New NYS gun legislation????????

[High Bidder]

I know how you guys feel. I felt the same for years in that I had to surrender my right to carry a handgun everytime I went to NY. I felt like a 2nd class citizen. Here in PA we are also controlled by the city voter majority. Rural people are tolerated only because their taxes support the cities social programs. I don't know where PA is headed in this deal but I'm sure it will be for the worse.

High Bidder

[Shorthanded]

IMHO...debating the intricacies of the new laws is not what we should be focused on at this time, but rather how we are going to quickly become solidified as a group of like citizens and become annoyingly active and vocal in fighting against these and future politically motivated aggressions against our freedom, in particular veiled actions that do nothing to solve the issues for which they are being justified. The cards are stacking against us.

The days of simply writing a check and letting the NRA handle it are over. We can no longer sit back and be passive...the time has come to get off the couch/computer and do something more, and NOW.

[Sk8man]

Last night I wrote a lengthy letter to the N.Y.S. Assembly Minority Leader Brian Kolb He is actively involved in this issue and voted against it so folks may wish to send him your comments for starters.

Here is his email address: [email protected]

P.S. Even the anti-gun people should be upset about this as it is is an infringement on everyone's rights when the government makes its own decisions affecting the citizenry and the opportunity for input, commentary, or due process is aborted. This was decided behind closed doors and then rammed down the legislatures throat by the governor essentially thwarting any input that would be truly representative of the people of the state (either way)....that is exactly what totalitarian states do to their citizenry.

[Legacy]

Assemblyman Steve McLaughlin discusses the New York SAFE Act

[Diversion]

IMHO...debating the intricacies of the new laws is not what we should be focused on at this time, but rather how we are going to quickly become solidified as a group of like citizens and become annoyingly active and vocal in fighting against these and future politically motivated aggressions against our freedom, in particular veiled actions that do nothing to solve the issues for which they are being justified. The cards are stacking against us..

EXACTLY!!! United we will stand, divided we will fall. The in-fighting among gun owners / sportsmen etc needs to combine into a united stand against losing our freedoms

[on the lam]

Well this guy was ahead of his time in terms of this recent anti gun craze.!

http://www.texemarrs.com/061997/gun_control.htm

[Legacy]

A good read...

If you're anti gun or at least not upset by the SAFE act please read this post. Reposted with permission from nyfirearms.com :

Hey guys, I was speaking with a non gun owner the other day, and it struck me how she just didn't get why an assault weapons ban is such a big deal. Thought about it for a bit, and typed this up. Please tell me what you think, and feel free to spread it around if you think it will make a difference. Thanks.

Imagine that you’re a law abiding, sensible, responsible citizen (as I’m sure you are anyway). You own a nice car that you take care of, and have a significant amount of money invested in. You use your vehicle every day for lawful purposes, and you could not imagine life without it. You try to never break traffic laws, and you never drive while intoxicated. In fact, you’ve gone out of your way to ensure that if you’re going to be at a party or a bar where you may be drinking, you get a ride, carpool, or even take a cab ( at additional expense to yourself) to comply with the law. In every way you are a model citizen, and you have never made the mistake of drinking and getting behind the wheel.

One day, a man who is having marriage problems goes to a bar, drinks too much, and tries to drive himself home. On the way, he runs a red light and hits a minivan with a young family of five inside, on the way to their vacation home not too far away. No one survives the accident, including the drunk driver. The accident is highly publicized, with political leaders and the media calling for stricter laws to prevent this sort of thing in the future. The debate rages on for weeks, with each side becoming more and more vocal.

A few weeks later after you drive home from work, you turn on the news. The headline of the day is that the state legislature has passed a comprehensive new ban on drunk driving, even though it has already been banned for twenty years. The new law is much more restrictive, and according to the media, will save lives at only the cost of a few inconveniences.

