New York has frozen over-New York's May Issue for Good Cause violates 2A

[Heinz]

Interesting that New York, and most of its Boroughs, report some of the lowest homicide and crime rates in the United States, if that is true, they really do not need to fear an influx of violent crime. If, as I suspect, it is typical New York cooking their statistical books: for example , it is only a crime if someone is convicted of the crime, not just because it is reported, then they should still have to live with the data they report.

 

[ladder13]

A good read into the thoughtful mind of Justice Thomas.

GUNS Magazine Supreme Smack Down: 6-3 High Court Ruling On Right-To-Carry A Huge Win - GUNS Magazine

 

[biku324]

... for example , it is only a crime if someone is convicted of the crime, not just because it is reported, then they should still have to live with the data they report.

Nope - the entireity of New York, state and City, report through UCR and NIBRS. All count 'crimes reported to police'; they also separately count and report 'cleared' crimes (wherein a suspect has been identified and arrested or is unavailable for arrest [exceptionally cleared]). NYC led the country into CompStat policing in the 90s, and the whole system is data driven. It works, and elements have been copied and implemented in agencies all over the world.

Look here for detailed info: https://crime-data-explorer.fr.cloud.gov/pages/about

 

[G-Mac]

I lived just the other side of Westchester Ave by Crosby Cab @1739 Pilgrim Ave. Son of Sams first two victims were killed right around the corner.

What did David Berkowitz say about the dog? During questioning, Berkowitz claimed that his neighbor's dog was one of the reasons that he killed, stating that the dog demanded the blood of pretty young girls.

My old boss where I still work, a woman now retired and living in Florida, KNEW THAT DOG!

 

[ladder13]

Richard David Falco and I attended JHS 123 in the Bronx. Not at the same time though.

 

[delcrossv]

...

As to training, you're right. Illinois requires 16 hours every five years, more than any other state. While I don't like that on principle, the people I see in those classes are such lousy shots that I'm almost glad that they have to shoot the course to get their CCW.

No. 1st class is 16 hours, renewals are 3 plus range qualification.
Just completed mine- now the 120 day wait.

 

[Borderboss]

No. 1st class is 16 hours, renewals are 3 plus range qualification.
Just completed mine- now the 120 day wait.

Yes, that's true. I've been through both, the renewal about three years ago. I best check my renewal date.

Even though you have to wait to get the new CCW card, you're already renewed.

 

[biku324]

Here's a preview of what you'll satart hearing about more guns = more crime: https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w30190/w30190.pdf

 

[Borderboss]

Here's a preview of what you'll satart hearing about more guns = more crime: https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w30190/w30190.pdf

Every word is pure BS.

 

[RCL-09]

Here's a preview of what you'll satart hearing about more guns = more crime: https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w30190/w30190.pdf

The sad thing is that people will read that and actually believe it.

 

[RCL-09]

Nope - the entireity of New York, state and City, report through UCR and NIBRS. All count 'crimes reported to police'; they also separately count and report 'cleared' crimes (wherein a suspect has been identified and arrested or is unavailable for arrest [exceptionally cleared]). NYC led the country into CompStat policing in the 90s, and the whole system is data driven. It works, and elements have been copied and implemented in agencies all over the world.

Look here for detailed info: https://crime-data-explorer.fr.cloud.gov/pages/about

Spot on...

 

[biku324]

The sad thing is that people will read that and actually believe it.

Or they won't bother to read it before saying I Told You So.

A bump in gun thefts when gun values are up and availability not great doesn't exactly shock me. It's not the same as a generalized rise in violent crime.

 

[RCL-09]

Or they won't bother to read it before saying I Told You So.

A bump in gun thefts when gun values are up and availability not great doesn't exactly shock me. It's not the same as a generalized rise in violent crime.

It is a simple fact that correlation is not causation.


Also, when someone claims banning flash hiders, folding stocks, bayonet lugs, etc. led to a reduction in crime they are either stupid, or liars.

