Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion Discuss national gun rights and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-28-2018, 4:29 PM
wolfwood's Avatar
wolfwood wolfwood is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,059
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default Maloney v Rice Challenge to New York State's nunchaku ban

This thread is about the NY legal challenge to New York State's ban on the ownership of nunchucks. This case began in 2003.

In 2000 Jim Maloney, who is a lawyer in New York, was arrested for owning a pair on nunchucks on his own property.

In 2003 he filed a lawsuit as his own lawyer, challenging the nunchaku ban on 2a grounds. Here are most of the pleadings.
http://michellawyers.com/maloney-v-rice/

The trial court and 2nd circuit said the 2a does not protect an individual right.
He goes to the Supreme Court in 2010 and it rules in his favor finding that the Second Amendment confers an individual right.
He goes back to the trial court. Both sides file for summary judgement. The Court denies both sides.

Then there is a trial. The Court could not rule in the State's favor because the State did such a bad job. So instead of ruling in Jim's favor the Court says we are having a second trial!!!

The second trial was just held and both parties submitted legal briefs. Which are linked below.

https://www.scribd.com/document/3872...-Trial-Brief-2

https://mlaus.org/wp-content/uploads...orrections.pdf

15 years and this case is still going because the State of NY does not want Jim Maloney to own two sticks connected by a chain

Now we are waiting for a decision.

If Jim loses he is going to take this to the Second Circuit and this case easily go back to the Supreme Court

Last edited by wolfwood; 08-29-2018 at 11:40 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-28-2018, 5:08 PM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 8,398
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Thanks for the update.

Don't forget Nuccio:
http://michellawyers.com/nuccio-v-duve/

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfwood View Post
If Jim loses he is going to take this to the Second Circuit and this case easily go back to the Supreme Court
Looks like the CA2 "deck" is stacked 2:1 against us.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...Second_Circuit

Thank heaven Trump won and by the time it goes for cert., we should have a favorable Court.
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif

Last edited by Paladin; 08-28-2018 at 5:42 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-28-2018, 5:24 PM
Dan_Eastvale's Avatar
Dan_Eastvale Dan_Eastvale is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 1,396
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

How does one practice martial arts in states with a nunchaku , swords etc ban?

They are an integral tool of the trade?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-28-2018, 5:26 PM
CCWFacts CCWFacts is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,692
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfwood View Post
15 years and this case is still going because the State of NY does not want Jim Maloney to own two sticks connected by a chain
Obviously the state of New York is running so perfectly that they have nothing else to worry about.

BTW the "free hugs guy" who has a sign offering free hugs, and he punches out women who decline his free offer, is back to giving free hugs again. Apparently even with his history of attacks, he's not worth locking up, because reasons.



But you know... let's focus on the important stuff, some weird Japanese stick "weapon" that's generally more dangerous to the guy using it.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-28-2018, 5:35 PM
wolfwood's Avatar
wolfwood wolfwood is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,059
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan_Eastvale View Post
How does one practice martial arts in states with a nunchaku , swords etc ban?

They are an integral tool of the trade?
That's sort of the point. Unless you have spent years training with nunchucks they aren't really a good tool for self defense.

The stated reason in the brief for why they were banned is

New York has substantial, indeed compelling, governmental interests in public safety and crime prevention. Kachalsky v County of Westchester , 701 F3d 81, 97 [2d Cir 2012], cert denied 569 US . The legislative history of the 1974 amendment to Penal Law 265.01 (See Exhibit A) cited to concern that nunchaku would be used by gangs and by individuals who would emulate the famed martial artist actor, Bruce Lee.


Serious?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-28-2018, 5:37 PM
hunterb's Avatar
hunterb hunterb is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: SGV
Posts: 2,994
iTrader: 70 / 100%
Default

New York has been run by cowards since Revolutionary times. Obviously still are. Bunch of Tories....
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnthomas View Post
...The hardest part getting rid of crap is getting started.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-28-2018, 8:31 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 37,676
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan_Eastvale View Post
How does one practice martial arts in states with a nunchaku , swords etc ban?

