1st Shot Against Cuomo's Travesty

[adwjc]

NEW YORK STATE MUST NOW PROVE IN COURT THAT THE HASTILY WRITTEN AND PASSED SAFE ACT IS CONSTITUTIONAL.


Late yesterday, Wednesday 27 Feb, a NYS Supreme Court Justice, the Honorable Deborah Chimes of Erie County, signed an order against the State of New York and Governor Andrew Cuomo requiring the respondents to appear before the court on April 29th and provide good cause and reasons why the State should not be enjoined from enforcing any provision of the assault weapons ban contained in the recently pass SAFE Act.

Google judge's name for references.

[adwjc]

The Rally in Albany on Thursday, February 28, 2013 was a huge success by any standard, even the anti-gun press estimated the turn out as "thousands of people." Other unbiased tally's put the crowd estimate at 10 to 12 thousand. While Gov. Cuomo downplays the rancor caused by his "gun grab", it would appear the Legislature is beginning to run for cover. If the people keep up the pressure, we will be able to reverse this travesty of our rights.

We had folks from Texas, Ohio and New Hampshire at this historic 2nd Amendment Rally. There may have been more - we don't know.

In New York State there are 62 Counties, of the 62, over 40 have passed resolutions opposing NY SAFE Act. More are pending.

http://www.nysaferesolutions.com/

[adwjc]

Scenes from the Rally - Courtesy of All over Albany:

Scenes from the rally to repeal the NY SAFE Act | All Over Albany

[riderrick65]

Originally Posted by adwjc

Scenes from the Rally - Courtesy of All over Albany:

Scenes from the rally to repeal the NY SAFE Act | All Over Albany

Wow what a great show of support! ..... Would love to see this in every State Of The Union!!

[owenwd54]

We should all show up for any pro gun rally that we can attend and keep writing our elected officials and calling them . Let them know that we vote and how they vote on gun issues will determine wither they have a job come voting time.

[adwjc]

First hearing in Saratoga County Supreme Court regarding the challenge to the "Message of Necessity" the governor used to rush the bill through without study time or debate:

Politics on the Hudson

[TStick]

Originally Posted by adwjc

First hearing in Saratoga County Supreme Court regarding the challenge to the "Message of Necessity" the governor used to rush the bill through without study time or debate:

http://polhudson.lohudblogs.com/2013...over-gun-law/:

Thank you for keeping us updated. Even us Southerners are watching this.

FYI - take the ":" off of the end of your link to make it work.

[Freeway]

This came from the linked article... "the NY SAFE Act does not immediately ban the possession or ownership of an estimated one million assault weapons currently in use by New York citizens, nor does it immediately ban the purchase and sale of assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices between individuals."

Well, if the new law does not immediately ban these things, WHY was it necessary to pass it so quickly, without the 3 day time period for comments, etc? Doesn't sound logical to me.

[DCWilson]

This is a procedural challenge to the way the new regulations were adopted rather than a frontal challenge to the regulations themselves, but it is still a welcome step. If the hasty initial process is deemed unwarranted or unnecessary, then the laws may still be adopted by the legislature, but they would need to be adopted after a traditional legislative process. That means hearings and a great deal more sunlight and discussion that the anti-gun forces wanted in the first place. Maybe Andrew Cuomo will get some legal humiliation out of this. Hope so. He deserves every shred of it that can be delivered to him.

All in all, a turn of events that offers grounds for optimism. Supporters of firearms ownership are not out of the woods yet, but at least the anti forces are finding that a heralded significant victory is potentially neither significant nor a victory.

I love a good wake-up call delivered by a judge with the power to slap a confederacy of dunces upside the head and recalibrate their reality meters.

[jtpur]

I may live in Texas, but If NY wins this stupid law there may be a few of my neighbors who are willing to show the government of NY why we are proud of the saying, " Don,t mess with Texas"

[gregintenn]

We're not in New York, but as long as you all are willing to fight this, we're behind you.

[ladder13]

Originally Posted by Freeway

This came from the linked article... "the NY SAFE Act does not immediately ban the possession or ownership of an estimated one million assault weapons currently in use by New York citizens, nor does it immediately ban the purchase and sale of assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices between individuals."

Well, if the new law does not immediately ban these things, WHY was it necessary to pass it so quickly, without the 3 day time period for comments, etc? Doesn't sound logical to me.

That's part of the court case, the dictator declared an emergency existed to hurry this thru without discussion. So if it were so urgent, why would be still "allowed" to even own these dangerous guns anymore?
This thing is going down and they know it now, lots of pols backtracking.

[PainterlyShotgroup]

Originally Posted by TStick

Thank you for keeping us updated. Even us Southerners are watching this.

FYI - take the ":" off of the end of your link to make it work.

It's going to be you southerners who will save the rest of the union! Hold fast you guys. If I could move south I would at the drop of a hat!

[PainterlyShotgroup]

Originally Posted by ladder13

That's part of the court case, the dictator declared an emergency existed to hurry this thru without discussion. So if it were so urgent, why would be still "allowed" to even own these dangerous guns anymore?
This thing is going down and they know it now, lots of pols backtracking.

Lets hope Ladder. As for all the politician back peddling, use'em then lose'em I say.

[adwjc]

Today, the VA stated they will not abide by the reporting provisions of the SAFE Act:

Capitol Confidential * VA won?t abide by reporting provisions of SAFE


Better still, the governor, is quoted in a reply to this, “You know, I really don’t know the specifics, but first of all what the laws says is it leaves it totally up to the mental health provider if they want to come forward or not — totally up to them,” Cuomo said. “It’s volitional on their part. And then depending on the institution or the organization, they may have preexisting legal parameters."

