A (very) small victory for NY

[toivo]

Ha! hahaha! Wow, that really... wow. I can just imagine the next mentally ill mass shooter only loading up 7rds each into 10rd magazines.

Right. And he would have already sold his pre-ban hi-caps out-of-state so as to be in compliance ...

 

[jerkface11]

A New York court threw out a law banning high capacity drinks. Not a big jump to applying that ruling here.

 

[HKGuns]

All these stupid bills are doing is costing a heck of a lot of money...on both sides of the fence for absolutely nothing.

There you have the real truth. You ought to walk down to the Capital building, tar and feather his @SS and run him, Bloomberg and all of their supporters out of the State on a rail.

It ought to be led by the State Police, with backup from the Sheriff's departments of every County to pass a resolution against it, because it only puts their good pensions further at risk and for what? - Absolutely nothing but air time for these buffoons. They should have their lights on and provide an escort for all of the good citizens involved in the act of freedom and rebellion.

How many millions do you think this garbage is going to cost the citizens of NY to defend and how much of the rest of the Country to fight?

It is beyond any reasonable comprehension that Mayor Sodapop can even get air time on any serious news program and the people who elected him should hang their heads in absolute, utter shame.

Colorado should do the exact same with the bunch of idiots they now have running the show in their State.

 

[Pat M]

You can load 10 rounds at at an authorized shooting range, or at an NRA sanctioned competition, but limited to 7 in your own home with a licensed handgun. Absurd.

 

[toivo]

Folks, this is about to get more interesting. I've just been reading the lawsuit that NYSRPA filed today. They point out that the law says you can't load more than seven rounds in a magazine that has a capacity of "more than seven but less than ten." And of course, you can't have a magazine with a capacity of more than ten.

The lawsuit points out, rightfully, that this means you can load more than seven rounds in a magazine that has a capacity of exactly ten. So if you have an eight or nine-round magazine, you can only load seven, but if you have a ten-round magazine, you can load ten. Oops ...

They should have said "a capacity of more than seven but less than eleven" or "a capacity of more than seven but not more than ten." As written, the law totally exempts ten-round magazines from the seven-round-load limitation. Oh no, they didn't rush this bill at all ...

 

[HKGuns]

I got so ticked off about NY I wrote COMA a scathing email.

I told him I was glad he showed his true colors, because he'd never hold another public office again in his life and that I normally write respectful letters to Politicians but my respect is earned and he's proven he deserves none.

 

[SleazyRider]

Folks, this is about to get more interesting. I've just been reading the lawsuit that NYSRPA filed today. They point out that the law says you can't load more than seven rounds in a magazine that has a capacity of "more than seven but less than ten." And of course, you can't have a magazine with a capacity of more than ten.

The lawsuit points out, rightfully, that this means you can load more than seven rounds in a magazine that has a capacity of exactly ten. So if you have an eight or nine-round magazine, you can only load seven, but if you have a ten-round magazine, you can load ten. Oops ...

They should have said "a capacity of more than seven but less than eleven" or "a capacity of more than seven but not more than ten." As written, the law totally exempts ten-round magazines from the seven-round-load limitation. Oh no, they didn't rush this bill at all ...

That is a great point! But I'm not really concerned with breaking the law loading more than seven; I'm concerned with availability of the guns. Nobody will ship a gun that holds more than seven to the Empire State. But, yes, that's just another indicator of what a hastily and ill-conceived piece of legislation it is.

 

[steelerdude99]

I’m trying to figure this out: IF a NY’er has a 24oz. cup only filled with soda to 16oz. that’s still legal. BUT someone who has a 32oz. or even the 48oz. BIG GULP, they will be arrested for a large capacity sugar feeding device? What if they go back for a refill or just buy two sodas? What about a straw purchase where I bring a friend and he buys a soda for me? Will I need a background check for that soda? { sorry for my slightly off-topic rant }

Back to guns and magazines, the part that bugs me about NY’s “SAFE ACT” is the concept that an item bought legally is now illegal and must be turned in. Even the NFA of 1934, did not outlaw then require surrendering or selling the items out of jurisdiction. The selling outside of NY is a contradiction as NY blames neighboring states for its “illegal gun problem”.

chuck

 

[Tom from WNY]

And it gets more interesting....

Despite the new illogic that makes my head hurt, I can buy/own a 10 round magazine but I can only load 7 unless at an incorporated range, ***????!!! Yet, a new wrinkle is appearing.

Dictator Skelos, the RINO in charge of the NY Senate Republicans is reportedly against any exemptions from the SAFE Act for the entertainment industry. Now, I have commented on that here and to my elected representatives quite clearly; NO EXEMPTION FOR ENTERTAINMENT TO PRODUCE GRATUITOUS VIOLENCE.

I only can ponder if he will use his reluctance to agree as leverage? Make any bets?

Look at the maps on SCOPENY. Predictors of things to come.

 

[PabloJ]

King Cuomo has acknowledged that at least part of his new 'SAFE act' is ill conceived and unworkable.
He's realized that placing a restriction on magazines capable of holding more than seven rounds will jeopardize his new law, so he's made a concession; we can continue to buy ten-rounders but only load seven (except at a range and possibly in the home).

