• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

NY State *passes* most restrictive weapons ban ever after being rushed to a vote.

Page 27 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
Illegal, BATF would classify it as a suppressor.
There you go guys, that'd be perfect for them. Necessitate black powder, which has more particulate. Since it has more particulate, firearm needs a particulate filter. Once it has a particulate filter, it has a 'suppressor', which is illegal. Since all guns would be illegal, 'no one' will have guns. We'd need to hire a bunch of environmental cleanup crews though, because the amount of Lefties that logic would satisfy would be so many, they'd all cream their pants in unison ready it. Jizzathol? Could be onto something there...
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,570
2
0
That may be a tough choice for them though. Those powders undoubtably pollute more, so they'd have to choose between the two 'terrible wrongs'. What a fight that'd be between closed doors: The gun grabber religous nuts and the envirokook religous nuts. Could Pay-Per-View that and use it to pay down some of the national debt...

Chuck
The sad thing is, they've already tried something very similar.
http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/15/zeroing-in-on-lead-in-hunters-bullets/

I'd REALLY like to know how they got their numbers too. I guess you can estimate rounds fired by hunters and average lead content per round, but HTF do you figure 20 million birds died of lead poisoning? Do you have people combing the woods collecting tens of millions of dead birds and conducting autopsies? :D
 

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,523
1,569
126
Illegal, BATF would classify it as a suppressor.
Suppressors are legal in most states.

Pay the tax, fill out the application, do the background check, and you can have one.

If you live in these states, you can't have one:

California, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, and the District of Columbia.
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
The sad thing is, they've already tried something very similar.
http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/15/zeroing-in-on-lead-in-hunters-bullets/

I'd REALLY like to know how they got their numbers too. I guess you can estimate rounds fired by hunters and average lead content per round, but HTF do you figure 20 millions birds died of lead poisoning? Do you have people combing the woods collecting tens of millions of dead birds and conducting autopsies? :D
Haha, who knows. I'm sure it was a study and I'm sure it was 'peer reviewed', so the numbers must be legit. I'm OK with banning lead bullets used outdoors, right after a suitable replacement is found that meets hunter and reloader needs equal to or better than lead. Is there such a thing? I've never bothered to check, so just don't know...

Chuck
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
Suppressors are legal in most states.

Pay the tax, fill out the application, do the background check, and you can have one.

If you live in these states, you can't have one:

California, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, and the District of Columbia.
So guns would then be banned in those states. And then the rest of the states would get even more income from needless regulation?!?! Holy shit, I hope no super smart political guys are reading this thread! D::hmm:

Chuck
 

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,313
2
0
https://www.facebook.com/SteveMcNY

Here's what was originally proposed.

1. Confiscation of "assault weapons"
2. Confiscation o ten round clips
3. Statewide database for ALL Guns
4. Continue to allow pistol permit holder's information to be replaced to the public
5. Label semiautomatic shotguns with more than 5 rounds or pistol grips as "assault weapons”
6. Limit the number of rounds in a magazine to 5 and confiscation and forfeiture of banned magazines
7. Limit possession to no more than two (2) magazines
8. Limit purchase of guns to one gun per person per month
9. Require re-licensing of all pistol permit owners
10. Require renewal of all pistol permits every five years
11. State issued pistol permits
12. Micro-stamping of all guns in New York State
13. Require licensing of all gun ammo dealers
14. Mandatory locking of guns at home
15. Fee for licensing, registering weapons
McLaughlin was asked to "not release" the specifics prior to the vote because they'd dampen the ability to compromise.
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
Hahahaha!!!

I love the Looney Left, they are like the mirror image of the Radical Right but even more insane. This - and worse, since you know that some of this was a "compromise" from the true Left base - is the mentality of the Left. Unchecked, that's the type of insanity logic the Left brings to the table.

Hahaha, man that made my day, thanks for sharing Doppel!

