Subscribe now to get the latest news on guns, gear, gun rights, and personal defense delivered straight to your inbox daily!

Required fields are bold...

Email Address:
First Name:
Zip Code:

Judge Blocks NY City “High Capacity” Ban

Big Gulp, c SA

The one on high capacity soda, that is. According to the New York Times, a judge in New York has invalidated the city high capacity soda container ordinance (that would have banned the sale of “large” sodas at NY city establishments, ostensibly to fight obesity) based on the fact that the ban is “arbitrary and capricious,” dealing a massive blow to Mayor Michael Bloomberg and his tyrannical reign over New York City. Which, by the way, is the exact same argument the Tresmonds are making against the “high capacity” magazine ban that was part of the SAFE Act. And if you look into this ruling a bit more, you can see the glimmer of logic and common sense taking hold in the New York judicial system . . .

From the Times:

The judge also wrote that the fact that consumers can receive refills of sodas, as long as the cup size is not larger than 16 ounces, would “defeat and/or serve to gut the purpose the rule.” And the judge also appeared to be skeptical of the purview of the city’s Board of Health, which the Bloomberg administration had maintained has broad powers to better the public’s health. That interpretation, the judge wrote, “would leave its authority to define, create, mandate and enforce limited only by its own imagination,” and “create an administrative Leviathan.”

Let me change a couple words in here real quick . . .

The judge also wrote that the fact that [criminals] can [refill their firearms with new, fully loaded magazines], as long as the [magazine] size is not larger than [7 rounds], would “defeat and/or serve to gut the purpose the rule.” And the judge also appeared to be skeptical of the purview of the [NY Stage legislature], which the Bloomberg administration had maintained has broad powers to [circumvent the Second Amendment]. That interpretation, the judge wrote, “would [invalidate the bill of rights and leave the state governments] limited only by its own imagination,” and “create an administrative Leviathan.”

The exact same logic that was applied to create the “assault soda” legislation was applied to create the magazine capacity restriction legislation. Neither law actually fixes the problem, it instead is a knee-jerk reaction based on absolutely no research that tries to “do something” to fix a perceived problem. Instead of trying to actually present effective solutions, mayors like Michael Bloomberg instead try to legislate against the symptoms rather than the illness. And by doing so, they do more harm than good to their constituents.

At least the judicial system seems to be catching on to their idiotic laws at long last.


  1. avatar JTPhilly says:

    Thank you for posting this. A loss for the Nanny State is a loss. Hope it’s foreshadowing…

  2. avatar Sammy says:

    Damn you! I read the e mail too fast and thought it was the mag limit ban. I was ready to send out for champagne. Then I click on the link just to get a face full of Jumbo haulin’ a Slurpee.

    1. avatar Nick Leghorn says:

      Just practicing for April Fool’s day 😉

      1. avatar Sammy says:

        Man, I was so hoping. But you deliberately worded the title to be a wee bit ambiguous, didn’t you? Crazy gun nut.

      2. avatar DudeBro says:

        Article title and pic are 100% full of pure awesome.

      3. avatar EthanB says:

        You got me pretty good last year with the machine gun registry story.

  3. avatar brian10x says:

    What I never see mentioned in this whole insane argument is that what if I were to buy a “Big Gulp” of diet soda? How does that stupid law reduce obesity in my case? I am a simple man with a limited intellect. Someone please explain this to me.

    1. avatar Peter says:

      I don’t think it would apply since there’s no sugar in that drink

    2. avatar Lemming says:

      1) the ASB wouldn’t have applied to 7-eleven, as they are monitored by a State agency (being a grocery) rather than the City (as are restaurants/delis)

      2) You could still get a “standard capacity cup” for diet soda. As many places just hand you a cup and you fill it, how they would have enforced this is beyond me.

      3) Pizza places and the like could still have sold standard capacity diet soda bottles. Only small regular soda bottles.

      4) The legality of a large cup of coffee would have depended upon who added the sugar/syrup to it.

  4. avatar Silver says:

    I was sort of hoping this goes through. Braindead morons like NYC-ers who vote in and tolerate tyrants like Bloomberg deserve the police state they elected, and all the misery and oppression that comes with it.

    1. avatar Rabbi says:

      While I agree that the people who voted for him, deserve him, the rest don’t

      We don’t get the government that “we” deserve, we get the government “they” deserve.

      1. avatar Bob says:

        This is why democracy as implemented in this country (and everywhere else) is nothing more than tyranny of the majority.

        51% get to tell the other 49% what to do. At the point of a gun.

        1. avatar Silver says:

          Give this man a prize.

    2. avatar Brooklyn in da house says:

      So are you saying that just because we live in the USA we all deserve B.O. as President?

