Will the new NY law be repealed by the Courts?


PDA






usmarine0352_2005
January 16, 2013, 12:23 AM
.

What is the chance of someone taking the new NY law by Gov. Cuomo to the courts and having it overturned?
.

If you enjoyed reading about "Will the new NY law be repealed by the Courts?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
pendennis
January 16, 2013, 12:47 AM
I would say that odds are likely that the law will end up in Federal Courts shortly after it becomes effective. The items affected by the law are legal today. It's difficult to understand how they would be illegal tomorrow by a state legislative act, and force citizens to dispose of legally-purchased items (guns, magazines, etc.).

The U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 10, in part states that no state may pass any ex post facto law. The wording is similar to Article I, Section 9, applying to the U.S. Congress. How the New York legislature gets around this, I'm not sure. When the AWB was passed in 1994 was passed, pre-1994 weapons, magazines, etc., were so-called "grandfathered in". "Grandfathered" seems a misnomer, given the Constitutional wording.

When the NFA of 1934 was passed, there was no forced disposition or confiscation of those arms (submachine guns, sawed-off shotguns, etc.) which became Class III weapons. Owners had the opportunity to register them and keep them, and a method was put in place to account for their transfer and sale.

There are a ton of questions, but since the laws aren't on the books yet, it's going to be long and complicated.

And, we still haven't heard what the President's EO's are, yet. Those may very well start everything from lawsuits to impeachment proceedings.

EmGeeGeorge
January 16, 2013, 12:52 AM
Well it's probably a good thing you don't.

Wolfman131
January 16, 2013, 12:52 AM
Those may very well start everything from lawsuits to impeachment proceedings.


Oh stop it! This guy just got re-elected in an electoral landslide, he has no opposition to speak of.

Solo
January 16, 2013, 01:01 AM
Sounds like some people would need to Escape from New York.

QuietEarp
January 16, 2013, 01:42 AM
Well Wolfman131, by that logic you elected Obama.:evil:

tyeo098
January 16, 2013, 01:45 AM
Its not intended to help, I have no sympathy for these populations, they have voted one marxist after another into power, for all of my life. I don't have a jot of sympathy for them, they have by overwhelming majorities, chosen this path.

I don't want my children exposed to any of them, its poison.
You fail to understand how much pull NYC has in that state.
For all we know, Bloomburg and the gang have PAID their way to the top.

We did not want this.

General Geoff
January 16, 2013, 02:20 AM
Consider that out of ~19 million residents, over 13 million of those are in the NYC metro area. There's your answer as to why there are so many anti-gun politicians in the NYS legislature. We have a similar but not quite as unbalanced relationship with Philadelphia vs the rest of the state, here in PA.

Evergreen
January 16, 2013, 02:39 AM
This is my best answer:

http://i49.tinypic.com/15grwg6.jpg

Doc7
January 16, 2013, 02:59 AM
Wolfman you are indicting populations in which millions of residents voted *against* the people currently in office. Just because I was offered a job here and live here (for *now*) supporting my family doesn't make me responsible for whatever gun legislation is proposed by candidates I vote against. In fact - if we all left these states you'd never have a President again that came from anywhere but a state like California or the Northeast, due to the electoral college setup. (Not that NJ is going to be a swing state anytime soon)

CapnMac
January 16, 2013, 03:08 AM
Ex post facto is the wrong tack anyway (citizens are free to move their chattels to other states or to dispose of them as best they can before the deadline).

No, the correct challenge will be from Heller.

Heller held that 2A covered weapons "commonly used for defense of self and others." Unless the NY legislature wants to contend that LE weapons are not for the purposes of defense of self or others, then the citizens of NY ought be as well armed as their police.

Now, that would not stop NYS from mandating that LEO have to use and carry reduced-capacity magazines and weapons.

But, until such a definition comes out of Albany, one would thing that Heller, as incorporated, ought to hold sway.

tarosean
January 16, 2013, 05:09 AM
No, the correct challenge will be from Heller.

Heller held that 2A covered weapons "commonly used for defense of self and others." Unless the NY legislature wants to contend that LE weapons are not for the purposes of defense of self or others, then the citizens of NY ought be as well armed as their police.

Now, that would not stop NYS from mandating that LEO have to use and carry reduced-capacity magazines and weapons.