The new law requires all cars manufactured to come with a built in blood alcohol content interlock, to ensure that the operator is sober before starting the car. In addition, all newly manufactured vehicles may not have fuel tanks over five gallons in size, and may not be capable of exceeding 55 miles per hour. This of course is to both reduce the severity of potential future incidents, and to reduce the ability of intoxicated drivers to flee from the police. The police and government of course do not have to abide by these arbitrary limits, and the politicians who passed this ban have specially licensed chauffeurs allowed to own performance vehicles with high capacity fuel tanks. The last portion of the ban on vehicles specifies a list of features that a vehicle may not have. These include traction control, spoilers, air scoops, dual exhausts, and eight cylinder engines.

“Well†you think, “This won’t affect me. I already own my vehicle, and I’m not planning on buying one for at least a couple of years.†You’re wrong. The lawmakers have thought of that too. All cars built before the law was enacted are required to have an interlock installed, at owner expense. The interlock must be inspected and registered with the state, and recertified every five years, with a fee each time. This applies to all vehicles, regardless of the owner’s driving history, and the fact that you’ve gone out of your way and spent extra money in the past to comply with the existing laws. Vehicles currently owned are also not allowed to be sold within the state. When you decide to dispose of your current vehicle, you must sell to an out of state buyer, or surrender it to state police to be destroyed, without compensation. You also may not give it to your child for their first vehicle. Your high capacity fuel tank is now banned. Even though the tank was the standard capacity when the vehicle was manufactured, if it now holds more than five gallons you must register it with the state. High capacity fuel tanks may no longer be filled with more than five gallons. If you are caught with more than five gallons of fuel in your tank, you face a misdemeanor charge. Fuel is also highly controlled under the new law. You no longer may go down to your local station and fill up anonymously. You now have to go to a government controlled fuel station, submit to a blood alcohol content test, and pay a fee every time you fuel your vehicle. In addition, every fuel sale is reported to the government. Any fuel purchases over five gallons are considered unusual, and may be investigated by the state government. Also, because this law went into effect today while you were at work, you were unknowingly in violation, because you had a full tank at the beginning of the day.

After you hear all this on the news, you think that they must have made a mistake. You, a responsible, taxpaying, law abiding driver, are being treated like a common criminal. You’ve gone out of your way to comply with the former DWI laws, but now they’re treating you as a scapegoat.

Welcome to the world of being a gun owner

[skipper19]

A good read...

If you're anti gun or at least not upset by the SAFE act please read this post. Reposted with permission from nyfirearms.com :

Hey guys, I was speaking with a non gun owner the other day, and it struck me how she just didn't get why an assault weapons ban is such a big deal. Thought about it for a bit, and typed this up. Please tell me what you think, and feel free to spread it around if you think it will make a difference. Thanks.

Imagine that you’re a law abiding, sensible, responsible citizen (as I’m sure you are anyway). You own a nice car that you take care of, and have a significant amount of money invested in. You use your vehicle every day for lawful purposes, and you could not imagine life without it. You try to never break traffic laws, and you never drive while intoxicated. In fact, you’ve gone out of your way to ensure that if you’re going to be at a party or a bar where you may be drinking, you get a ride, carpool, or even take a cab ( at additional expense to yourself) to comply with the law. In every way you are a model citizen, and you have never made the mistake of drinking and getting behind the wheel.

One day, a man who is having marriage problems goes to a bar, drinks too much, and tries to drive himself home. On the way, he runs a red light and hits a minivan with a young family of five inside, on the way to their vacation home not too far away. No one survives the accident, including the drunk driver. The accident is highly publicized, with political leaders and the media calling for stricter laws to prevent this sort of thing in the future. The debate rages on for weeks, with each side becoming more and more vocal.

A few weeks later after you drive home from work, you turn on the news. The headline of the day is that the state legislature has passed a comprehensive new ban on drunk driving, even though it has already been banned for twenty years. The new law is much more restrictive, and according to the media, will save lives at only the cost of a few inconveniences.

