US Supreme Court Expands Gun Rights

[Sequoia]

Supreme Court Strikes Down New York Law on Concealed Weapons (msn.com)

 

Now in all states people can carry guns in public and states can't restrict gun use.   I wonder about criminals and those who have domestic violence protection orders against them.  It was already the case that in states like Washington.  That a protection order can sometimes be issued and yet the perpetrator can still have a gun.  Although merely having a protection order issued doesn't mean that person was convicted.    

[Qapla]

15 minutes ago, JW2017 said:

I wonder about criminals

 

Criminals already carry guns ... regardless of the laws ... breaking laws is why we call them criminals.

 

It is already illegal for convicted felons to own a gun - I don't think that has changed with any of the new laws on guns.

 

 

[GeordieGirl]

8 hours ago, JW2017 said:

 

Now in all states people can carry guns in public and states can't restrict gun use.  

I was reading about this earlier on the BBC.

The way I read it was that other states make their own gun laws: 

 

The court's decision clears the way for legal challenges to similar restrictions in Maryland, California, New Jersey, Hawaii and Massachusetts.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61915237

 

Edited June 24, 2022 by GeordieGirl

[Sequoia]

On 6/23/2022 at 5:44 PM, GeordieGirl said:

I was reading about this earlier on the BBC.

The way I read it was that other states make their own gun laws: 

 

The court's decision clears the way for legal challenges to similar restrictions in Maryland, California, New Jersey, Hawaii and Massachusetts.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61915237

 

The ruling allows for Americans to carry concealed weapons without a permit.

[Nobody]

13 hours ago, JW2017 said:

The ruling allows for Americans to carry concealed weapons without a permit.

It allows law abiding citizens to do what the wealthy aristocratic hypocrites already do. 
Of course we would want to evaluate for ourselves  before we did something like this. Personally I have no desire to carry I will rely on Jehovah. However I do know Elders and sisters who carry for their personal protection. 
1 Thes 4:11

[Shawnster]

27 minutes ago, Your Brother said:

It allows law abiding citizens to do what the wealthy aristocratic hypocrites already do. 
Of course we would want to evaluate for ourselves  before we did something like this. Personally I have no desire to carry I will rely on Jehovah. However I do know Elders and sisters who carry for their personal protection. 
1 Thes 4:11

*** w17 July p. 32 par. 5 Questions From Readers ***

How a Christian chooses to protect himself, his family, or his possessions is, of course, largely a personal matter, as is his choice of employment. That said, Bible principles reflect God’s wisdom and his love for us. Out of regard for those principles, spiritually mature Christians choose not to keep a firearm for protection against other humans. They know that true and lasting security comes to those who demonstrate trust in God by living in harmony with Bible principles.—Ps. 97:10; Prov. 1:33; 2:6, 7.

https://www.jw.org/finder?wtlocale=E&docid=2017484&srctype=wol&srcid=share&par=11

 

Regardless of who we know or their position in the congregation, our understanding of Jehovah’s principles as explained in our publications is quite clear. 

[Nobody]

Not well worded. Bottom line is I don’t think the laws make any difference in the world I live in. I don’t think gun crimes in Chicago or New York will go up or down based on it. I don’t think it will go up or down in Wallkill, It’s just another story, more drama in the news of this messed up, satanic world. 

[Sequoia]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/after-supreme-court-overturned-new-york-s-concealed-carry-law-americans-react/ar-AAYT1E3?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=0ea298d081cd4608a5c902fbd1c0a6ba

Americans react

Edited June 26, 2022 by JW2017

[Shawnster]

SCOTUS makes a ruling on gun laws and people react with "I think that today's ruling by the Supreme Court is dangerous" 

 

SCOTUS makes a ruling on abortion laws and people react with "I think that today's ruling by the Supreme Court is dangerous" 

[cricket246]

The problem is they are laws.. People don’t like being told what to do. 
 

 

[Sheep]

1 hour ago, cricket246 said:

The problem is they are laws.. People don’t like being told what to do.

...unless they are in agreement with the laws...

[Hope]

2 hours ago, Shawnster said:

SCOTUS makes a ruling on gun laws and people react with "I think that today's ruling by the Supreme Court is dangerous" 

 

SCOTUS makes a ruling on abortion laws and people react with "I think that today's ruling by the Supreme Court is dangerous" 

Both can be true.  Looking forward to Jehovah’s perfect laws being observed worldwide soon.. 🙏🏽

[Shawnster]

3 hours ago, Hope said:

Both can be true.  Looking forward to Jehovah’s perfect laws being observed worldwide soon.. 🙏🏽

While you are correct, in reading the social media comments in response to either ruling and you see how quickly people become hyperbolic and polarized in reaction to any decision that doesn't go their way. 

 

Any decision against their opinion is "the worst decision ever."   

[Pabo]

I know of a person who has served with the Australian Defense Forces for a very long time, and he was on an exchange period with the US Armed Forces for 2 years. Even though he lived on the army base with his family, the one thing he said that he felt safer walking the streets of Baghdad or Kabul than that of walking on any street in the USA. He said at least you know who to look at for in those worn-torn countries, even if you were carrying a weapon, as those who were a threat had a reason why to be that threat. Whereas in the US, the locals don't have a reason to be threatened, but are actually are the threat.

 

He has been at various countries where either the local militia or the local Police carry assault weapons, but he doesn't get fazed by it. But he cannot fathom why civilians in the USA buy and carry such weapons. When his US work colleagues ask him whether he was packs a weapon when he is Australia, he said no need to and he didn't have any firearms at home either. He said they only carry a weapon if they are on duty on base, and most of that time it is restricted, or you are training or doing exercises. The only time you had them in within reach is when you were actually on a deployment. His work colleagues just couldn't fathom of not have a firearm within reach.

 

Now we are talking about a person who has been trained to kill (and has killed) having questions about need for civilians for having assault or small firearms.