NYC 1 in 90... after CA's 1 in 30 falls

PeteInNY

Massive FPC Wins: Federal Courts Strike Down Post Office Carry Ban & CA’s “One-Gun-Per-Month” Law

Big wins this week for the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) — federal courts have struck down both the ban on carrying at U.S. post offices and California’s law restricting citizens to one handgun purchase per month.

👉 Full list of recent wins here

Both decisions are major, but it raises a bigger question:
Which of these victories do you think has the biggest national impact?

And let’s not ignore the local angle — here in New York City, the “1-in-90 rule” still limits lawful gun owners to purchasing only one handgun every 90 days. It’s a blatant echo of California’s now-defeated restriction — and just as unconstitutional.

So, how long until NYC’s arbitrary rationing of rights gets its own day in court?
Should we expect these FPC wins to start toppling similar rules here?

Let’s hear your take — which case matters most, and what should come next for New Yorkers living under the same kind of infringements?

69rrdriver

Unfortunately the 2nd isn't a great circuit to work in. They have always bent over backwards to support gun control. I looked the other day to see what openings there were in the 2nd, hoping we could stack it in our favor, but there's nothing now. The supreme court playing around with what cases they accept isn't helping the cause either.

Anthony

Both wins are huge, but the one-gun-per-month decision might end up having the bigger national ripple effect. Once a federal court says you can’t ration a constitutional right in California, it puts every similar rule on shaky ground, including NYC’s “one-in-90” policy. There’s no historical tradition that justifies telling a law-abiding citizen they can only buy a handgun every three months. It’s arbitrary, it’s punitive, and now it looks even more vulnerable. The Post Office ruling matters too, because it chips away at the idea that the government can declare entire everyday locations as “sensitive places” without real justification. But if you’re looking at what hits NYC directly, the purchase-rationing issue is the one that could fall next. These wins are the kind of precedents that start smashing the nonsense restrictions we deal with here.