Chuck
 

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,313
2
0
There has been a lot of flak over this bill. Cuomo's approval rating immediately fell 15 points, though it's still high for a governor. The NY sheriff's association condemned how the bill was passed and though it supports some parts of it, criticized others. Also a lot of counties in NY have passed resolutions calling for the repeal of it, and many more will be voting on similar resolutions shortly. They have no weight on this, strictly speaking, but the backlash has been severe. Senate co-leader Skelos said that "perhaps we did act in haste". At least one lawsuit has already been files, based on precedent of another SCOTUS case over some portions of this law.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_8_9/516140_.html
 
Last edited:

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,267
3
76
There has been a lot of flak over this bill. Cuomo's approval rating immediately fell 15 points, though it's still high for a governor. The NY sheriff's association condemned how the bill was passed and though it supports some parts of it, criticized others. Also a lot of counties in NY have passed resolutions calling for the repeal of it, and many more will be voting on similar resolutions shortly. They have no weight on this, strictly speaking, but the backlash has been severe. Senate co-leader Skelos said that "perhaps we did act in haste". At least one lawsuit has already been files, based on precedent of another SCOTUS case over some portions of this law.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_8_9/516140_.html
Good, they need to destroy this anti-gun nut job law.
 

Lithium381

Lifer
May 12, 2001
12,464
2
0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8W91EWQv4Fc

where were the police? aren't we supposed to just give up our guns and trust the police? Oh thats right, they don't even have a duty to protect us anyway, and whn we need them they're 18 minutes away...what if there had been a baby in the back seat of the car? They want us to be unarmed, and against THIS?
 

Lithium381

Lifer
May 12, 2001
12,464
2
0
I would agree, if it's justified for LEO to carry hi-cap mags the same should apply to CCW's as well.
remember, they're not HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES(ZOMG!!!)

they're standard. . . . they're trying to control the language so they can control the uninformed. . .
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,267
3
76
remember, they're not HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES(ZOMG!!!)

they're standard. . . . they're trying to control the language so they can control the uninformed. . .
I think am going to re-new my CHL, and carry a MAC11 .380.
 

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,313
2
0
*UPDATE*

More counties continue to consider and/or pass resolutions calling for partial or full repeal of NY safe:



Cuomo actually spoke to this trend and said it covers 11% of the NY population (i.e. not significant). Either his math is wrong or he's going on old data. At the rate things are going the vast majority of upstate NY counties will have opposed NY Safe. Cuomo just recently admitted that without the "message of necessity" (meaning: a bill is passed immediately without the legally required 3 days of discussion) NY safe never would have gone through.

Of more substantial, concrete progress, yesterday:
http://www.wktv.com/news/local/State-Supreme-Court-wants-NYS-to-show-good-cause-that-gun-law-is-constitutional-193664911.html

State Supreme Court wants NYS to show good cause that gun law is constitutional...The Buffalo-based attorney who is spear-heading a lawsuit against Governor Andrew Cuomo's recent gun laws said that Wednesday was "monumental," as a State Supreme Court Justice issued an order requiring New York State to show good cause that the law is constitutional.

New York State has until April 29 to respond or else an injunction will be issued.
This is a massive hit against the law. Apparently the plaintiff involved deals exclusively with "assault weapons" and so the law has wrecked his business. The onus is now on the state to defend the constitutionality of the law.

--------

Cuomo is learning what others have had to learn the hard way, which is that gun owners are a very strong voice and do not easily roll over.

NY safe's passage to my standard was a terrible piece of legislation, forced through on incorrect pretenses (a run on guns, which had already happened), and with some senators having no more than 90 minutes to review it they nonetheless abdicated their responsibilities and passed the "toughest gun law in the country". This is now coming back hard to bite them, and if the courts actually do slap down the law (in the short term that would be via injunction) the politicians involved have sullied their reputations and not even achieved what they went for. Huge miscalculation.

