New York Safe Act facts......just out from Gov Cuomo

page: 1
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Below are FAQ intended to help gun owners in New York understand and comply with the NY SAFE Act enacted on January 15, 2013. If your question is not answered here, please continue to check back, as this list will be updated regularly.


www.governor.ny.gov...

So here is the scoop on the new gun ban.

Everything you wanted to know.

Also, on a another note.

All New York, and nearby second amendment supporters......rally at the NY State Capital, tomorrow, Saturday 12:00 noon.

Speakers to include State Sen. Kathy Marchione!




posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Q: What if I have a magazine that can contain more than ten rounds? A: You can permanently modify the magazine so that it holds no more than ten rounds, responsibly discard it, or sell it to a dealer or an out of state purchaser by January 15, 2014.


So how will these modifications be made?


Q: How many rounds can I put in my magazine today? A: Ten. Starting on April 15, 2013, you are limited to putting in seven rounds, unless you are at an incorporated firing range or competition recognized by the National Rifle Association or International Handgun Metallic Silhouette Association, in which case the limit is ten.



Oopsy, they forgot to exempt police officers.
edit on 18-1-2013 by timetothink because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 03:38 PM
link   
This is crazy. They actually said to grid off the threads on the barrel. They'll be real good for my 2500$ gun. What a bunch of criminals. We need to get rid of this scum once and for all.



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 03:38 PM
link   
Um how vague lol.

"I own a gun that I use for hunting, is it an assault weapon?"

RIFLES THAT ARE NOT CLASSIFIED AS ASSAULT WEAPONS
RIFLES THAT ARE CLASSIFIED AS ASSAULT WEAPONS
BANNED FEATURES
IMAGES OF RIFLES THAT ARE NOT CLASSIFIED AS ASSAULT RIFLES

So how did that answer that question? And Images of rifles can be an assault rifle??



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Azdraik
 


You can see how they just threw this whole thing together in a panic.

I guess they figured if they got it done, it wouldn't get repealed?

What a mess!



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 03:45 PM
link   
I have a question for New York LEOs:

Do you intend to enforce this crap if you encounter someone with a "pre-ban" magazine or other "banned feature"?



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by AwakeinNM
 


I sent an email to my county sheriff with this question....still haven't heard anything.



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 03:51 PM
link   
I bring a few things to consider...in reading New York's "FAQ" and political reassurance piece that 'all is okay' and 'trust us....we really won't do more'.


In 1989, California banned the
sale or transfer of assault weapons and required all existing owners to
register their guns. The California law was very poorly drafted:
California Attorney General Dan Lungren later admitted that some of the
gun models banned by the California Legislature did not exist. San
Francisco lawyer Don Kates suggested that legislators, in compiling the
list of prohibited guns, appeared to have selected from "some picture
book ... of mislabeled firearms they thought looked evil."

The vast majority of Californians did not register their guns.
Thus the law may have created as many as 300,000 new criminals.
According to Michael McNulty, chairman of the private California
Organization for Public Safety, "We estimate that hundreds of citizens
have been arrested and prosecuted for firearms not on the regulated
list." In numerous cases, police carrying out searches of people's homes
have seized weapons they allege to be illegal assault weapons--and then
have refused to return them even after receiving proof that the guns are
not legally banned under California law.
Source

And...

CALIFORNIA REDEFINES 'ASSAULT WEAPONS'

and finally...

California Demands All SKS Rifles Be Turned In

These are all pieces I've located using Google's date limiting tools. So these articles come before 2000 and reflect the actual things said and done at the time, not how people would re-write events by hindsight. The people of California were also assured registration would never mean confiscation. I lived there. I heard this with my own ears. As we all know, confiscation absolutely DID COME as it must to effectively enforce the bans proposed then and now, in the long term. Anything else makes the law a gesture and not an effective change to real world events.

New York has, by the 10th Amendment, this right ...If the Super Court agrees with the challenges, of course. I'm sure it'll be run to Albany and then the 9 Robed ones quickly enough to learn that. If the PEOPLE of New York WANT THIS and what comes next by California's apt example, then by all means...I wish you well. If New York believes this IS ALL THAT WILL HAPPEN? Then, please,,, read the above stuff and whatever else from California and Illinois both on what happened there, how your new laws were modeled on theirs, and what WILL COME NEXT.

This is but a step to the end...and this isn't guessing. It's happened before and it happened exactly like this. Step by Step. By the numbers.
edit on 18-1-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 03:58 PM
link   
Q: What qualifies as an antique gun or magazine?
A: Any magazine or gun manufactured more than 50 years ago. this is alittle ambiguious as i didnt think most magazines had dates on them so to speak so how will you prove it......and on another note a tommy gun is over 50 years old are they gonan exempt all of them? same for most m1's and perhaps even a few more guns could slip through the cracks on this one least as far as the guns go......

thinking about the date part more clearly i think this law will do one good thing a surge in sales of engraving machines as people scraw "legal" dates into their magazines to get around this i mean how are they gonna prove when the mag was made?
edit on 18-1-2013 by RalagaNarHallas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 08:39 PM
link   
figured this video would be entertaining to members of ats as it shows exactly what they are trying to pull off and what they want to accomplish with out us "catching on"

www.youtube.com...




so its a republican and a democrat from ny talking about the assult weapons bill in ny and how they didnt want to let the list get out that talked about confiscations


www.menrec.com...