      1. avatar Silver says:

        I’m saying sometimes things need to get bad to wake people up so they can get better. We’ve been treating symptoms for so long without actually attempting to cure the disease. Stopping this soda ban was the treating of a symptom, and will do nothing to curtail the nefarious ambitions of tyrants like Bloomberg and the others.

        1. avatar Brooklyn in da house says:

          What did you have in mind?

        2. avatar Silver says:

          Nothing. I think the nation’s too far gone at this point. Nothing but all-out war will change the landscape back, but I don’t see that happening any time soon.

  5. avatar Sertorius says:

    The primary rationale of the decision, though, was the fact it was passed by the unelected Board of Health, which the judge ruled did not have the authority to do this. In the language of the Times, “And the judge also appeared to be skeptical of the purview of the city’s Board of Health, which the Bloomberg administration had maintained has broad powers to better the public’s health.”

    That’s not going to help on the gun ban, which was passed by the legislature, not a group of unelected bureaucrats appointed by Bloomberg. Further, the power grab by the Board of Health was pretty appalling here. New York courts had already ruled the Board of Health couldn’t ban indoor smoking or pit bulls under the guise of “health regulations.” This was more of the same.

    I’m not complaining, this was a solid and legally correct ruling. But I wouldn’t bet on getting the same kind of help from the NY courts on the gun ban. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit is going to be where the action is there.

    Anyone interested can read the ruling here:

    1. avatar Nor'Easter says:

      I see your point but the SAFE Act is such a mess I can also see an upstate Judge for even the Court of Appeals cutting a chunk out of it, if only to save it from the Supremes – or am I giving them too much credit?

  6. avatar Roll says:

    Another example of Bloomberg and Company trying to turn NY into a concentration camp, when will they pull the Nazi uniforms out of the closet and put up the barbed wire?

  7. avatar Ralph says:

    the glimmer of logic and common sense taking hold in the New York judicial system

    That must have happened after I retired.

  8. avatar great unknown says:

    Reasonably certain that hizzoner’s PAC will pump enough money into the next election to make sure that this judge is not reelected. If glimmers of logic and common sense were allowed to take hold in the New York judicial system, totalitarians like hizzoner would be out of business. Got to stamp them out while they’re still only glimmers.

  9. avatar Nor'Easter says:

    Living in the land of dopey laws is fun, can’t wait to break the next one. Nicely written Nick and I hope your logic holds for the other stuff. By the way, love your Icon.

  10. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

    Wonder if this will discourage Mr. uber nanny from his war on earphones:

    1. avatar lagbolt1138 says:

      “Bloomberg, who apparently has never met a health crusade he didn’t think worthy of embarking on, is launching a campaign to warn people about the risks of losing their hearing from blasting music on their headphones.”

      Well, I have no problem with a campaign to **warn** people about a health issue. It’s the campaign to control them I’m worried about.

  11. avatar Gene says:

    Someone pls remind me, was this the legislation passed under emergency consideration at 3 am?

  12. avatar g says:

    Do they deliver high-capacity sodas? We should all prank Bloomberg by ordering a couple 1,000 or so and have have them dropped off at the NY city’s mayor’s office. Pwahaha.

  13. avatar Randy Drescher says:

    Damn, Now NY’ers have to run their own lives, at least on this matter. daddy bloomberg can hopefully piss up a rope on all his wacked out wants, Randy

  14. avatar Lance says:

    Every one go out and drink a large Pepsi and go haha at Bloomburg.

  15. avatar Greg Camp says:

    What’s disturbing here is that Bloomingbutt can get elected three times–the third time requiring special dispensation–even though he’s done the best to make himself into a parody of a dictator. If ever we needed proof that government must be strictly limited in its powers and the rights of the people must be broadly defined and numbered in great length…

  16. avatar Joe says:

    Large capacity sodas must be banned. Their sole purpose is to make people obese.

  17. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

    “Neither law actually fixes the problem….”

    Hell, when was the last time a politician really understood what the problem was? In the health care debate they insisted that the problem was too many people didn’t have health insurance when the real problem was that health care is so expensive that no one could afford it without insurance.

  18. avatar gringito says:

    Yes..BUT…maybe GUNS are a COMPLETLY different matter!

    Don’t count your chickens before they are hatched!

  19. avatar eugene says:

    too early to say soda drinking constituents won. they plan to appeal this and with enough money coming out of bloomberg’s ears, it’s a toss up still.

  20. avatar Eric says:

    This has nothing to do about guns, you’re turning into a click whore like Adrian Chen.

  21. avatar Nine says:

    It sure is nice to see Bloomberg get knocked down a peg~

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email