New york state safe act

[mcoh1030]

Just wondering how all you New Yorkers are feeling about the Safe Act.

 

[mikestone967]

"We, the People" are ignoring it. There ain't a damn thing can be done about it either.
UnConstituional laws are not laws at all and may be ignored by the citizens.

(YMMV of course!)

 

[mcoh1030]

Ok, but do you think there's a chance that the Safe Act/Cuomo can be over turned/voted out of office? Are New Yorkers so stupid as to allow this non-sense to continue. I mean the Senator from Queens recently tried to outlaw Machetes. New Yorkers need to put up a fight. I think everyone is waiting to see the outcome of the Presidential election in November. If Clinton gets in, it's all over.

 

[mikestone967]

The "Safe Act" is unconstitutional and illegal. Period.
Unconstitutional laws are NOT laws and may be ignored at ones own peril.
Until or unless "We, the People" use force to repeal it, it ain't goin no where..

 

[mcoh1030]

When you say it "ain't going no where", do you mean that New York State voters won't vote out the representatives that allowed this law to go into effect? If the people in this country could just see the extent to which a law like this one, limits and restricts gun ownership, I think they'd be in shock. The Democrats and certain Republicans are soft on 2nd Amendment rights. That much goes without saying. But during this heated election season, it would really make a lot of sense to expose New York's Safe Act to the country so that voters can see how a democratic controlled state, in this case, New York, has handled their power. They've told the voting public that they don't want to "take away" guns or the 2nd Amendment. Yet when looking at the Safe Act, it's obvious what they would do if given the opportunity to control the United States Congress and the Executive Branch at the same time. They'd limit, restrict and confiscate gun owners and guns. It's very scary.

 

[BluesStringer]

When you say it "ain't going no where", do you mean that New York State voters won't vote out the representatives that allowed this law to go into effect? If the people in this country could just see the extent to which a law like this one, limits and restricts gun ownership, I think they'd be in shock. The Democrats and certain Republicans are soft on 2nd Amendment rights. That much goes without saying. But during this heated election season, it would really make a lot of sense to expose New York's Safe Act to the country so that voters can see how a democratic controlled state, in this case, New York, has handled their power. They've told the voting public that they don't want to "take away" guns or the 2nd Amendment. Yet when looking at the Safe Act, it's obvious what they would do if given the opportunity to control the United States Congress and the Executive Branch at the same time. They'd limit, restrict and confiscate gun owners and guns. It's very scary.

No, voters of NY will not vote leftists who created and supported the SAFE Act out of office. NY is completely controlled by NYC. While the rural counties may have a higher per-capita Republican population, there aren't enough of them to overcome the millions of leftists in NYC. It's the same thing in CA, just spread over a wider geographic area. Blue population centers control red rural areas in every state where that intrastate ideological dichotomy exists.

Besides the voting patterns of NY'ers, you seem to be unaware that the Supreme Court just codified the SAFE Act as constitutional early this year by turning down an appeal to a lower court's ruling that it was indeed constitutional.

The above is written from the perspective that voting matters at all in the first place, which I don't happen to believe. I was just answering your question in the same context as you posed it. Even if voting mattered a wit, SAFE and Cuomo ain't goin' nowhere, just like mikestone said.

Blues

 

[bofh]

When you say it "ain't going no where", do you mean that New York State voters won't vote out the representatives that allowed this law to go into effect? If the people in this country could just see the extent to which a law like this one, limits and restricts gun ownership, I think they'd be in shock. The Democrats and certain Republicans are soft on 2nd Amendment rights. That much goes without saying. But during this heated election season, it would really make a lot of sense to expose New York's Safe Act to the country so that voters can see how a democratic controlled state, in this case, New York, has handled their power. They've told the voting public that they don't want to "take away" guns or the 2nd Amendment. Yet when looking at the Safe Act, it's obvious what they would do if given the opportunity to control the United States Congress and the Executive Branch at the same time. They'd limit, restrict and confiscate gun owners and guns. It's very scary.

So, then what are you waiting for? You say it is time to do something about the NY Safe Act. Guess what? Who, if not you, should then do something about it? Will you though do something about it? No. Hence, it ain't going no where.