The new law requires all cars manufactured to come with a built in blood alcohol content interlock, to ensure that the operator is sober before starting the car. In addition, all newly manufactured vehicles may not have fuel tanks over five gallons in size, and may not be capable of exceeding 55 miles per hour. This of course is to both reduce the severity of potential future incidents, and to reduce the ability of intoxicated drivers to flee from the police. The police and government of course do not have to abide by these arbitrary limits, and the politicians who passed this ban have specially licensed chauffeurs allowed to own performance vehicles with high capacity fuel tanks. The last portion of the ban on vehicles specifies a list of features that a vehicle may not have. These include traction control, spoilers, air scoops, dual exhausts, and eight cylinder engines.

“Well†you think, “This won’t affect me. I already own my vehicle, and I’m not planning on buying one for at least a couple of years.†You’re wrong. The lawmakers have thought of that too. All cars built before the law was enacted are required to have an interlock installed, at owner expense. The interlock must be inspected and registered with the state, and recertified every five years, with a fee each time. This applies to all vehicles, regardless of the owner’s driving history, and the fact that you’ve gone out of your way and spent extra money in the past to comply with the existing laws. Vehicles currently owned are also not allowed to be sold within the state. When you decide to dispose of your current vehicle, you must sell to an out of state buyer, or surrender it to state police to be destroyed, without compensation. You also may not give it to your child for their first vehicle. Your high capacity fuel tank is now banned. Even though the tank was the standard capacity when the vehicle was manufactured, if it now holds more than five gallons you must register it with the state. High capacity fuel tanks may no longer be filled with more than five gallons. If you are caught with more than five gallons of fuel in your tank, you face a misdemeanor charge. Fuel is also highly controlled under the new law. You no longer may go down to your local station and fill up anonymously. You now have to go to a government controlled fuel station, submit to a blood alcohol content test, and pay a fee every time you fuel your vehicle. In addition, every fuel sale is reported to the government. Any fuel purchases over five gallons are considered unusual, and may be investigated by the state government. Also, because this law went into effect today while you were at work, you were unknowingly in violation, because you had a full tank at the beginning of the day.

After you hear all this on the news, you think that they must have made a mistake. You, a responsible, taxpaying, law abiding driver, are being treated like a common criminal. You’ve gone out of your way to comply with the former DWI laws, but now they’re treating you as a scapegoat.

Welcome to the world of being a gun owner

Don't forget that all out of state drivers, or gun owners, will report their crossing the state line and must comply with these laws as well as register their car, or firearm, with the state of NY and pay a fee or be denied entry if your car or firearm is not exempt from NY state law.

Welcome to the imperial territory of what was NY.

Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.

A variation of Ben Franklin quote

Gather the flock.

[ Post made via Android ]

[Capt Vince Pierleoni]

This country is so split 50/50 on so many issues, I'm afraid we are heading for another civil war. It's like the other 50% is a different species. Perhaps the administration knows this and is preparing. The rush-job move by NYS governor was definitely a posture play for a Presidential run. Sadly, there are too many people who fall for this manipulation. All this will do is create a bigger underground criminal element selling guns to other criminals. Eventually, people trying to abide by the law will rush into other legal(but not well thought out) means of self defense, and Chaos will ensue. Imagine all the unqualified dog trainers/dealers who will pop up.

I remember when I saw the movie "Hunger games", thinking "man, this could happen."

[Chas0218]

This country is so split 50/50 on so many issues, I'm afraid we are heading for another civil war. It's like the other 50% is a different species. Perhaps the administration knows this and is preparing. The rush-job move by NYS governor was definitely a posture play for a Presidential run. Sadly, there are too many people who fall for this manipulation. All this will do is create a bigger underground criminal element selling guns to other criminals. Eventually, people trying to abide by the law will rush into other legal(but not well thought out) means of self defense, and Chaos will ensue. Imagine all the unqualified dog trainers/dealers who will pop up.

I remember when I saw the movie "Hunger games", thinking "man, this could happen."

Spot on my man!