But, until such a definition comes out of Albany, one would thing that Heller, as incorporated, ought to hold sway.

First off... Hello there neighbor.

Wonder if they could also take the civil rights approach?


New York State Civil Rights - Article 2 Section 4

ß 4. Right to keep and bear arms. A well regulated militia being
necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to
keep and bear arms cannot be infringed.

Girodin
January 16, 2013, 05:19 AM
The U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 10, in part states that no state may pass any ex post facto law. The wording is similar to Article I, Section 9, applying to the U.S. Congress. How the New York legislature gets around this, I'm not sure.

Perhaps by not being an ex post facto law. I think you need to do a little reading on exactly what constitutes an ex post facto law. Start with Calder v Bull.

If the SCOTUS keeps its current makeup I'd say there is a pretty reasonable chance this law could be struck as violating the second amendment. The language of Heller gives some strong arguments that it ought to be. There are other legal challenges that are working their way through the courts that could affect how a challenge of the New York law goes, for example, the suit challenging the CA AWB.

Ohio Gun Guy
January 16, 2013, 07:37 AM
I don't see it as an individual inditement of those of you living in NY, he is making the point that on election night there is never any doubt about who will win in CA, NY. Then, in October \ November, here there were MANY who were clearly making arguments for voting for a 2nd term. Last night I searched some of those threads here to make sure my memory was correct..... The arguments were he's never actually signed a gun control bill to he said he wast going to take our guns..... I believe there Are not just a few who voted for this and are now here wondering what happened. Now, I know criticism it's fun, usually not taken well on the Internet. But clearly NY, Ca, I'll. tend to got democrat. The Recently re-elected democrat in the White House is proposing gun bans.... Should you be surprised NO! Stop voting for them if you care! Stop the blind support, stop justifying it, your great grandfather who benefited from the publics works program won't roll over in his grave, lighting will not strike you if you don't vote for the people with the D behind their name.

Checkman
January 16, 2013, 12:16 PM
Evergreen

And, considering the heavy police presence in Idaho, where they stand on the sidewalks watching people all night, I didn't exactly feel as free there as I did in Oregon and Washington.

Wow. I live in Idaho and I've been a cop in Idaho for the past twelve years. Do we have that many cops in Idaho? Because if we do somebody needs to get all those cops off of the sidewalks and start talking calls. We're lucky if we have seven officers working on a shift and I work for a city of 45,000. We're outnumbered and often overwhelmed. I would like to know where there is such a heavy police presence.

Old Fuff
January 16, 2013, 01:44 PM
In both Idaho and Arizona just about everyone is armed to the teeth. One reason is that in the rural areas quick response from police officers may be wishful thinking given they're numbers vs. the area they are expected to cover.

So, it is highly unlikely that the legislatures in both of the above states will follow New York's example.

razorback2003
January 16, 2013, 02:00 PM
I think NY will have to do like DC and Chicago and at least allow 10 round mags in semi auto pistols.

Now the registration will probably stand because that seemed to be allowed with McDonald and Heller. I'm sure anti gun people can use voter registration as an example of a right that requires registration and the courts will buy it.

henschman
January 16, 2013, 02:14 PM
I think this law will cause widespread civil disobedience, especially in the rural areas, and will further erode respect for the government among many. I wouldn't even be too surprised if some people decided to resist it with force. One can hope, anyway.

Old Fuff
January 16, 2013, 05:37 PM
Now the registration will probably stand because that seemed to be allowed with McDonald and Heller.

Not necessarily. Government control over arms possession was why the founders said in blunt language, "...shall not be infringed."

Be that as it may, even Obama supporters are saying that getting what they want through congress will be very difficult, and after Obama's dog & pony show USA TODAY observed that:

Many federal and state lawmakers have said they would vote against stricter controls.

Keep those letters coming.

Evergreen
January 16, 2013, 06:38 PM
Wow. I live in Idaho and I've been a cop in Idaho for the past twelve years. Do we have that many cops in Idaho? Because if we do somebody needs to get all those cops off of the sidewalks and start talking calls. We're lucky if we have seven officers working on a shift and I work for a city of 45,000. We're outnumbered and often overwhelmed. I would like to know where there is such a heavy police presence.
Hi Checkman.. I lived in the Boise area for a year. Well, actually I lived in a small town in the West Treasure Valley. Idaho is a big state and I don't know if you live in the Boise area or not. North Idaho seem liked a night and day difference from the South.

