she violated the recently passed city law that prohibits civilians from bringing firearms to protests, the police said

At no point in time was anyone menaced or injured as a result of her possessing the firearm

Unless she was threatening someone (the article specifically claims she wasn’t), she will be acquitted. One does not have just one right at a time, one has all their rights all the time.

  • Anticorp
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It’ll definitely get struck down if it makes it that far. You have a right to protest, and you have a right to carry a firearm. They can’t state that you don’t have some of your rights when exercising other rights.

    Edit: this is assuming you can even carry a firearm in NYC, which seems unlikely. I know that when I visited, I checked if I could carry my pocketknife and the answer was no, which seems really fucking lame to someone who has carried a pocket knife his entire life.

    • jordanlund@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      She did have a concealed carry permit and the Supremes just struck down their “May issue” rules and converted them to a “Shall issue” state.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_State_Rifle_%26_Pistol_Association,_Inc._v._Bruen

      “The constitutional right to bear arms in public for self-defense is not ‘a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.’ We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need.”[28]

      • Anticorp
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        the Supremes just struck down their “May issue” rules and converted them to a “Shall issue” state.

        Sweet!