[daveguy]

Of course the second amendment isn't allowed in his courtroom. It's literally not allowed in any courtroom in the country. It's a courtroom. The only people permitted to have guns in a courtroom in the US are the bailiffs and the judge. Was that a reading comprehension issue, or are you just trying to rile people up?

Sports Arenas and Jails are two other places you might be surprised to learn don't allow the second amendment.

[charcircuit]

The full quote is.

>Do not bring the Second Amendment into this courtroom. It doesn’t exist here. So you can’t argue Second Amendment. This is New York.

This is not about guns in the courtroom. This is a claim that the 2nd amendment of the constitution does not apply to the state of New York.

[daveguy]

Weird. I have seen a bunch of people repeating that quote, but not a single source for the full court transcript. Court transcript are public record, available for request by anyone. So it's real strange no one seems to have a source reference, no? Did you read the transcript? Happen to have a reference?

[throwway120385]

No, what the judge is saying is that just arguing that you're allowed to do whatever "gun things" you want because of the 2nd amendment in a state district court is specious. You can argue the merits of the specific case based on the precedent in that and other courts that have jurisdiction but simply standing up and arguing baldly that the 2nd amendment lets you make guns and sell them without a serial number doesn't carry water. To make that argument you'd first have to take the F out of ATF and roll back a lot of case law that exists at the federal level that does give states the right to enact some controls.

It's a gross oversimplification of what the judge was trying to say to imply that they don't care about the 2nd amendment or the constitution.