From the sounds of it, it doesn't seem like you spent much time in downtown Boise at night. Literally, every night and even more so on weekends, there would be anywhere from 6-20 police officers who just stand on the sidewalks and watch people go in and out of the clubs on the main street in downtown. Even though I am a law-abiding citizen and generally respect law enforcement, I felt uncomfortable with they way they were operating. It just reminded me of when I was in Africa with the police checkpoints and having police officers monitoring my every move, something I had yet to encounter anywhere in the USA. They also had a very intimidating demeanor to them. This was my interpretation about how they would stand with arms crossed looking at you. I felt very uncomfortable. I have nothing against police either, as I have known a few and even went shooting with some of them.

I agree with you about getting them off the street and wasting tax payer dollars to bust that one drunk rowdy guy and putting them where they are needed. I hear the town of Caldwell is seriously understaffed and suffering from a crime problem. How come these police who just sit around in downtown Boise cannot help out the departments where there is more dire need for them, like Caldwell?

I do admit downtown Boise is a bit wild, but it certainly isn't worthy of the massive number of police I see there.

I have literally seen a group of 5 police officers drag a single drunk guy who was not even resisting into a police car. Yes, they dragged him! People told me that he mouthed off to some of the cops, which resulted in his subsequent arrest.

I'm sorry if people are offended, but I do feel like parts of Idaho feel like a police state, especially the city of Boise. I did not feel free at all. One night I stopped for about 15 minutes to talk to some girls on the sidewalk who were coming home from the bar. A police officer decided to make circles around us and intimidate us. He would just go round and round. Even though we probably shouldn't have been talking for so long, I have never experienced this phenomenon in Portland or Seattle.

Considering, Idaho is a "Red State", I was disappointed living in the Treasure Valley.

ON the other hand I enjoyed my time in North Idaho and felt very welcomed there and it seemed very laid back. South Idaho just doesn't even seem like the same state.

Evergreen
January 16, 2013, 06:46 PM
In both Idaho and Arizona just about everyone is armed to the teeth. One reason is that in the rural areas quick response from police officers may be wishful thinking given they're numbers vs. the area they are expected to cover.

So, it is highly unlikely that the legislatures in both of the above states will follow New York's example.

We in Washington and Oregon are just as well armed.. I was surprised actually how few people own guns in Boise city proper. Of course, soon as you get out of the city everybody is armed. But the same can be said for Washington and Oregon too! I live within driving distance from Rainier Arms and Oly Arms. Oregon is home of Leupold, Noveske, Nosler and few other large names in the gun industry.


I live in a small farm town in WNY. I no more am responsible for Cuomo than you are for Obama. Stop with the NY hate, already.
Bird Dog, what people like Wolfman don't understand is that New York, like many other states in the country is overall a Red State with one very liberal blue city which makes the rules for the entire state. I actually looked at a demographic map of New York and the state votes almost entirely red outside NYC and its immediate surrounding counties. Even the city of Boise votes blue in most elections and has imposed anti-gun legislation/anti-gun laws, such as banning guns on Boise State campus, to the dismay of gun rights advocates.

All pro-gun New Yorkers, I want to welcome you to the Pacific NW, I think you would be a great addition to an area that still cherishes freedom and gun rights. Hope some of you make it out this way. Sadly, I think New York is a lost cause. One city dictates the rules for the people in the entire state.

OpelBlitz
January 16, 2013, 07:08 PM
Believe me, as a citizen in Illinois, I understand. :banghead:

birddog
January 16, 2013, 07:09 PM
Bird Dog, what people like Wolfman don't understand is that New York, like many other states in the country is overall a Red State with one very liberal blue city which makes the rules for the entire state. I actually looked at a demographic map of New York and the state votes almost entirely red outside NYC and its immediate surrounding counties. Even the city of Boise votes blue in most elections and has imposed anti-gun legislation/anti-gun laws, such as banning guns on Boise State campus, to the dismay of gun rights advocates.


You're right. I've seen the overwhelmingly red map. In area, NY is a red state. Because of sheer urban numbers, we're a blue state.