Evidently, owning a 10 round magazine and putting in more than 7 rounds, come April's cut-off is a more major felony than a whole rash of sexual crimes including 3rd degree rape, genital mutilation, owning child porn: http://www.nyfirearms.com/blog/2013/02/31-crimes-that-are-worse-than-having-more-than-7-rounds/
 
Last edited:

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,313
2
0
Guess this thread seems to be kinda dead, but since NY has been the bellwether of where this fight is going to a large degree, it's interesting to see what's happening.

As of now the vast majority of counties in NY state have passed resolutions indicating their desire to see NY Safe repealed.



These counties do not represent the majority of the population, though; those around NYC who are already far less likely to own guns like NY Safe.

The pressure on state government has been immense and the state is about to back out of the magazine limit. If it hadn't, there is a good chance one of the cases against the state would have received an injunction anyway (and there is a hearing on April 29 to this effect; if the state doesn't make a strong case for constitutionality of the law a judge is going to back it out until courts uphold or strike it down).
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,570
2
0
It's always the big cities that are the issue. Glad to see resistance is gaining such traction in New York, I'd all but written the state off.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
The elite authoritarian assholes in the cities don't give a rat's ass about what any hick redneck in the sticks thinks. They believe they're your superiors and you should just do as you're fucking told.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,678
4,079
126
This whole thing needs to be struck down and Cuomo needs to go. This whole process is the antithesis of representative democracy, making sure there was little debate and no public input. I hope this ends the Emperor's chances for national office although he's probably too powerful.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
69,057
17,202
136
Guess this thread seems to be kinda dead, but since NY has been the bellwether of where this fight is going to a large degree, it's interesting to see what's happening.

As of now the vast majority of counties in NY state have passed resolutions indicating their desire to see NY Safe repealed.



These counties do not represent the majority of the population, though; those around NYC who are already far less likely to own guns like NY Safe.

The pressure on state government has been immense and the state is about to back out of the magazine limit. If it hadn't, there is a good chance one of the cases against the state would have received an injunction anyway (and there is a hearing on April 29 to this effect; if the state doesn't make a strong case for constitutionality of the law a judge is going to back it out until courts uphold or strike it down).
It is a case that deals with a constitutional right. The burden is always on the government to show its necessity. This is not unique to this law.

Oh and maps like that are super misleading. Republicans usually publish one after every election they lose. People vote, not trees and grass.
 

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,313
2
0
It is a case that deals with a constitutional right. The burden is always on the government to show its necessity. This is not unique to this law.

Oh and maps like that are super misleading. Republicans usually publish one after every election they lose. People vote, not trees and grass.
That map is only misleading if one doesn't mention the population--but I did :) It showcases the huge disconnect between upstate and downstate NY. Cuomo in an increasing way just represents NYC; the sheriff's association and counties don't support him at nearly the levels they do in NYC.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,570
2
0
I'd put down money that Cuomo wins his run for national office if it is senate or below, and he has a decent shot at the presidency if Hillary doesn't run.
HAHAHAHAHA.

Question: "Mr Cuomo, during your tenure as governor you passed the highly controversial NY SAFE Act with some estimates citing a mere two hours of debate, can Americans expect this same bending of the rules as President?"

Cuomo: Says something stupid.


Never mind that the Democrats seem determined to alienate gun owners and make the NRA as powerful as possible over the next 4 years. I know the NRA doesn't determine elections by itself, but close to half of all households have a gun in them, probably another couple of percent added in the last 2 months. You think the gun-scare over Obama was bad? Imagine if the Democrats tried to elect someone who not only might be coming for your guns but has gone on record as saying he wants to confiscate (he used the word) guns.

Good luck alienating a growing demographic in a more and more libertarian society. Of course, all he needs to win is for the GOP to nominate someone even dumber.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,083
489
126
2014 will be a good measuring stick on whether or not Cuomo has a chance in 2016. If state democrats who pass draconian gun bans go down in flames. Forget about it...
 

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,313
2
0
I believe this has killed his chances for presidency, almost alone. His approval rating is still strong but down to 55 I think now, shedding 20 points since this. He's learning that gun owners are a very strong voice and they will throw a lot of money at him if he ever tries it. I think this has finished such aspirations frankly.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY