Dred Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. 393 (1857), Chief Justice Taney offered what he thought was a parade of horribles that would result from recognizing that free blacks were citizens of the United States. If blacks were citizens, Taney fretted, they would be entitled to the privileges and immunities of citizens, including the right “to keep and carry arms wherever they went .” Id., at 417 (emphasis added). Thus, even Chief Justice Taney recognized (albeit unenthusiastically in the case of blacks) that public carry was a component of the right to keep and bear arms—a right free blacks were often denied in antebellum America.

    smalltownoklahoman in reply to Neo. | June 23, 2022 at 3:25 pm

    Oooh, I like that! Makes it harder for opponents of this decision to call it racist without looking like fools.

    henrybowman in reply to Neo. | June 23, 2022 at 3:48 pm

    Somebody’s been reading the copy of “Supreme Court Gun Cases” that Alan Korwin sent him.

E Howard Hunt | June 23, 2022 at 4:45 pm

Just one more hard thing for her to swallow.

Supreme Court’s decision to expand gun rights will have deadly repercussions, gun-safety advocates warn

Really? How about comparing the incidents of gun crime committed by citizens with concealed carry permits vs. the rest?

Then research how many violent crimes have been deterred by concealed carry holders.

Then explain the reasoning for your ridiculous ‘warning’.

You childish putz of a propagandist.

HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa (take a breath) HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa (I’m dying over here) HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa YOU HAD IT COMING, YOU IGNORANT SLUT !!!!!!!!

I liked her comment that she’s ok with muskets as those were the guns during the revolution. She missed cannons, armed ships, the Puckle Gun albeit the “first machine gun” for some LYING democrat inspired reason.
But what I want to do is remind her women were also NOT allowed to vote. So if she wants to allow only muskets then I want us to go back to women not being allowed to vote. Which could mean she’d have to take off her shoes and go back to the kitchen.