I can't stand the NY ignorance. It is a huge state, with two, huge, mountainous regions, the finger lakes, and Western NY (Niagara Falls, etc). And the entire state is frequently judged by NYC standards. Wolfman is just relishing pushing our NY buttons.

grahluk
January 16, 2013, 07:20 PM
While chit chat about other states is a pleasant diversion I am very concerned about the topic of this thread. If this is being discussed or considered seriously anywhere please direct me there. I am a licensed NYC pistol owner. My P226 with NYC compliant 10rd magazines is now an assault weapon. I think my line in the sand has just been crossed. I've never so much as had a jaywalking ticket in my life but I am willing to join a peaceful, organized, and well thought out course of legal action and civil disobedience. I sincerely hope Sig, MecGar nor any of the other gun manufacturers produce a NY compliant 7rd magazine. If they do not and my 10rd ones become illegal in a year I will have standing to challenge this law as a constructive ban.

razorback2003
January 16, 2013, 08:05 PM
New York is sadly a pretty state ruined by NYC in many aspects, not just guns.

NYC is a place that has been ruined by foreigners that can't speak English and people who have no desire to work and are looking for the next govt handout.

Sadly this is what has happened to much of beautiful California.

heyjoe
January 16, 2013, 10:11 PM
the fight isnt over here. there will be battles in federal court. a number of national state and local second amendment advocate groups are meeting with lawyers to review the law with the aim of challenging it in whole or in parts in federal court. from the reaction i am seeing from gun owners in NY, it will be well funded.

The good news for those of you in the rest of the country is with this move, the law, the way it was rammed through in a day with no debate, behind closed doors and talk of confiscation, Cuomo has guaranteed that he will not be the next president of the united states.

Make no mistake though the republican party also disgraced itself. despite a tremendous outpouring of phone calls, emails, letters and faxes on very short notice in a very limited time frame, from their constituents, republican state senators caved quickly because of fear of Cuomo's wrath and to get some table scraps from him in the state budget. Spineless gutless politicians.

if i decide to move i hope it will be next door to wolfman.

birddog
January 16, 2013, 10:52 PM
Yet you(the state)continually embrace the furthest of the left as your own. Read the link, all four major state offices went to marxists, it wasn't even close. Its never even close on NY-state, ever!


Again, many of us don't embrace any of it. We're outnumbered by a city that, in my case, is hundreds of miles away. My local legislators voted against this.

Why has this guy's trolling been tolerated here?? Not The High Road I know and love.

blaisenguns
January 16, 2013, 10:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evergreen
This is my best answer:



You see thats the problem, as we have happening out in the mountain west, they leave the states that they screwed up because the socialism became a little to soviet for them, then they move to some paradise, like Idaho, and then immediately begin voting in the exact same marxists that they just ran away from!

Let them either fix the mess that they made for themselves, or reap it, seriously! I'm not nearly alone in this viewpoint, half of northern Idaho wants to evict every Californian that has fled marxism, they come here, as fleeing NY'rs do elsewhere, and just begin the cycle anew.

Agreed. New Yorkers keep coming to FL and they cant drive.

BullfrogKen
January 16, 2013, 11:52 PM
Temporarily closed while cleanup is in process.


10 minutes later . . . .


OK, all done.

MilsurpShooter
January 17, 2013, 08:00 PM
There's supposedly a protest in Westchester county, down at the Federal court house on 1/19/13. Haven't heard about the times yet but myself and my Gadsden Flag will be there even if I'm the only one who shows.

burk
January 19, 2013, 12:51 AM
As far as the law there are three clear legal problems with it:

1) They require dealers to perform a NICS check before they sell ammo. But it is illegal under federal law to access NICS for anything other than a Handgun or Long Gun purchase. So the law requires that ammo dealers violate federal law.

2) They forgot to include a clause exempting any LE from the magazine ban. And the cops in NYC need to fire 15-20 rounds just to find the general vicinity of the target if the Empire State Building is shooting is any indication.

3) By banning all firearms that come with magazines larger than 7 rounds they are effectively banning most commonly used handguns like the Glock 19, In the DC case a ban of Semi-auto pistols was thrown out due to the fact that semi-autos are "commonly used" in self defense and very popular. NY state is not banning magazines (that is a ruse), they are banning a vast majority of semi-auto handguns and SCOTUS has already ruled that was illegal.

swalton1943
January 19, 2013, 01:11 AM
Do we think that remington will close their plant in nys and move elsewhere?