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/21/n...ase-a-newly-passed-gun-restriction.html?_r=1&

Thanks Andy, but no dice.

See you in court.

Load 7 into 10 rounder? What is next for them? It's ok for them to have pot as long it's not smoked/distributed and used as room freshener only?

 

[WoodchuckAssassin]

HA! I can't wait to talk to my dad about this one. The poor guy still lives in NY, and almost exclusively owns Ruger Mark 1's (10 round mags).

Score one...or rather 1/2...for Team Common Sense!

 

[c4v3man]

Cuomo threw hunters a bone -a discount of from one to ten dollars on hunting licensess.

Now if only they'll start offering those human hunting licenses that Diane Feinstein keeps talking about...

I agree, they're trying to go in and fix what's wrong with the bill, the lack of a police (and private security firm) exemption.

 

[BryanDavis]

A New York court threw out a law banning high capacity drinks. Not a big jump to applying that ruling here.

I was just thinking that.

The judge in the Big Gulp Ban case used the phrase "arbitrary and capricious" and that strongly applies to any magazine capacity limits.

For example: Why 10? Why 7? Why not zero? Why not 2? The number was effectively pulled out of thin air. There's no telling what number will be next. Five? Three?

That and it wouldn't have made much difference in the first place, in all the cases of these mass shootings from Adam Lanza to Gabby Giffords, the shooter had to reload at some point, and there either was some hero waiting to tackle the guy or there wasn't.

Character made the difference, not the tool involved.

 

[Ohio Gun Guy]

start the kettle and get some feathers......

 

[rondaxe]

Voting Andy out of office isn't going to happen, and don't think for one second showing his true colors on the gun issue is political suicide for him either. We who live in upstate NY are at the mercy of the MAJORITY from downstate. They just love a New York city slicker who they think is going to protect them.

 

[HKGuns]

Voting Andy out of office isn't going to happen, and don't think for one second showing his true colors on the gun issue is political suicide for him either. We who live in upstate NY are at the mercy of the MAJORITY from downstate. They just love a New York city slicker who they think is going to protect them.

Then your only choice is to move or do as I said further up in the thread.

 

[rondaxe]

Sorry HK, moving means running, I'm not doing that. I wrote him a letter, told him I had a 12 round mag and if he wanted it to come get it, himself, not some poor state trooper. Probably not the smartest thing I ever did but I was a little P.O.ed. Tar and feather him? One can dream!

 

[SleazyRider]

Sorry HK, moving means running, I'm not doing that.

Nor am I.

 

[Upstater]

^^^^ WHAT HE SAID! Without a doubt!

 

[HorseSoldier]

NO

He wants to bring the law back to the chopping block so he can add the LEO exception!!
DONT LET HIM DO IT. HE MADE HIS BED.

Even without an exemption, who is going to enforce LE adherence to a seven round max in the gun? Even if you can get a cop to charge a cop for violation, what DA is going to pour gasoline over their relationship with local law enforcement and set fire to it by prosecuting? While gun owners are justifiably up in arms about this, the MSM isn't going to lead the charge on creating a PR nightmare for departments which ignore the restriction -- if anything, they'll do the opposite and downplay it.

Trying to leave this one on the books so cops can be made to suffer under its stupidity as well strikes me as a good way to not-really-win a battle while tanking the war entirely.

 

[pseudonymity]

Load 7 into 10 rounder? What is next for them? It's ok for them to have pot as long it's not smoked/distributed and used as room freshener only?

Oh man, it is so much better than that. So it looks like S2607D removes the 7 round definition for the large capacity ammo feeding device (LCAFD) definition, but remove curio and relics also.

It leaves in place the new law 265.37 which went into effect on 3/15. That peach of a law says

IT SHALL BE UNLAWFUL FOR A PERSON TO KNOWINGLY POSSESS AN AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICE THAT SUCH PERSON LAWFULLY POSSESSED 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 SEVEN BUT LESS THAN TEN ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION, WHERE SUCH DEVICE CONTAINS MORE THAN SEVEN ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION​

So, the law only is in effect for mags that hold "more than seven but less than ten rounds" - in other words, the 7 round limit only applies to 8 and 9 round mags, but not 10 round mags.

Even better, the law only applies to mags of any size that were possessed before 3/15/2013, so any mags you purchase after 3/15 are not part of this law.

 

[Pat M]

Ok, so I can only load 7 in my 8-round Kimber 1911 mags, but 10 in my 10-round Glock mags. Got it.

 

[railroadman]

thanks for the many people who can see what the 2014 vote will do for getting rid of the gun zealots nation wide see you on election DAY

 

[StrutStopper]

I'm certainly glad I left NY. Unfortunately, our moron Governor here is kissing Nobama's butt and trying to pass some pretty ridiculous laws of his own. They've been tabled for now, but we're not out of the woods yet. Anyway, I'd like to think that if Cuomo had aspirations of being POTUS that the American people would kill that quickly, but look who we've got for a president now... I can see the 2020 ticket now (gotta wait for Hillary to get thrown off her throne first) Cuomo/Bloomberg...

 

[SleazyRider]

Rhetoric aside, few sobering truths ...

1. We of The High Road are a voting minority.
2. It matters not what state you live in, nothing can stop an idea whose time has come.