Make sure to buy a "Molon Labe" shirt that you can wear when it is your time to line up and register your firearms, if you haven't done that already, and when it is your time to turn in your firearms. In the mean time, you are free to post Internet memes on gun forums on how all gun laws are unconstitutional.

In this context, from WCVB5 | Gun-rights activists rally at Mass. Statehouse:

Gun-rights activists rally at Mass. Statehouse
Estimated 10,000 copycat assault weapons sold in 2015

BOSTON —Gun advocates are rallying outside the Statehouse to protest AG Maura Healey's crackdown on the sale and manufacture of what she's called copycat assault weapons.

The rally, organized by Gun Owners Action League, began around 10 a.m. Saturday. Boston police estimates the crowd is about 600 people, and they have shut down part of Beacon Street.

Healey on Wednesday sent an enforcement notice to gun sellers and manufacturers clarifying what constitutes a "copy" or "duplicate" weapon under the state's assault-weapons ban, including copies of the Colt AR-15 and the Kalashnikov AK-47.

Healey says an estimated 10,000 copycat assault weapons were sold in Massachusetts last year.

But gun-rights activists say Healey is taking "rogue actions" that will turn thousands of gun owners into "future felons."

Healey said the rule will not be enforced against gun owners who bought weapons prior to the notice being sent out.

There were an estimated 10,000 copycat "assault weapons" sold in Massachusetts last year, yet only 600 people show up at the rally that is going on right now. Unless each of those 600 people bought an estimated 17 copycat "assault weapons" last year, the vast majority of those gun owners with brand new, and probably never fired, copycat "assault weapons" are not there. Why is that?

 

[freethink]

Interesting article I saw recently about NY State sending out letters to people stating that NY state has the "authority" to confiscate people's firearms. It's sending these notices out to anyone who it thinks has a firearm that might violate the SAFE Act. My guess is that they don't care if you've modified it to put an Armaglock, fixed mag, made it featureless and non-evil, etc., so as to comply with SAFE Act. They just want to confiscate them all anyway.

I would suggest calling a lawyer and having a lawyer addressing these notification letters from NY State which undoubtedly are going out to a massive number of firearm owners.

If you do not have / cannot afford a legal team (which can be quite expensive) consider getting this: Link Removed

As you can see, complying with government registration schemes, however temporarily, will have consequences including confiscation. The only purpose of registration is ultimately confiscation and possible jailing of legal firearm owners.

If you're serious about protecting your right to firearm ownership, you'll have firearms that are completely unregistered. That involves a bit more effort on your part, but for the sake of your family and your community, it is worth it. We've had to deal with this very same issue in California as well, and the rise of 80 percenters / homebuilds here is part of how we are dealing with it.

Link to: http://www.usacarry.com/forums/cali...ornia-gun-laws-winning-simple-technology.html

 

[XD40scinNC]

"We, the People" are ignoring it. There ain't a damn thing can be done about it either.
UnConstituional laws are not laws at all and may be ignored by the citizens.

(YMMV of course!)

So if you are in NY (you don't indicate your location) you ignore it and go to your LGS and buy some 30 round pmags, and a 16 - 19 round mag for your handgun?

 

[freethink]

So if you are in NY (you don't indicate your location) you ignore it and go to your LGS and buy some 30 round pmags, and a 16 - 19 round mag for your handgun?

No, ditto for CA (though as I understand it the bill prohibiting ownership of large-cap mags that recently got signed into law in CA is one of those that will be challenged in court as well as being eventually subjected to referendum either this year or next), but such bans won't keep people from making their own or crafting them from kits.

 

[mikestone967]

Speaking of Kommiefornia....
Here's a a story that should anger everyone here..

EDITORIAL: One law for us, another for you - Washington Times

EDITORIAL: One law for us, another for you - Washington Times

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

The California state Senate voted 28-8 Wednesday to exempt itself from the pointless gun-control laws that apply to the rest of the populace. Legislators apparently think they alone are worthy to pack heat on the streets for personal protection, and the masses ought to wait until the police arrive.