Tom from WNY
January 19, 2013, 01:24 AM
Ah, but LEO currently are not exempt from the capacity restrictions at this time.

Solo
January 19, 2013, 01:26 AM
1) They require dealers to perform a NICS check before they sell ammo. But it is illegal under federal law to access NICS for anything other than a Handgun or Long Gun purchase. So the law requires that ammo dealers violate federal law.
This sounds hilarious! Can you show me the part of the laws stating this so I may share it with my more liberal friends?

pendennis
January 19, 2013, 11:07 AM
...this would be pure fantasy, but it would be sweet justice if the firearms manufacturers (Glock, S&W, etc.), would inform the various purchasing agencies in New York, that they will no longer ship any semi-automatic handguns for police purchase, since the magazines all hold more than seven rounds.

Sauce for the goose...

Green Lantern
January 19, 2013, 11:27 AM
Maud Dib - I understand fully where you're coming from. I make such a big deal out of it in order to highlight the dangers of rushing through kneejerk legislation that "you have to pass it to find out what's in it!" :barf:

Plus, restricting civilians' RKBA does not make the antis or fence-sitters realize that we're less safe. But doing it to the cops will have (most of) them screaming bloody murder. Maybe eventually something will "click" in their minds, that a good guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun, badge or not?

Old Fuff
January 19, 2013, 11:30 AM
This sounds hilarious! Can you show me the part of the laws stating this so I may share it with my more liberal friends?

Your "liberal friends" won't believe you, so tell them they can see for themselves by going to this link:

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics

And to totally ruin their day you might point out...

Accessing or using the NICS, or permitting access or use of NICS by another, for any unauthorized purpose is a violation of Federal law, sanctions for which included criminal prosecution; a civil fine not to exceed $10,000 and/or cancellation of NICS inquiry privileges.

If New York State is directing it's residents and businesses by law, to violate a Federal statute......

The thing that's interesting about N.Y. legislators and the governor is that they pass laws while having absolutely no knowledge about what they are doing.

And keep getting elected... :banghead:

Oh well... :evil:

alsaqr
January 19, 2013, 12:49 PM
What is the chance of someone taking the new NY law by Gov. Cuomo to the courts and having it overturned?

The chances of the NY law being overturned by the courts are slim to none.

General Geoff
January 19, 2013, 01:27 PM
The chances of the NY law being overturned by the courts are slim to none.
I'd agree that it's not likely that a New York State court will strike it down, but a federal court? You betcha. Modern semiautomatic firearms holding more than 7 rounds are practically the definition of "common usage," these days. There is absolutely no way that limit could be considered constitutional under Heller.

Old Fuff
January 19, 2013, 03:50 PM
And by implication, Miller (1934) said that firearms with a clear use in the Militia were protected by the 2nd Amendment.

Solo
January 19, 2013, 05:02 PM
Your "liberal friends" won't believe you, so tell them they can see for themselves by going to this link:

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics
Found it!
ß 25.6 Accessing records in the system.
(a) FFLs may initiate a NICS background check only in connection with a proposed firearm transfer as required by the Brady Act. FFLs are strictly prohibited from initiating a NICS background check for any other purpose.
(p. 58308)

You have made me a very happy man.

joeschmoe
January 19, 2013, 05:16 PM
As far as the law there are three clear legal problems with it:

1) They require dealers to perform a NICS check before they sell ammo. But it is illegal under federal law to access NICS for anything other than a Handgun or Long Gun purchase. So the law requires that ammo dealers violate federal law.

2) They forgot to include a clause exempting any LE from the magazine ban. And the cops in NYC need to fire 15-20 rounds just to find the general vicinity of the target if the Empire State Building is shooting is any indication.

3) By banning all firearms that come with magazines larger than 7 rounds they are effectively banning most commonly used handguns like the Glock 19, In the DC case a ban of Semi-auto pistols was thrown out due to the fact that semi-autos are "commonly used" in self defense and very popular. NY state is not banning magazines (that is a ruse), they are banning a vast majority of semi-auto handguns and SCOTUS has already ruled that was illegal.
I agree with this and I would add;

4)NY made no effort to comply with the rulings in with Heller/McDonald/Miller.

Old Fuff
January 19, 2013, 09:53 PM
You have made me a very happy man.

My bill for professional research services is in the mail... :D:

Now go forth and ruin some folks day. :evil:

mgkdrgn
January 20, 2013, 12:57 PM
Odds are pretty good at least parts of it will ge quashed ... but it will take years. NY will fight it to the last taxpayer dollar.

steveracer
January 20, 2013, 01:13 PM
If New York State is directing it's residents and businesses by law, to violate a Federal statute......

The thing that's interesting about N.Y. legislators and the governor is that they pass laws while having absolutely no knowledge about what they are doing.

And keep getting elected...

Fuff,
Maybe this was deliberate. MAYBE it was intended to make it illegal to buy ammo in the state of NY. If the dealers don't violate federal law, the sale can't happen or they violate NYS law. Boom: Ammo sales illegal. Done and done.

Old Fuff
January 20, 2013, 02:12 PM
Maybe this was deliberate. MAYBE it was intended to make it illegal to buy ammo in the state of NY. If the dealers don't violate federal law, the sale can't happen or they violate NYS law. Boom: Ammo sales illegal. Done and done.

I doubt it. I havenít read the text of New York's new law, but apparently they are doing something they can't legally do - that is to direct a Federally Licensed Firearms Dealer to do something that is specifically forbidden in the Federal Statute. States do not have the authority under the Constitution to do what they are doing. Some attorney will undoubtedly haul them into Federal Court, or they may simply send a letter to the U.S. Attorney's Office in New York, where they can't ignore the situation.

If the state government won't back down they will soon be hit with a Federal Court injunction, and if they ignore that the fun will really begin with the likely result of Governor Cuomo and perhaps others being hit with a Contempt of Court Citation containing sanctions. Not likely though, that things will go that far.

Meanwhile the Governor and some legislators should have egg on their face as itís hopefully pointed out that they are absolutely brainless when it comes to drafting firearms legislation. Satire can bite!

larryh1108
January 20, 2013, 05:35 PM
What's to keep people who live in New York from buying ammo in the closest state? It may be a pain but while they sort this mess out drive to the closest state and stock up. That law is as useless as a 7 round mag limit.

RPRNY
January 20, 2013, 06:20 PM
To the smug posters who damn all NY residents for having voted in communist Democrats, you need to know something about the cesspit of corruption that is the NY state legislature. Cuomo's piece of theatre dressed up as law was passed with BI-PARTISAN support in the Senate by craven dog Republicans sucking up to Lord Cuomo. The Bill was passed in the Senate 43-18. There are 30 so-called "Republicans" in the Senate. Last Saturday nine Democrats were prepared to vote against the Bill and 4 more were susceptible. If the Republicans had voted party line against it, we could have beat this Bill. They are craven cowards and Albany is the most corrupt hell-hole outside Cooke Co IL. So, it didn't matter who voted for whom. Lord Cuomo and His Excellency, Count Bloomberg, bought this law.

The law is vulnerable on several points listed above. It will have to be amended and, frankly, Cuomo may not even care when key provisions are overturned since he got his headlines and doesn't care about gun violence anyway. Several provisions that may not be amended will be challenged but have no hope of being overturned in State Courts filled with judges who believe the Constitution is an anachronistic fascist rag. Many however will be overturned in Federal Court.

There are many sane New Yorkers. Some of us live South of 84. Almost none of us hold elected office. The state legislature is a disgrace. The governor is a pandering idiot. Bloomberg is a condescending piece of filth who hates his own country. As long as these people are tolerated by the gimmedats gimmedats, limousine Liberals, and credit card Communists that dominate our electorate, NY will be a cancer on America. But do not paint those of us who are economic prisoners of the Southern Gulag or the poor upstarted folks who have no say in how they are governed with the same brush.

Despite good weather, turn out yesterday was disappointing in my opinion.


http://polhudson.lohudblogs.com/2013/01/19/video-gun-rights-supporters-rally-at-state-capitol-after-new-law/

burk
January 20, 2013, 07:30 PM
While it may take many years in the court to get the magazine Ban which apparently violates McDonald. The NICS ammo check part of the regulation could get an injunction against it very quickly (a few weeks). As a rule Federal Courts don't take kindly to States violating clear Federal statutes.

OTOH, the Constitutional issues could take 12-18 months at least to get thru the Courts.