[frm03064]

Im all for responsible gun ownership, and reasonable gun legislation. What ive seen in the past month has been neither one... Ive seen gun owners flocking to the stores to stock up on 30 round magazines incase of a "zombie apocolypse"...seriously if you believe in zombies you have no business owning a gun... and ive seen politicians push through legislation that does little more than make people feel better...

Fundementally everyone should have a right to keep a handgun or long gun in their home to protect their property, presuming they are not mentally ill or a criminal. I agree 100% with any law that improves the background check process on gun purchasers. Sure, you might have to wait a little longer to buy a gun, but if it keeps a single nutjob or felon from buying a gun, which it does, im all for it. I also have no problem making "straw purchases" explicitly illegal. That being said, only 12% of the guns used in crimes are purchased through a licensed dealer or retailer, so to believe that improving background checks is a fix-all is naive. The overwhelming majority of guns used in crimes are 'street guns'...the purchasers of whom have no regards for any law... If your going to break the most grave law of all, and murder, do you really care if you broke the law when you bought your gun in exchange for crack? Ultimately the best way to decrease illegal gun crime and use is probably to get serious about cracking down on street level drug crime. The two walk hand in hand.

As for legislation that limits firearms physically, i tend to fall pretty center of the line on it... Alot of the pro-gun crowd screams and whines over ANY legislation that limits types of firearms. lets face it- THERE SHOULD BE some limit on the weaponry a private citizen can posess. You realistically do not need 30 round magazines, fully automatics or bazookas to protect your property. That being said, i think the 7 round limit being imposed is woefully inadequate and essentially made a huge number of gun owners in violation of the law overnight, simply because the majority of guns are fitted with 10 round magazines or more. The 7 round limit will push gun makers out of new york, leave homeowners with the choice of a bolt-action or revolver to protect their land- both of which are insufficient in my opinion given the types of weapons thieves are wielding, and in the long run of things it will do NOTHING to prevent gun violence or limit its effects. its just a way for the politicians to look like they are doing SOMETHING. Along similar lines, anything that bans a specific gun simply because of what color it is, how it looks or the furniture on it is similarly useless...

So what would work?? What is reasonable? The parts about improving background checks, making straw purchases illegal and keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill- thats all reasonable... As for the guns themselves... The limits on them should be simple: No more then 10 rounds, No Fully automatics, No silencers. Bar those three things, anything else is resonable for a responsible gun owner to keep to protect his property and family and to participate in hunting.

I just finished reading the president's draft plan on the issue, and i cant believe the amount of money being tossed towards mental health, school counselors, medical research into gun violence, etc.... Theres alot of money being earmarked towards things that MIGHT fix the problem SOMEDAY... when for half as much money they could of put a few cops in every school and FIXED the problem TODAY. as an added benefit you might see less drug crime in schools and have a trained emergency responder in the school to respond to medical emergencies until EMS arrives... If someone is absolutely crazy no amount of voluntary counselling in the world will keep them from killing. but a well trained police officer will everytime.

[Mortigan]

All three of your "simple limits" were ALREADY illegal in New York. Fully automatic weapons and silencers have been illegal for decades most places in the country, except under very strict federal licensing requirements.

[Chas0218]

Im all for responsible gun ownership, and reasonable gun legislation. What ive seen in the past month has been neither one... Ive seen gun owners flocking to the stores to stock up on 30 round magazines incase of a "zombie apocolypse"...seriously if you believe in zombies you have no business owning a gun... and ive seen politicians push through legislation that does little more than make people feel better...

Fundementally everyone should have a right to keep a handgun or long gun in their home to protect their property, presuming they are not mentally ill or a criminal. I agree 100% with any law that improves the background check process on gun purchasers. Sure, you might have to wait a little longer to buy a gun, but if it keeps a single nutjob or felon from buying a gun, which it does, im all for it. I also have no problem making "straw purchases" explicitly illegal. That being said, only 12% of the guns used in crimes are purchased through a licensed dealer or retailer, so to believe that improving background checks is a fix-all is naive. The overwhelming majority of guns used in crimes are 'street guns'...the purchasers of whom have no regards for any law... If your going to break the most grave law of all, and murder, do you really care if you broke the law when you bought your gun in exchange for crack? Ultimately the best way to decrease illegal gun crime and use is probably to get serious about cracking down on street level drug crime. The two walk hand in hand.

