Governor Cuomo's Ban Is Unconstitutional

[NS496]

Does Cuomo's new gun law expire?? Or run indefinably??

 

[Numenor]

Does Cuomo's new gun law expire?? Or run indefinably??

It has no expiration date.

 

[CharlesMorrison]

It has no expiration date.

You mean "no expiration date" YET!

 

[Itstjs]

Wow, I have never seen anything so stupid pass, whats more unbelievable is, it makes absolutely NO sense. Do they really think some Criminal is going to see this law and immediately change their ways or obey that 1 law? I mean, you know all drug dealers, gang members and other low life criminals are going to shiver in their pants knowing Cuomos law is going to catch them in jail? I think not, they're going to ignore this law much like every other law and get away with it for as long as they can...
Stupid politicians, I hope every one of them finds their asses in the unemployment line...Good Luck New York.

 

[CharlesMorrison]

Wow, I have never seen anything so stupid pass, whats more unbelievable is, it makes absolutely NO sense. Do they really think some Criminal is going to see this law and immediately change their ways or obey that 1 law? I mean, you know all drug dealers, gang members and other low life criminals are going to shiver in their pants knowing Cuomos law is going to catch them in jail? I think not, they're going to ignore this law much like every other law and get away with it for as long as they can...
Stupid politicians, I hope every one of them finds their asses in the unemployment line...Good Luck New York.

I think that some of us who live on the fringe between law and order or just plain chaos will decide that the grass is greener on the other side.
I say, if NY wants to turn "us" all into criminals with the stroke of the pen... then I say go with it!
It might be a good time to start the revolution.....

Just sayin.... Ya know?

Link Removed

 

[BluesStringer]

And here is the expost facto violation.

S 265.36 UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF A LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING
DEVICE.
IT SHALL BE UNLAWFUL FOR A PERSON TO KNOWINGLY POSSESS A LARGE CAPACI
TY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICE MANUFACTURED BEFORE SEPTEMBER THIRTEENTH,
NINETEEN HUNDRED NINETY-FOUR, AND IF SUCH PERSON LAWFULLY POSSESSED SUCH
LARGE CAPACITY FEEDING DEVICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE CHAPTER
OF THE LAWS OF TWO THOUSAND THIRTEEN WHICH ADDED THIS SECTION, THAT HAS
A CAPACITY OF, OR THAT CAN BE READILY RESTORED OR CONVERTED TO ACCEPT,
MORE THAN TEN ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION.
AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS A REASONABLE BELIEF THAT SUCH DEVICE IS OF SUCH
A CHARACTER THAT IT MAY LAWFULLY BE POSSESSED AND WHO SURRENDERS OR
LAWFULLY DISPOSES OF SUCH DEVICE WITHIN THIRTY DAYS OF BEING NOTIFIED BY
LAW ENFORCEMENT OR COUNTY LICENSING OFFICIALS THAT SUCH POSSESSION IS
UNLAWFUL SHALL NOT BE GUILTY OF THIS OFFENSE. IT SHALL BE A REBUTTABLE
PRESUMPTION THAT SUCH PERSON KNOWS THAT SUCH LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION
FEEDING DEVICE MAY NOT BE LAWFULLY POSSESSED IF HE OR SHE HAS BEEN
CONTACTED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT OR COUNTY LICENSING OFFICIALS AND INFORMED
THAT SUCH DEVICE MAY NOT BE LAWFULLY POSSESSED.
UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF A LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICE IS A
CLASS A MISDEMEANOR.

But see, Chief Justice Benedict Arnold will just strike the ex post facto violation(s) and apply a $100,000.00 tax for the "privilege" of owning "2nd Amendment-compliant" items in its place, and POOF! It's constitutional.

Having a hard time keeping up with constitutional law there, S&W645? Don't worry. You're not alone.

Blues

 

[Nightmare45]

"ex post facto law and is therefore a prima facie violation"

Okay... what does that mean in real English?

It means the law is illegal. I am not a laywer and did not play one on tv. Cuomo is not God.

 

[S&W645]

But see, Chief Justice Benedict Arnold will just strike the ex post facto violation(s) and apply a $100,000.00 tax for the "privilege" of owning "2nd Amendment-compliant" items in its place, and POOF! It's constitutional.

Having a hard time keeping up with constitutional law there, S&W645? Don't worry. You're not alone.

Blues

About that time you'll see rioting in the streets of DC. And it won't be the gimme, gimme folks doing it.

 

[BluesStringer]

About that time you'll see rioting in the streets of DC. And it won't be the gimme, gimme folks doing it.

Wonder why there was no rioting when the first AWB passed? Because it was written with a sunset clause that may or may not have been allowed to implement? 'Fraid not Brother 645. No riots are forthcoming, at least not from "law-abiding" gun owners. The most noise that will be made over this kind of stuff is the sound of their collective snoring from one end of the country to the other. There might be isolated instances of resistance to such tyranny, but mark my words, no matter how unconstitutional the law or the SCOTUS ruling that upholds it, even on gun forums like this one, the resisters will be vilified and shunned by the overwhelming majority of gun owners. All anyone has to do to prove that to themselves is look at the deep-sleep that residents of DC and Chicago are still in, even after supposedly "pro-2nd-Amendment" rulings by SCOTUS.

Just like you're not really done taking a dump until you wipe and clean yourself up, it's all over but the paperwork as far as gun rights go in this country. Most won't even notice once the paperwork is finished either.

Blues

 

[UATKP]

Any federal or state law that infringes on the right to keep and bear arms is an Unconstitutional statute, and therefore is no statute at all. We the people of the Republic of the United States of America have the duty as citizens to disobey that statute, and to declare the responsible legislators traitors.
Now, since officers involved in law enforcement, have sworn an oath to defend the Constitution (the Constitution is the rule of law), they are bound by oath to protect the constitution. If they don't protect the citizens from enforcement of illegal, unconstitutional laws, then they, themselves have become traitors, and should themselves be placed under arrest.
That's my opinion... (1st Amendment).

 

[BC1]

Trust me, I would absolutely LOVE to see this bill declared unconstitutional on the ex post facto angle... or frankly ANY angle. I just don't think it will happen with the US Circuit Court that covers NYS.

True. That district court recently ruled that refusing a carry permit is not a violation of the second as long as they still let you own it. Then the district court for Maryland ruled the complete opposite. These conflicting rulings need to go berfore the supreme court before O gets another pick.

 

[2Awarrior]

Any news on this thread?

Edit - disregard, found this - Link Removed

 

[lsmurphy]

Understand that all these laws and regs will serve one purpose.......
.
To create chaos......to divide........to demoralize.........to anger.........to agitate.....to destroy.
.
These people are Evil and they know exactly what they are doing.

 

[CharlesMorrison]

As do you it would appear....