I also think the citizens of the State Have a lawsuit possibility for Cuomo's ridiculous announcement that we won't enforce the law against LE. The 14th amendment issues (equal protection means equal enforcement) are huge in this one. If the State Congress forgot to include a clause exempting LE that's their problem, the government has no legal authority to declare that the law doesn't apply to government employees. I'd love to see some citizen arrests and law suits for any prosecutors who fail to enforce the whole law on this one but I'm not holding my breath.

joeschmoe
January 20, 2013, 07:44 PM
To the smug posters who damn all NY residents for having voted in communist Democrats, you need to know something about the cesspit of corruption that is the NY state legislature. Cuomo's piece of theatre dressed up as law was passed with BI-PARTISAN support in the Senate by craven dog Republicans sucking up to Lord Cuomo. The Bill was passed in the Senate 43-18. There are 30 so-called "Republicans" in the Senate. Last Saturday nine Democrats were prepared to vote against the Bill and 4 more were susceptible. If the Republicans had voted party line against it, we could have beat this Bill. They are craven cowards and Albany is the most corrupt hell-hole outside Cooke Co IL. So, it didn't matter who voted for whom. Lord Cuomo and His Excellency, Count Bloomberg, bought this law.

The law is vulnerable on several points listed above. It will have to be amended and, frankly, Cuomo may not even care when key provisions are overturned since he got his headlines and doesn't care about gun violence anyway. Several provisions that may not be amended will be challenged but have no hope of being overturned in State Courts filled with judges who believe the Constitution is an anachronistic fascist rag. Many however will be overturned in Federal Court.

There are many sane New Yorkers. Some of us live South of 84. Almost none of us hold elected office. The state legislature is a disgrace. The governor is a pandering idiot. Bloomberg is a condescending piece of filth who hates his own country. As long as these people are tolerated by the gimmedats gimmedats, limousine Liberals, and credit card Communists that dominate our electorate, NY will be a cancer on America. But do not paint those of us who are economic prisoners of the Southern Gulag or the poor upstarted folks who have no say in how they are governed with the same brush.

Despite good weather, turn out yesterday was disappointing in my opinion.


http://polhudson.lohudblogs.com/2013/01/19/video-gun-rights-supporters-rally-at-state-capitol-after-new-law/

The fact remains that the bill was slammed dunked through both houses, repubs and dems alike voted overwhelming for it. The overwhelming MAJORITY of NY'ers and their state reps agree with this. You are a silent minority in your state being oppressed by the majority. I don't blame you, unless you voted for these clowns. Any NY who did, or keeps voting for these clowns is responsible for what they do. Bloomberg, cumo, both major parties and all of NYC are not to blame. It's the millions of NY'ers around the state who voted for these reps and keep voting for them that are responsible. It's their fault. That's not opinion, that's fact.
The only way it will change, is if NY'ers vote for pro gun candidates. New candidates, not the same old ones. Otherwise you must pray a court overturns it as unconstitutional. Don't hold your breath for a NY federal judge sitting in NYC or Albany to do so. It could take years for a higher court to overrule your local federal gun grabbing courts and legislatures.
Take control of your government or be oppressed by it.

JERRY
January 20, 2013, 08:04 PM
i do admit downtown boise is a bit wild, but it certainly isn't worthy of the massive number of police i see there.

I have literally seen a group of 5 police officers drag a single drunk guy who was not even resisting into a police car. Yes, they dragged him! People told me that he mouthed off to some of the cops, which resulted in his subsequent arrest.


if im downtown anywhere at night and its known that drunks and crime occur there at higher numbers i will be glad to see cops on foot and near by.

If i get drunk and act like a jack-ass id expect a public intox pinch. Of course my story, my friend's story and other drunks around me will say something diffrent than what a complainant and bar vidio will show im sure.....

Im not affraid of cops standing around a known trouble area trying to deter idiots....

riverdog
January 20, 2013, 08:32 PM
NY is directing its businesses to violate Federal law wrt NICS because they probably didn't know they couldn't, but having done it, do you think the current US AG will send it back at the NY State legislature. The Justice Department will give them a pass. It puts the business owner selling ammo in a Catch 22 and that's a good thing to the fine legislators in Albany. They'll need to plus up the funding for the NICS, because the traffic on their system is about to increase -- a lot.