As for legislation that limits firearms physically, i tend to fall pretty center of the line on it... Alot of the pro-gun crowd screams and whines over ANY legislation that limits types of firearms. lets face it- THERE SHOULD BE some limit on the weaponry a private citizen can posess. You realistically do not need 30 round magazines, fully automatics or bazookas to protect your property. That being said, i think the 7 round limit being imposed is woefully inadequate and essentially made a huge number of gun owners in violation of the law overnight, simply because the majority of guns are fitted with 10 round magazines or more. The 7 round limit will push gun makers out of new york, leave homeowners with the choice of a bolt-action or revolver to protect their land- both of which are insufficient in my opinion given the types of weapons thieves are wielding, and in the long run of things it will do NOTHING to prevent gun violence or limit its effects. its just a way for the politicians to look like they are doing SOMETHING. Along similar lines, anything that bans a specific gun simply because of what color it is, how it looks or the furniture on it is similarly useless...

So what would work?? What is reasonable? The parts about improving background checks, making straw purchases illegal and keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill- thats all reasonable... As for the guns themselves... The limits on them should be simple: No more then 10 rounds, No Fully automatics, No silencers. Bar those three things, anything else is resonable for a responsible gun owner to keep to protect his property and family and to participate in hunting.

I just finished reading the president's draft plan on the issue, and i cant believe the amount of money being tossed towards mental health, school counselors, medical research into gun violence, etc.... Theres alot of money being earmarked towards things that MIGHT fix the problem SOMEDAY... when for half as much money they could of put a few cops in every school and FIXED the problem TODAY. as an added benefit you might see less drug crime in schools and have a trained emergency responder in the school to respond to medical emergencies until EMS arrives... If someone is absolutely crazy no amount of voluntary counselling in the world will keep them from killing. but a well trained police officer will everytime.

Most would not argue with you about the background checks nor will I it is more on the issue about the state telling us we can not buy guns that have proven reliable in the field. There was a article in field & stream saying how the sporting rifle (known to politicians and most anit-gun as assault rifles) has found its way into the hunting crowd for various reasons. These rifles are also now available in various calibers ranging from .22LR to .50 caliber so to say any assault is the same is like saying all cars or boats are the same.

It is the lack of common sense among law makers that make this bill so asinine not to mention they are only limiting law abiding citizens because I am pretty sure criminals will end up using high capacity magazines or at least fill them all the way.

By the way that video posted earlier is worth a listen many valid points.

[Poles293]

This is nothing more than anti-gun politicians / groups seizing the opportunity off of a tragedy to further their cause of taking our 2nd Amendment rights away. Most of the public is too naive and believes anything that is fed to them by the anti-gun media. This is a systematic attack on our rights and is just one more step towards disarming America. Most Americans have no clue what the difference is in guns. They latch onto buzz words ("assault weapon" "Bushmaster" etc) that are deemed "evil" and that is all they know. Check out this link that gives a good explanation of what an "assault weapon" really is.

http://www.assaultweapon.info/

If you watch the news I'm sure you've heard another term that has been popping up more and more in the past couple of years: Home Invasions. It's a growing trend where multiple criminals will force entry into a home and gain control by force then rob, rape, assault or murder the residents. I for one will have more than 7 rounds in my gun and that decision comes from years of training and personal experience with deadly force.

"One of the ordinary modes, by which tyrants accomplish their purposes without resistance, is, by disarming the people, and making it an offense to keep arms."

-- Constitutional scholar and Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, 1840

It's a sad day in this country and I'm afraid it's only going to get worse. Welcome to NY Comrade!