This is just one of many bills Golden State politicians used this legislative session to set themselves apart from the little people, the ones who pay their inflated salaries. Annual compensation for legislators averages about $140,000, not counting luxurious perks such as taxpayer-funded cars and free gasoline. By comparison, the average Californian earns $50,000 a year, and the unemployment rate is 11.9 percent - far above the national average. Exact salaries for state assemblymen and senators are obscured by the use of a “per diem” payment scheme that shelters a significant chunk of income from taxation.

Attempts by a handful of reformers to require politicians to provide a full annual disclosure of the benefits received from the public treasury have been rebuffed. Currently, government officials must file a statement of economic interests revealing income from any source other than a local, state or federal government agency. Gifts worth more than $50 also must be disclosed, but lawmakers rejected a bill that would have prohibited acceptance of concert and sporting event tickets, gift cards, spa treatments, golf outings and other benefits from lobbyists trying to buy votes.

Bills of this nature never meet an honest fate in which roll-call votes put members on the record as favoring or opposing each idea. Instead, reform measures are held in committee to die quietly as legislative deadlines pass. As of last week, it’s effectively impossible for a bill to become law if it hasn’t already passed in at least one of the chambers.

Such a silent death sentence was imposed on a bill that would have eliminated the practice of allowing select public employees to avoid paying red-light-camera tickets and escape any consequence for using toll roads without paying. The current system grants free rides to politicians, court workers, police officers, city council members, social workers, meter maids and their spouses. The bill failed even after a compromise amendment deleted the requirement to pay red-light-camera tickets.

The arrogance of the political class is certainly not limited to California. Federal law prohibits private companies from pestering the public with unwanted telemarketing calls from businesses, but Congress exempted “political organizations” - i.e., themselves - from its provisions. In Sacramento, an attempt failed to establish a special Do Not Call list for people who don’t want to listen to automated calls from California pols.

Left coast politicians lack all shame regarding their self-enrichment at public expense. Even though their outrageous conduct has sunk a once-prosperous state $10 billion in debt, the public seems not to care. In November, voters recycled Jerry Brown as governor even though Gov. Moonbeam’s disastrous tenure during the 1970s enabled the compensation packages for a unionized public sector that are busting the budget today. When California finally goes bankrupt, voters need only look in the mirror when wondering who deserves the blame.

 

[freethink]

That article from 2011

Speaking of Kommiefornia....
Here's a a story that should anger everyone here..

EDITORIAL: One law for us, another for you - Washington Times

Yeah, I keep seeing people circulate that article... from 2011.

It's not that we're not upset about it, it's that it's from 2011. The things that are happening now are the seven bills that just got passed (CA) which are about to be challenged in two ways... 1) in the courts (by FPF and others), and also, 2) by referendum. And of course, 3) by technological circumvention.

Maybe as the case(s) go through the courts which challenge those seven laws, the lawyers will use that issue from 2011 as leverage ("see, the Legislature has not provided equal treatment under the law, one more reason to overturn these particular laws, etc.") but who knows what legal arguments they'll use. I'll bet they'll be novel, though.

Meanwhile, we're building (unregistered) guns from eighty-percenters and preparing to move out of the state. Those court cases can last years.

 

[mcoh1030]

The Frontier No Longer Exists

Yeah, I keep seeing people circulate that article... from 2011.

It's not that we're not upset about it, it's that it's from 2011. The things that are happening now are the seven bills that just got passed (CA) which are about to be challenged in two ways... 1) in the courts (by FPF and others), and also, 2) by referendum. And of course, 3) by technological circumvention.

Maybe as the case(s) go through the courts which challenge those seven laws, the lawyers will use that issue from 2011 as leverage ("see, the Legislature has not provided equal treatment under the law, one more reason to overturn these particular laws, etc.") but who knows what legal arguments they'll use. I'll bet they'll be novel, though.

Meanwhile, we're building (unregistered) guns from eighty-percenters and preparing to move out of the state. Those court cases can last years.

MOVING OUT OF STATE.....MEANS CRAP!!! If CLUN-TON wins......she'll decapitate the 2nd Amendment using her teeth........and she's good at it!!! She took Bill's off and put it back on and took it off again. And she did it while Barack has is pee-shooter planted firmly in her anus.

 

[Seamsealer]

If you haven't seen this one, its pretty good.