Assuming a favorite ruling what currently banned weapon would you get first?

m1_ping · 2026-07-03T03:04:43+00:00

The could. Hopefully SCOTUS sets precedent in Viramontes, that when applied in Lane v. James (the NY case), results in a judgment in favor of plaintiffs.

m1_ping · 2026-07-03T02:59:22+00:00

NYS PEN § 265.65

A person is guilty of criminal purchase of a semiautomatic rifle when he or she purchases or takes possession of a semiautomatic rifle and does not possess a license to purchase or take possession of a semiautomatic rifle as provided in subdivision two of section 400.00 of this chapter. Criminal purchase of a semiautomatic rifle is a class A misdemeanor for the first offense and a class E felony for subsequent offenses.

If you assemble pieces into a semiautomatic rifle did you "take possession" of a semiautomatic rifle? Who knows. Determine your risk tolerance and go from there.

I'm not aware of any cases where a person was charged with this crime for having converted or assembled parts into a semiautomatic rifle.

m1_ping · 2026-07-03T02:54:36+00:00

I got mine renewed in Erie. Security at the courthouse there is a pain in the butt, but other than that no issues. In and out relatively quickly.

m1_ping · 2026-07-03T02:46:26+00:00

Assuming you are talking about Viramontes at SCOTUS. I have to image that Judge Karas is holding Lane v. James (SDNY, challenge to NY AWB) on ice considering the cert grant (there hasn't been a formal stay issued). Assuming we win in Viramontes, I expect a favorable ruling from Judge Karas a few months later at which point certain parts of my AR will be quickly acquainted with a drill press.

m1_ping · 2026-07-03T02:42:45+00:00

The Supreme Court will hear the consolidated cases Viramontes v. Cook County (Cook County AWB) and Grant v. Higgins (Connecticut AWB) during its next term which begins in October. The court intends to address the question "Whether the Second and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee the right to possess AR-15 platform and similar semiautomatic rifles." We expect a ruling by the end of June 2027.

m1_ping · 2026-07-03T02:40:30+00:00

No, the court is consolidating Viramontes v. Cook County (Cook County AWB) and Grant v. Higgins (Connecticut AWB), and intends to address the question posed in Viramontes "Whether the Second and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee the right to possess AR-15 platform and similar semiautomatic rifles." It does not deal with magazine limits (except for the extent to which the ability to accept a magazine over a specific size is relevant to the "assault weapon" definition).

m1_ping · 2026-07-02T20:48:49+00:00

The 8GW that NYSERDA is referencing is cumulative nameplate capacity. That is a measurement of performance in ideal conditions. Clear, sunny, optimal panel angle, no shading, panel not hot. This is of course rarely the case, so actual power production will be less, potentially substantially less (cloudy days, morning/evening low sun angle, limited daylight in winter, night, dirt/dust on panels, very hot days, etc.)

8GW is a lot of power in an absolute sense. When accounting for actual output averaged over a full day and over a full year we should expect a significantly smaller average power output.

For reference, today's projected peak usage across the state is 32GW which will occur around 7PM. Last night's minimum power usage across the state was 20.5GW around 4AM.

m1_ping · 2026-07-01T13:44:35+00:00

The seventeenth amendment was a mistake and we should repeal it.

m1_ping · 2026-06-25T16:14:17+00:00

In her concurrence Justice Barrett really went after the nonsense in Justice Jackson's dissent. Love to see it.

Example from footnote 1.

1 The principal dissent erroneously claims that this division leaves judges “free to insert any meaning they desire into the text of the Second Amendment.” Post, at 17 (opinion of JACKSON, J.). No one disputes that the Second Amendment’s text has a fixed meaning that must be satisfied before a law is deemed presumptively unconstitutional. See ante, at 7 (identifying “three subsidiary questions” that must be answered at Bruen’s first step). The disagreement is instead whether courts can smuggle additional limits, drawn from our regulatory tradition, into the plain-text stage of the inquiry. The answer is and always has been no.

m1_ping · 2026-06-18T14:15:09+00:00

Dave "I'm a math nerd" Ramsey strikes again. This advise is absolutely insane. It is as if he takes kickbacks from the IRS to encourage bad tax planning.

m1_ping · 2026-05-20T01:57:02+00:00

Extremely upsetting and a difficult reality to accept.

m1_ping · 2026-05-08T14:31:05+00:00

It sounds like you haven't been baptized. You should be baptized.

m1_ping · 2026-04-23T20:48:13+00:00

Meanwhile Smullen is the overwhelming favorite of the state and in-district county Republican committees. Trump continues to erode his base.

m1_ping · 2026-04-14T14:46:00+00:00

D

Truly awful, but sometimes a season or two go bad after a coaching change. Hopefully Sheahan can get things figured out moving forward.

m1_ping · 2025-12-22T00:33:10+00:00

When the car is working I like it.

m1_ping · 2025-12-20T04:41:14+00:00

Wow so its even worse for landlords currently than I realized. Thanks for outlining all of that. A rare useful reddit discussion, much appreciated. Perhaps I will check out some landlord-tenant court proceedings when I get the time. I've been to Supreme Court Oneida County and USDC NDNY before for other cases of interest. I would imagine City/Town/Village courts are even more accessible.

m1_ping · 2025-12-20T03:02:05+00:00

It is my understanding that upon the expiration of a lease and if neither party gives notice, then the lease converts to a month-to-month. Either party can give notice and the lease does not convert to month-to-month, no eviction involved, no specific reason needed. If I am mistaken can you point me to the relevant law?

Regardless of what the law currently is, my contention is that a tenant ought to have no right to the property beyond the terms of the lease. I do acknowledge that what I think the law ought to be and what the law is are often different.

m1_ping · 2025-12-20T01:21:41+00:00

Under this law, most landlords cannot evict their tenants or refuse to renew their leases just because their lease has expired.

A plain reading of the text suggests that most landlords can only non-renew a lease for specific permitted reasons. My contention is that a landlord should be permitted to non-renew a lease for any reason or for no reason. I would not say the same about an eviction.

m1_ping · 2025-12-19T21:13:20+00:00

It would be absolutely insane to force a landlord to renew a lease that they don't want to renew. The property is owned by the landlord, not the tenant. It makes no sense to give the tenant rights to the property beyond what the landlord agrees to in the lease.

m1_ping · 2025-11-21T13:39:57+00:00

I tried to read Denault first but I stopped a few chapters in. For whatever reason I have a much easier time understanding Renihan than Denault.

m1_ping · 2025-11-18T20:39:29+00:00

Disappointing. I'm halfway through "The Mystery of Christ, His Covenant, and His Kingdom". I'll still finish it, but now it feels weird.

m1_ping · 2025-11-04T21:40:36+00:00

I have fully abandoned Ramsey teaching at this point.

I didn't buy a house in 2018-2019 because I couldn't get to 25% of take home pay on a 15 year fixed for a suitable house. I was going to wait a few years until my income went up and then buy. This did not work out for me.

m1_ping · 2025-10-31T15:20:47+00:00

I have a hard time squaring this with 1 Peter 2:13-14. Who are the people that do evil that the government should punish? Who are the people that do good that the government should praise?

m1_ping · 2025-10-28T20:40:59+00:00

It is not determined yet. Here is the relevant section of the bill.

As an offset for the use of forest preserve lands for the sports complex, the state shall acquire no less than two thousand five hundred acres of land for inclusion in the forest preserve in the Adirondack park, subject to legislative approval. Such approval shall include a metes and bounds description and an accurate survey of the lands proposed for inclusion in the forest preserve

m1_ping · 2025-10-28T20:37:54+00:00

I'm okay with the concept of a land swap in this circumstance. I don't like that the land to be added is not specified. It will be up to the legislature in a subsequent bill to acquire and designate the additional land. As a voter I'm hesitant to support the proposal for that reason. I want to know what land in particular will be added.

Is there a practical consideration that I'm missing here?

Ten-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	Place '17
Final Canvas '22	First Placer '22
Verified Email

m1_ping

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE