In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options

Federal judge upholds NY SafeAct, stikes a portion

rabump199rabump199 Member Posts: 238 ✭✭✭
edited January 2014 in General Discussion

Comments

  • Options
    brier-49brier-49 Member Posts: 7,039 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    YUP NY & CT going down because of non voting gun owners!!
  • Options
    shilowarshilowar Member Posts: 38,815 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Hey if it needs to be torn down one piece at a time, so long as it gets torn down I say carry on!
  • Options
    guntech59guntech59 Member Posts: 23,187 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Thanks for the news Robert.

    I have been waiting for that decision. You can bet that it will be appealed.

    You're right, Shilowar, one piece at at time.

    Those poor buzzards in CT have it worse than us. [:(!][V]
  • Options
    nyforesternyforester Member Posts: 2,575 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    So are 20 and 30 round mags legal or illegal ????

    Looking for clarification ????
    Abort Cuomo
  • Options
    ChrisInTempeChrisInTempe Member Posts: 15,562
    edited November -1
    There have been many gains for Gun Rights in the last 20 years or so, and a few backslides. Keep whittling away at the foolishness, it will fall eventually.
  • Options
    1911a1-fan1911a1-fan Member Posts: 51,193 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Justice Antonin Scalia, who wrote the opinion, said the Constitution does not give people the right to keep and carry any type of gun whatsoever.


    and he is the alleged intellectual of the conservative side of the court?
  • Options
    guntech59guntech59 Member Posts: 23,187 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    A C&P from this site (my apologies if it is hard to read): http://download.gannett.edgesuite.net/wgrz/news/SAFEACT-Decision.pdf


    IV. CONCLUSION
    "Our Constitution is designed to maximize individual freedoms within a framework
    of ordered liberty." Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352, 357, 103 S. Ct. 1855, 1858, 75 L.
    Ed. 2d 903 (1983). In Heller and McDonald, the Supreme Court found that the right to
    "keep and bear arms," enshrined in the Second Amendment, was among those individual
    freedoms. But the Court also noted that the right was not unlimited. Drawing from post-
    Heller rulings that have begun to settle the vast terra incognita left by the Supreme Court,
    this Court finds that the challenged provisions of the SAFE Act - including the Act's
    definition and regulation of assault weapons and its ban on large-capacity magazines -
    further the state's important interest in public safety, and do not impermissibly infringe on
    Plaintiffs' Second Amendment rights. But, the seven-round limit fails the relevant test
    because the purported link between the ban and the State's interest is tenuous, strained,
    and unsupported in the record.
    Further, three aspects of the law - the "and if" clause of N.Y. Penal Law ? 265.36,
    the references to muzzle "breaks" in N.Y. Penal Law ? 265.00(22)(a)(vi), and the regulation
    with respect to pistols that are "versions" of automatic weapons in N.Y. Penal Law ?
    265.00(22)(c)(viii) - must be stricken because they do not adequately inform an ordinary
    person as to what conduct is prohibited.
    Finally, because the SAFE Act's requirement that all ammunition sales be
    conducted in-person does not unduly burden interstate commerce, it does not violate the
    Commerce Clause.


    So....you can have 10 rds in a 10 rd mag. Everything else stands.
    [:(!][:(!]
  • Options
    spasmcreekspasmcreek Member Posts: 37,724 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    got the best Constitution trashing judges our socialist administration can appoint
  • Options
    guntech59guntech59 Member Posts: 23,187 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by spasmcreek
    got the best Constitution trashing judges our socialist administration can appoint


    Yup!

    Read my signature and see how that matches up with the SAFE Act. [xx(]
  • Options
    Riomouse911Riomouse911 Member Posts: 3,492 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    It is the new gun banner's mantra: they know that they can't ban them outright, so they will try the "death by a thousand cuts" instead and ban them one little piece at a time. This is what happened, and is continuing to happen every single year, in California.

    When one starts out, it seems "OK" to the casual observer or lazy gun owner. But once these little pieces of crap are all added up over the years, the right to own a firearm will be gone.

    If you don't think it can happen to you in your State, beware. We didn't think it could happen here in Ca as fast as it did.
  • Options
    fishkiller41fishkiller41 Member Posts: 50,608
    edited November -1
    Other States must look at NY,Nj,Conn,Cali and just laugh their butts off!!
    At least,I sure hope they do!!
  • Options
    MG1890MG1890 Member Posts: 4,649
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by fishkiller41
    Other States must look at NY,Nj,Conn,Cali and just laugh their butts off!!
    At least,I sure hope they do!!


