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]

Reply to Thread

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]

Monday, March 11, 2013

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]

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/2013/03/01/state-to-go-to-court-march-11-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]

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]

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]

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]

Update

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]

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]

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

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

 

[VMaxSplat]

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]

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.