In the video, McLaughlin is speaking to Democrat Assemblyman Joseph Lentol. Here is the transcript: McLaughlin: ... Something that we received from the Senate, Democrat proposals in this gun bill. And I don't know if you've seen this, or if you know that these are there or not. Lentol: Well we don't have our own list of rejected proposals, that the Senate rejected, so I don't have anything to show you. McLaughlin: Okay. Alright, then I won't address it then if you haven't seen it. I'll leave that one alone. Okay, thank you, Joe. Appreciate it. Lentol: And by the way, I would recommend not to have that list shared because it has the capacity to dampen the enthusiasm of compromise. McLaughlin: Well, it sure does when we talk about the confiscation of assault weapons. It absolutely has the ability to dampen a compromise. The list of proposals that Democrats would rather you didn't see, can be seen below. 1. Confiscation of "assault weapons" 2. Confiscation of 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



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 09:23 PM
link   
It is interesting to note that, on the site, rather than a typical statement of facts or FAQ, the information is presented thusly:


Q: I own a gun that I use for hunting, is it an assault weapon?
Q: I own a handgun, is that an assault weapon?
Q: I am not sure if the gun I own is an assault weapon. How do I find out?
Q: I have an assault weapon. Do I have to give it up?
Q: How does registering my gun compare to getting a handgun license?
Q: What do I do if I don’t want to register my assault weapon?
Q: If I modify my gun by removing all design characteristics that makes it an assault weapon, do I have to register it?
Q: If I don’t currently own an assault weapon, how does the new ban on assault weapons affect me?


Statement form. To gain information pertaining to a certain type of gun, one must check a box stating, admitting, or confessing, "I own a gun..."

By design, this website informs the public, as well as informing the State of New York.
edit on 18-1-2013 by ecapsretuo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Azdraik
Um how vague lol.

"I own a gun that I use for hunting, is it an assault weapon?"

RIFLES THAT ARE NOT CLASSIFIED AS ASSAULT WEAPONS
RIFLES THAT ARE CLASSIFIED AS ASSAULT WEAPONS
BANNED FEATURES
IMAGES OF RIFLES THAT ARE NOT CLASSIFIED AS ASSAULT RIFLES

So how did that answer that question? And Images of rifles can be an assault rifle??


There was a linked document that listed the rifles that are assault weapons. it seems they must be registered.



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 11:25 PM
link   
With these gun facts in mind.
Know that it is your duty as a American Citizen to disobey unlawful laws.
The Weapons are for tyrannical governments.
I'm not saying this government is tyrannical,
but that is the only real reason we have the right to have them in the first place.



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 11:44 PM
link   
What I am wondering is if you had a pre safe act compliant ar 15 with a forward grip on it would it be considered illegal? It seems it would to me because of the reduction of the 2 features to 1 feature? I am all sorts of confused anymore?



posted on Jan, 18 2013 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Well aren't you little bunny foo foo good news tonight!

Just when I thought we might have legal recourse.


Pfffffft.



Thank you for the info though, I appreciate the heads up.
edit on 18-1-2013 by timetothink because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 12:00 AM
link   
reply to post by RalagaNarHallas
 


I would like to see more of the secret lists and exchanges.

Nice to know what their endgame is.

Thank you for finding that.



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 12:15 AM
link   
This is all turning into such a mess. This is going to do nothing for law abiding citizens but create mass confusion and make good people criminal. They dont even know what they are doing writing these stupid laws.



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 01:12 AM
link   
Well at least some people here in NYS within the legal system are trying to help out as they can. So far as of yesterday at least 10,000 people are joining in a suit against the current laws just passed. This is a positive in my opinion. The people of NY are speaking, I know Albany is not listening as usual. Link to local article.
www.wgrz.com...



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by stonebutterfly
This is all turning into such a mess. This is going to do nothing for law abiding citizens but create mass confusion and make good people criminal. They dont even know what they are doing writing these stupid laws.


It really is doing just that. For the first time in my life I picked up the phone today and called the local state police, I asked them to clarify the whole magazine thing because I planned on going out to the local public range for target shooting and didn't feel like getting hauled away in cuffs. Looking back on it I should have just drove over there as I have so many questions that are still unanswered. I was told for now it's business as usual until the deadline, but I figured it worth my 2 min to at least try to get clarification on it. The way this thing slammed through it wouldn't have surprised me one bit to hear we had till midnight the following day to comply, seems anything is fair game these days.



posted on Jan, 19 2013 @ 01:27 AM
link   
What is this they slipped in?




Possession of an unloaded gun will be raised from a misdemeanor to a Class E felony.





new topics

top topics



 
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join