 

[GaryS]

Two of the decisions released on the last day of the session are going to reverberate for years to come. The first of course is Bruen, but the second could have Second Amendment ramifications as well.

Why the Supreme Court's EPA Ruling Has Politicians and Gun Control Advocates Worried - The Truth About Guns

The question at stake, according to the majority decision written by Chief Justice John Roberts, was the “major questions doctrine.” Chief Justice Roberts, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, found that the EPA couldn’t point to “‘clear congressional authorization’ for the authority it claims.”

The EPA, in writing the rules for the Clean Power Plan rule under the Clean Air Act, “claimed to discover an unheralded power representing a transformative expansion of its regulatory authority in the vague language of a long-extant, but rarely used, statute designed as a gap filler. That discovery allowed it to create a regulatory program that Congress had conspicuously declined to enact itself.”

 

[bushmaster1313]

Two of the decisions released on the last day of the session are going to reverberate for years to come. The first of course is Bruen, but the second could have Second Amendment ramifications as well.

Why the Supreme Court's EPA Ruling Has Politicians and Gun Control Advocates Worried - The Truth About Guns

Frame and receiver and firearm are very tricky when applied to
an AR-15 type rifle. The problem is that unlike a revolver or a bolt action rifle, there is no one "thing" that holds all of the trigger, hammer, bolt, and barrel. This is important when trying to figure out which part needs a serial number and a NICS check. (I will look for the definition in the statute and try to update this post)

For example in the AR-15, the "lower" only holds the trigger and the hammer, while the "upper" holds the bolt and the barrel.

Here is the definition of "firearm" in 18 U.S.C. Sec 921(a)(3):

The term “firearm” means (A) any weapon (including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; (B) the frame or receiver of any such weapon; (C) any firearm muffler or firearm silencer; or (D) any destructive device. Such term does not include an antique firearm.

But as noted by the BATFE, Congress did not define "frame" or "receiver":

This is from 87 Federal Register 24652:

There are no statutory definitions for the terms “frame” or “receiver” in the Gun Control Act of 1968 (“GCA”) or the National Firearms Act of 1934 (“NFA”). To implement these statutes, the terms “firearm frame or receiver” and “frame or receiver” were defined in regulations to mean “[t]hat part of a firearm which provides housing for the hammer, bolt or breechblock, and firing mechanism, and which is usually threaded at its forward portion to receive the barrel.” 27 CFR 478.11 (implementing GCA, Title I); 27 CFR 479.11 [1]

(implementing GCA, Title II). These definitions were meant to provide direction as to which portion of a weapon is the frame or receiver for purposes of licensing, serialization, and recordkeeping, thereby ensuring that a component necessary for the functioning of the weapon could be traced if later involved in a crime.

However, a restrictive application of these definitions would not describe the frame or receiver of most firearms currently in circulation in the United States. Most modern weapon designs, including semiautomatic rifles and pistols with detachable magazines, have a split or multi-piece receiver where the relevant fire control components are housed by more than one part of the weapon (e.g., the upper receiver and lower receiver of an AR-15 rifle), or incorporate a striker to fire the weapon, rather than a hammer.

In the past few years, some courts have treated the regulatory definition of “firearm frame or receiver” as inflexible when applied to the lower portion of the AR-15-type rifle, one of the most popular firearms in the United States. If broadly followed, that result could mean that as many as 90 percent of all firearms (i.e.,with split frames or receivers, or striker-fired) in the United States would not have any frame or receiver subject to regulation. Furthermore, technological advances have also made it easier for companies to sell firearm parts kits, standalone frame or receiver parts, and easy-to-complete frames or receivers to unlicensed persons, without maintaining any records or conducting a background check. These parts kits, standalone frame or receiver parts, or partially complete frames or receivers enable individuals to make firearms quickly and easily. Such privately made firearms (“PMFs”), when made for personal use, are not required by the GCA to have a serial number placed on the frame or receiver, making it difficult for law enforcement to determine where, by whom, or when they were manufactured, and to whom they were sold or otherwise transferred. Because of the difficulty with tracing illegally sold or distributed PMFs, those firearms are also commonly referred to as “ghost guns.”