They are an integral tool of the trade?
In some places, the MA weapons are kept at the school.

In other places, there's a "gentleman's agreement" that students won't be hassled so long as actually enrolled at a MA school and no other 'color' applies to the discovery.

GA's, of course, are not worth the paper they are not written on.
__________________
No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems - of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.
- Thomas Sowell
I've been saying that for years ...

There is no value at all complaining or analyzing or reading tea leaves to decide what these bills really mean or actually do; any bill with a chance to pass will be bad for gun owners.

The details only count after the Governor signs the bills.

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.


Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-09-2018, 7:02 PM
wolfwood's Avatar
wolfwood wolfwood is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,059
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

New Order came out the case keep going.

https://www.scribd.com/document/3927...nt-Trial-Brief
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-09-2018, 9:24 PM
R Dale R Dale is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,458
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

What New York is doing is a sign of a very sick government, they can't keep a person of the street that is causing problems but yet want to imprison people that are not causing any problems all because they have a means of self defense.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-10-2018, 1:58 PM
flygrimm flygrimm is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 32
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

15 Years. Wow. How does one afford 15 years of lawyers, court fees, etc. I'd have been broke after 6 months.

But that's one of their methods. Block everything in the courts and you give up your Rights because you can't afford to keep pushing.

Stuart
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 11-10-2018, 2:12 PM
SAD338 SAD338 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 403
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Personally, I'm glad that we've evolved enough that an Active Chucker isn't a thing.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-10-2018, 4:08 PM
wolfwood's Avatar
wolfwood wolfwood is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,059
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flygrimm View Post
15 Years. Wow. How does one afford 15 years of lawyers, court fees, etc. I'd have been broke after 6 months.

But that's one of their methods. Block everything in the courts and you give up your Rights because you can't afford to keep pushing.

Stuart
Jim is a lawyer and representing himself.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-10-2018, 4:08 PM
wolfwood's Avatar
wolfwood wolfwood is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,059
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SAD338 View Post
Personally, I'm glad that we've evolved enough that an Active Chucker isn't a thing.
well done
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-13-2018, 1:15 PM
wolfwood's Avatar
wolfwood wolfwood is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,059
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

The State filed this today

https://www.scribd.com/document/3931...c-2018-Hearing
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-15-2018, 8:05 PM
BryMan92 BryMan92 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 44
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Obviously, spring-guns and carrying/using mace or stun guns are not constitutionally-protected activities.
Well, I think SCOTUS would disagree on this.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-16-2018, 5:58 PM
Wherryj's Avatar
Wherryj Wherryj is online now
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Livermore
Posts: 8,853
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfwood View Post
That's sort of the point. Unless you have spent years training with nunchucks they aren't really a good tool for self defense.

The stated reason in the brief for why they were banned is

New York has substantial, indeed compelling, governmental interests in public safety and crime prevention. Kachalsky v County of Westchester , 701 F3d 81, 97 [2d Cir 2012], cert denied 569 US . The legislative history of the 1974 amendment to Penal Law 265.01 (See Exhibit A) cited to concern that nunchaku would be used by gangs and by individuals who would emulate the famed martial artist actor, Bruce Lee.


Serious?
Even with years of training, nunchucku are not a good tool for self-defense. The only reason that they were ever used for self-defense is that the Japanese Emperor banned ownership of traditional weapons by the common people. Thus, the common riff raff had to make due with common farming implements for self defense.

Things like the staff (bo), sai, tonfa and nunchuku are all just "make due" implements" because the people weren't allowed to have the real weapons such as katana and wakizashi, pikes, etc.

Look at what's happening in England now. The government bans guns. Criminals are still using guns, but those that can't get guns are now running amok with knives, using acid, running people over with vehicles, building bombs, etc. Where there's a will, there's a way.
__________________
"What is a moderate interpretation of the text? Halfway between what it really means and what you'd like it to mean?"
"The cases will publish forever the discouraging truth that the Supreme Court of the United States favors some laws over others, and is prepared to do whatever it takes to uphold and assist its favorites."
-Antonin Scalia, Supreme Court Justice
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:00 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.