    Us NY residents don't find it comical.
  • Options
    guntech59guntech59 Member Posts: 23,187 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Riomouse911
    It is the new gun banner's mantra: they know that they can't ban them outright, so they will try the "death by a thousand cuts" instead and ban them one little piece at a time. This is what happened, and is continuing to happen every single year, in California.

    When one starts out, it seems "OK" to the casual observer or lazy gun owner. But once these little pieces of crap are all added up over the years, the right to own a firearm will be gone.

    If you don't think it can happen to you in your State, beware. We didn't think it could happen here in Ca as fast as it did.

    True!!
  • Options
    11BravoCrunchie11BravoCrunchie Member Posts: 33,423 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    What part of "...shall not be infringed" don't these $#@!-tards understand?
  • Options
    MFIMFI Member Posts: 7,899 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Anything over 10 should be a no-no I believe..

    quote:Originally posted by nyforester
    So are 20 and 30 round mags legal or illegal ????

    Looking for clarification ????
  • Options
    deerhntrdeerhntr Member Posts: 1,853 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    That judge was NEVER going to rule against the state, this state is a web of liberal commies working together against us. This is one of Many cases pending and i am confidant we will have our rights restored.......in time. How is it that a federal judge quotes mother jones as "facts" WTH? How is this ok?
  • Options
    dotcom_guy30dotcom_guy30 Member Posts: 2,572 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    My wife never looked back when she left New York State , now her brother moved down here
  • Options
    competentonecompetentone Member Posts: 4,698 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by nyforester
    So are 20 and 30 round mags legal or illegal ????

    Looking for clarification ????


    Just reading that article, it sounds like the ruling upholds the ban on magazines over 10 rounds, but eliminated the restriction prohibiting loading 10-round magazines to their full capacity.

    So it looks like you can now put an extra three rounds in that 10-round magazine.

    Wow. What a victory for Second Amendment rights....
  • Options
    legearlegear Member Posts: 6,716
    edited November -1
    I think the common use part from heller v. DC will knock alot of the NY safe act out.

    As stated the acts against the public with these weapons and mags are so little its a burden on the 2A and the public to havethese laws.

    I think the number of ARs AKs and 30rd mags in the publics hands far outweighs the ammout they are used in crimes.

    Im saying the scotus will overturn much of the law
  • Options
    DocDoc Member Posts: 13,899 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I have come to realize that I hate judges more than I do politicians. At least somebody gets to vote against the politicians. Most judges are appointed, rule like kings, make laws from the bench, ignore the Constitution, ignore the will of the people and do whatever they want which 90% of the time is straight out of the Communist Manifesto.
    ....................................................................................................
    Too old to live...too young to die...
  • Options
    SwanKongSwanKong Member Posts: 989 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Doc
    I have come to realize that I hate judges more than I do politicians. At least somebody gets to vote against the politicians. Most judges are appointed, rule like kings, make laws from the bench, ignore the Constitution, ignore the will of the people and do whatever they want which 90% of the time is straight out of the Communist Manifesto.


    +1
  • Options
    retroxler58retroxler58 Member Posts: 32,693 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by MFI
    Anything over 10 should be a no-no I believe..

    quote:Originally posted by nyforester
    So are 20 and 30 round mags legal or illegal ????

    Looking for clarification ????

    [?]

    You DO own guns... Right?

    Or did you jus'leave off the GREEN sarcasm by accident... ?
  • Options
    rabump199rabump199 Member Posts: 238 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Basically in the judges ruling we lost everything except

    mags back to 10
    "muzzlebreak" vs "muzzlebrake", the person who wrote the law had spelling errors and the judge said that for now a muzzle device remains legal however threaded barrels do not? what? Anyway, the judge said to the normal person this could create confusion resulting in a potential legal issue and struck it due to spelling, Albany just has to clean the language and that gets reversed by the Second Circuit. We still have the Tresmond lawsuit but unless they attack this in a different manner I believe that will fail to, they are using the MSR as a common use firearm and not a military one. The problem with SCOTUS is that if the federal judge said it's constitutional and if it makes it to the Second Circuit on appeal who historically has been a liberal anti gun court then SCOTUS I believe will find it hard to take if both of those courts have no dissention in the law. I pray they take it but I hope the other free states look at CT, NY, CA and the other Dem states and shore up your gun rights advocates, lawmakers, and get registered voters out there for our right to protect our freedoms.
Sign In or Register to comment.