For these many reasons, ATF is promulgating a rule that would bring clarity to the definition of “frame or receiver” by providing an updated, more comprehensive definition. On May 21, 2021, the Department published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“NPRM”) in the Federal Register, 86 FR 27720, proposing to redefine the term “frame or receiver” as that which provides housing or a structure to hold or integrate one or more fire control components. In light of the comments received, this final rule revises the proposed definition of “frame or receiver” so that a “frame” is applicable to a handgun, and variants thereof, and a “receiver” is applicable to a rifle, shotgun, or projectile weapon other than a handgun, and variants thereof. Moreover, “frame or receiver” will be defined to describe only a single part
that provides housing or a structure for one specific, primary fire control component of weapons that expel a projectile, or one specific, primary internal sound reduction component of firearm mufflers or silencers. The final rule also defines the meaning of “variants” and “variants thereof.” The final rule provides detailed examples along with pictures identifying the frame or receiver of a variety of common models under the updated definition. The final rule also exempts from the new definitions and marking requirements existing split frame or receiver designs in which a part was previously classified by ATF as the firearm “frame or receiver” and provides examples and pictures of select exempted frames or receivers, such as AR-15/M-16 variant firearms. The only exception to “grandfathering” will be for partially complete, disassembled, or nonfunctional frames or receivers, including weapon or frame or receiver parts kits, that ATF did not classify as firearm “frames or receivers” as defined prior to this rule.

The final rule also specifies, with more clarity and examples than the NPRM, how these terms apply to multi-piece frames or receivers (i.e., those that may be disassembled into multiple modular subparts), to firearm mufflers and silencers, to partially complete, disassembled, or nonfunctional frames or receivers, including frame or receiver parts kits, and to frames or receivers that are destroyed. The final rule also provides detailed examples of when such items are considered readily completed, assembled, restored, or otherwise “converted” to function as a frame or receiver. At the same time, the final rule makes clear that articles that have not yet reached a stage of manufacture where they are clearly identifiable as an unfinished component of a frame or receiver (e.g., unformed blocks of metal, liquid polymers, or other raw materials) are not frames or receivers.

Here is the entire Federal Register Preamble and Final Rule from August 2022

^^^ The above is quite a mouthful.
But back to the real topic, if it takes reams of paper for BATFE to define "frame or receiver," and the current definition is not the same as the definition in the past, can the actual Congressional statute be clear enough to pass "void for vagueness" under the Due Process required by the Constitution and can anyone be convicted for making, possessing or transferring a frame or receiver?

 

[kbm6893]

I fail to see how this SC decision was a victory. First of all, outside of the five boroughs of NYC, you were virtually guaranteed to be approved for a pistol permit. Some counties were May Issue as far as Carey, and some were Shall Issue for carry. But if you weren’t legally barred from getting the permit, you were given one. It was good for 5 years and renewing it was quick and easy. If it was a carry permit, it was good everywhere except the 5 boroughs of NYC, and a few sensitive locations like government buildings, courts, and bars. You could stop off at Walgreens on the way home and legally carry concealed.

Now, the courts have poked the bear. Either because they couldn’t, or because the didn’t, they left a huge loophole for the governor to drive a truck through. Virtually the entire state has been declared a sensitive area where guns can’t be carried. Parks, arenas, public streets, public transit, restaurants that serve alcohol, private businesses unless a sign is explicitly posted allowing guns, (never mind what that will do to the business, inviting rabid anti-gun protesters and gas lighters). The fees to apply have gone up, the training requirements have gone up, the permit is only good for 3 years, and each renewal is like a new application, with references, background checks, fingerprints, and now even social media inspections. What would get the permit denied? There’s no clear cut standard. Memberships in gun forums, NRA, pictures of you wearing a MAGA hat or one from 20 Years ago when you dressed as something stupid for Halloween? All fair game now.