[Shorthanded]

Assemblyman Steve McLaughlin discusses the New York SAFE Act

Kudos to him - he made a very informed and eloquent argument, unfortunately to no avail. Sadly, standup Assembly representatives like him must be in the minority or else this unjust law wouldn't have passed. Heavy handed Cuomo politics at its darkest.

[Tim Bromund]

This country is so split 50/50 on so many issues, I'm afraid we are heading for another civil war. It's like the other 50% is a different species. Perhaps the administration knows this and is preparing. The rush-job move by NYS governor was definitely a posture play for a Presidential run. Sadly, there are too many people who fall for this manipulation. All this will do is create a bigger underground criminal element selling guns to other criminals. Eventually, people trying to abide by the law will rush into other legal(but not well thought out) means of self defense, and Chaos will ensue. Imagine all the unqualified dog trainers/dealers who will pop up.

I remember when I saw the movie "Hunger games", thinking "man, this could happen."

[Poles293]

Assemblyman Steve McLaughlin discusses the New York SAFE Act

At least a few politicians aren't completely full of s**t. McLaughlin is in the super minority in this state though.

[JakeyBaby]

Pretty sure Hitler took the guns out of the hands of the people to gain control! Far fetch I think not are Gov wants all control. IMO This country and NYS is just scratching the surface to what is to come! Just remember that REGISTRATION LEADS TO CONFISCATION!!!! Wish I could move to Texas where the people AND the state believe and obay by the constitution!!

[JakeyBaby]

Forgot to mention the FACT that the two cities in the OUR Country with the highest and sticktest gun conrtol laws (untill now that is) have the highest gun related crime rate!! Wash. D.C. and Chicago.

[fish-on]

Hey guys i heard today this five year renewal on our pistol permits is going to cost us $125.00 each, Is this true or hog wash? Poles293, We need more people like you

[kliph]

Just in case this hasn't been posted. I hope it won't be deleted.

Default NY lawyer filing class action-need petition signees asap

Lawyer : Jim Tresmond, Attorney in Buffalo, New York. Attorney phone is 716.202.4301

Successfully represented clients in the past on Second Amendment issues in NYS Supreme Court. This case is pro-bono for all the gun owners of New York.

According to Mr. Tresmond the new ban is illegal as it is an ex-facto law taking away previously owned property and he intends to file this action in Federal Court.

We are looking for as many as possible to add to CLASS ACTION CASE:

SEND Your Name and EMAIL ADDRESS, Physical Address and phone number to:

[email protected]

WE ARE COLLECTING AS MANY AS POSSIBLE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE!!!

[Mortigan]

Hey guys i heard today this five year renewal on our pistol permits is going to cost us $125.00 each, Is this true or hog wash? Poles293, We need more people like you

They haven't figured out the specifics yet so so costs have not come up yet.

[Shorthanded]

2nd Amendment Rights protest Saturday 19th @12pm in niagara square in buffalo.

[Duckman1]

This is disturbing. I have also heard that assalt rifles will have to be sent out every year for balist test eash year. This info came from a reputable gun shop in rochester.

[ Post made via Android ]

[skipper19]

Taken from the NYSR&PA

NYSRPA, in co-operation with the NRA, are having the Cuomo law reviewed by a highly qualified legal team. We ask that no other 3rd party legal action be taken without prior consultation. We realize that this law impacts a large number of people, but a proper legal review will take some time. Please do not call or e-mail the office or directors. If/when there is an announcement on this issue, it will be published on our website. Thank you for your understanding.

IMHO...Mr Tresmond in a knee jerk action, could fly a weak case and set precedent. These guys know Albany, and the right people. A well thought strategy is best. Don't believe one Buffalo lawyer with names is gonna get you something from Albany. Relax, there's time, panic responses most often lead to disaster. Keep in touch with the right reps, stay informed from the right places. S.C.O.P.E. and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association are your legitimate defenders in NY.

Meanwhile....

SIGN THESE SENATE PETITIONS

http://www.nysenate.gov/node/171871/done?sid=850731

http://www.nysenate.gov/node/172396/done?sid=851136

[ Post made via Android ]