Don't know the specifics???

The section reads:
"(B) NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER LAW TO THE CONTRARY, WHEN A MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONAL CURRENTLY PROVIDING TREATMENT SERVICES TO A PERSON DETERMINES, IN THE EXERCISE OF REASONABLE PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT, THAT SUCH PERSON IS LIKELY TO ENGAGE IN CONDUCT THAT WOULD RESULT IN SERIOUS HARM TO SELF OR OTHERS, HE OR SHE SHALL BE REQUIRED TO REPORT, AS SOON AS PRACTICABLE, TO THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES, OR THE DIRECTOR’S DESIGNEE, WHO SHALL REPORT TO THE DIVISION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE SERVICES WHENEVER HE OR SHE AGREES THAT THE PERSON IS LIKELY TO ENGAGE IN SUCH CONDUCT. INFORMATION TRANSMITTED TO THE DIVISION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE SERVICES SHALL BE LIMITED TO NAMES AND OTHER NON-CLINICAL IDENTIFYING INFORMATION, WHICH MAY ONLY BE USED FOR DETERMINING WHETHER A LICENSE ISSUED PURSUANT TO SECTION 400.00 OF THE PENAL LAW SHOULD BE SUSPENDEDOR REVOKED, OR FOR DETERMINING WHETHER A PERSON IS INELIGIBLE FOR ALICENSE ISSUED PURSUANT TO SECTION 400.00 OF THE PENAL LAW, OR IS NO LONGER PERMITTED UNDER STATE OR FEDERAL LAW TO POSSESS A FIREARM.
(C) NOTHING IN THIS SECTION SHALL BE CONSTRUED TO REQUIRE A MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONAL TO TAKE ANY ACTION WHICH, IN THE EXERCISE OF REASONABLE PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT, WOULD ENDANGER SUCH MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONAL OR INCREASE THE DANGER TO A POTENTIAL VICTIM OR VICTIMS.
(D) THE DECISION OF A MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONAL TO DISCLOSE OR NOT TO DISCLOSE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS SECTION, WHEN MADE REASONABLY AND IN GOOD FAITH, SHALL NOT BE THE BASIS FOR ANY CIVIL OR CRIMINAL LIABILITY OF SUCH MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONAL."

The writer of this article asks - "what does "shall" mean?

[VMaxSplat]

Originally Posted by PainterlyShotgroup

It's going to be you southerners who will save the rest of the union! Hold fast you guys. If I could move south I would at the drop of a hat!

Many of us Southerners still want out of the Union, now more than ever.

[PainterlyShotgroup]

Originally Posted by VMaxSplat

Many of us Southerners still want out of the Union, now more than ever.

Understandable. I still want to move down south...

[VMaxSplat]

Originally Posted by PainterlyShotgroup

Understandable. I still want to move down south...

Sounds like you'd fit in. Come on down and enjoy some freedom.

[adwjc]

Bummer!

The word is out from Albany Supreme Court - Judge McNamara has refused to enjoin the SAFE Act.

On to the Appellate Court.

Other challenges are still in progress or being filed out in western NY...

[PainterlyShotgroup]

Originally Posted by adwjc

Bummer!

The word is out from Albany Supreme Court - Judge McNamara has refused to enjoin the SAFE Act.

On to the Appellate Court.

Other challenges are still in progress or being filed out in western NY...

This was expected. The Shultz case had no real legal grounds. I think ideally the guy was right, but legally no.

[PainterlyShotgroup]

Originally Posted by VMaxSplat

Sounds like you'd fit in. Come on down and enjoy some freedom.

Just need me a jobby job lined up and I'm there. Meanwhile, I save money for the move. First real chance I get to move I'm doing it.

[Buffalohunter60]

The battle in NY is just as important as the battle anywhere else. You freedom is tied directly to mine. If they can take your constitutional rights, they may think they can take mine also....so we are with you and keep the oath.

[Delos]

NY SAFE ACT OF 2013
Gun Reforms - 2013 Initiatives | Governor Andrew M. Cuomo

Key provisions of the bill include:

(About 4 paragraphs down)
Stronger regulations on ammunition:
Under the legislation, New York will have the strongest ban on high capacity magazines in the country, with a limit on capacity of seven rounds, down from the current limit of ten. The legislation includes a ban on possession of pre-1994 high capacity magazines, and will require owners to sell the banned magazines out of state within one year. Existing ten round magazines can be grandfathered in, but may only be loaded with 7 rounds.

To track high-volume ammunition purchasers, the legislation will make New York the first state in the nation to track ammo purchases in real time. All dealers in ammunition must be registered with the State Police, and each sale will require both a state background check and transmission of a record of the sale to State Police, so as to enable alerts of high volume purchases. Ammunition records will be purged within a year of submission. Dealers must report any loss of inventory. The legislation will also include a ban on direct internet sales of ammunition. Ammunition ordered over the internet must be delivered in a face-to-face transaction with a firearms dealer and the purchaser will be subject to the state background check. The Aurora shooter reportedly amassed 6000 rounds through direct online purchases.

(Much more at this site)

For additional questions on the NY SAFE Act call
1-855-LAW-GUNS weekdays 9:00 am – 5:00 pm

[Lenny_D]

The antis keep referring to the amount of ammo these mass murderers have but I fail to see how this has any conection to the actual event. So what if the guy has 6000 rounds at home. It's the ones that he brings with him that count. Astounding that these completely irrelevant numbers are thrown out there for nothing more than sensationalizing the media story. It's like getting caught speeding in a Prius but it's brought up that you've got a muscle car parked at home! You can't fix stupid.

Len

[ladder13]

Here's the second shot across their bow

2nd NY lawsuit