And let’s not forget the background check for ammo! Wanna buy a brick of .22 to hit the range with your son? Better plan ahead. Might take a few days. Or weeks.

Yeah, this has been some victory! Those in NYC can now get a permit to own a gun. Can’t carry it anywhere, but I’m sure they feel protected! And the guy who has been lawfully carrying for 25 years? He’s gonna have to leave his gun at home now, because basically anywhere he used to carry it is now illegal!

Victory? For NYS it is. They’ve just gone from being unreasonable to impossible, and they set the stage for every other state with similar practices to follow in their footsteps. California will soon follow suit. The residents of CA will be longing for the good old days of approved rosters.

 

[bushmaster1313]

I fail to see how this SC decision was a victory. First of all, outside of the five boroughs of NYC, you were virtually guaranteed to be approved for a pistol permit. Some counties were May Issue as far as Carey, and some were Shall Issue for carry. But if you weren’t legally barred from getting the permit, you were given one. It was good for 5 years and renewing it was quick and easy. If it was a carry permit, it was good everywhere except the 5 boroughs of NYC, and a few sensitive locations like government buildings, courts, and bars. You could stop off at Walgreens on the way home and legally carry concealed.

Now, the courts have poked the bear. Either because they couldn’t, or because the didn’t, they left a huge loophole for the governor to drive a truck through. Virtually the entire state has been declared a sensitive area where guns can’t be carried. Parks, arenas, public streets, public transit, restaurants that serve alcohol, private businesses unless a sign is explicitly posted allowing guns, (never mind what that will do to the business, inviting rabid anti-gun protesters and gas lighters). The fees to apply have gone up, the training requirements have gone up, the permit is only good for 3 years, and each renewal is like a new application, with references, background checks, fingerprints, and now even social media inspections. What would get tiny denied? There’s no clear cut standard. Memberships in gun forums, NRA, pictures of you wearing a MAGA hat or one from 20 Years ago when you dressed as something stupid for Halloween? All fair game now.

And let’s not forget the background check for ammo! Wanna buy a brick of .22 to hit the range with your son? Better plan ahead. Might take a few days. Or weeks.

Yeah, this has been some victory! Those in NYC can now get a permit to own a gun. Can’t carry it anywhere, but I’m sure they feel protected! And the guy who has been lawfully carrying for 25 years? He’s gonna have to leave his gun at home now, because basically anywhere he used to carry it is now illegal!

NYC -- Who knows?
In NJ the State Police expect 200,000 applications for carry permits in the near future.

 

[kbm6893]

NYC -- Who knows?
In NJ the State Police expect 200,000 applications for carry permits in the near future.

And when NJ declares 95% of their state as a sensitive area, the permits they get won’t be worth the paper it’s printed on.

 

[bushmaster1313]

And when NJ declares 95% of their state as a sensitive area, the permits they get won’t be worth the paper it’s printed on.

This is actually an interesting point.
Because New Jersey permits were as rare as hen’s teeth there are relatively few current laws declaring parts of New Jersey “sensitive”.

The places I care most about are houses of worship. After an incident several years ago our place of worship got a visit from police who said we needed to take precautions. When I asked an official how I could get a carry permit to protect my house of worship he said I would have to leave New Jersey.

 

[kbm6893]

This is actually an interesting point.
Because New Jersey permits were as rare as hen’s teeth there are relatively few current laws declaring parts of New Jersey “sensitive”.

The places I care most about are houses of worship. After an incident several years ago our place of worship got a visit from police who said we needed to take precautions. When I asked an official how I could get a carry permit to protect my house of worship he said I would have to leave New Jersey.

Houses of worship are now sensitive places in NY, so the guy with the carry permit in NY who carried to church for the last 25 years no longer can. Carry permits in NJ were as rare as carry permits in NYC. Now, since the issuing of permits can not be denied for cause, those houses of worship are now sensitive places, and guns are no longer allowed there.