We'll need to wait for a new administration and an Attorney General who believes in the rule of law before many of these issues can be addressed properly.

my opinion, YMMV

joeschmoe
January 20, 2013, 08:36 PM
do you think the current US AG will send it back at the NY State legislature. The Justice Department will give them a pass.

We'll need to wait for a new administration and an Attorney General who believes in the rule of law before many of these issues can be addressed properly.

my opinion, YMMV

US AG does not have any say on what laws NY passes.

riverdog
January 20, 2013, 08:39 PM
I would think that a NYS law that requires a NY citizen to violate Federal law should get some reaction from the US AG. But it probably won't.

larryh1108
January 20, 2013, 08:41 PM
I hope that when NYS asks the NICS system for "official" permission to use it's software that they say "no" because they are trampling the rights of the citizens of a state. Also, the system is already overloaded so something like this can ruin it for every state, which would not be right. Cuomo blows. I hope he does not get reelected. I hope every person who voted for this sham loses their job. Mid-term elections are coming up and the gun owners of NYS need to step up and make them pay for their crimes against their citizens.... every one of them.

Solo
January 20, 2013, 08:43 PM
NY is directing its businesses to violate Federal law wrt NICS because they probably didn't know they couldn't, but having done it, do you think the current US AG will send it back at the NY State legislature. The Justice Department will give them a pass. It puts the business owner selling ammo in a Catch 22 and that's a good thing to the fine legislators in Albany. They'll need to plus up the funding for the NICS, because the traffic on their system is about to increase -- a lot.
Then how do they sell ammo to the police?

riverdog
January 20, 2013, 08:49 PM
"Then how do they sell ammo to the police?"
Dunno. Does NY LE purchase their ammo thru local retailers? I don't. AFAIK, Ammoman still ships to NYS.

riverdog
January 20, 2013, 08:53 PM
It will be interesting to watch the lawsuits as they develop.

Frogman
January 20, 2013, 08:59 PM
Then how do they sell ammo to the police Quote

All they have to do is use there letter head and request a LEO price, usually (Dealer) and their good to go. The same go's with guns.

bubba in ca
January 20, 2013, 10:27 PM
Don`t bet on it.
Magazine bans have been passed before without court interference. When it gets down to 2 round mags the courts might step in.
It`s not ex post facto. You will not be penalized for having bought the gun or mag before the law was passed, but for possessing it after a given date. So went California.
They will quickly tweek the law to allow police purchase/possession /use. It`s only ink.
Using Nics for ammo checks might catch on--King Barry I will like that angle.
It is highly likely that the courts will do nothing to stop these laws. Nor will the voters in a place like NY. State preemption laws will help in states that have them.

riverdog
January 20, 2013, 10:56 PM
bubba in ca: "You will not be penalized for having bought the gun or mag before the law was passed, but for possessing it after a given date. So went California."

Unless I missed something, high-cap mags (standard mags for those outside CA and a few other states) are still legal to possess in CA, you just can't purchase, sell, import or otherwise transfer a high cap magazine.

goon
January 21, 2013, 12:14 AM
I wonder if the people of rural NY wouldn't be better served if their counties could vote to join PA. Is it possible for a county to secede from a state?

larryh1108
January 21, 2013, 07:31 AM
I don't know but counties can overrule state policy. In IL, until recently, you could not buy or possess a handgun which was contrary to state law. Cook County and various cities have magazine capacity laws where the state does not. Can counties overrule the state law of magazine capacity and allow more? Can they ignore the "assault weapon" ban? Why can they go less and not more if both go against the state law?

pseudonymity
January 21, 2013, 07:10 PM
.

What is the chance of someone taking the new NY law by Gov. Cuomo to the courts and having it overturned?
.

Depends on the portion of the laws effected. There were over 40 sections in S2230, so the answer is "it depends".

Mental health reporting and losing your handgun permit/AWs - this is almost certain to be overturned in court. A single person using just their professional opinion to relieve another person of a constitutionally protected right? I see no way this will stand.

Background checks for ammo purchases - this probably depends on how the system is implemented, and how the NYSP limit the registration of "ammo sellers". There is a lot of confusion here on the ammo check law - there is no requirement in the law for an FFL to do a NICS check for ammo. The ammo background check and FFL check for FTF gun sales are completely separate.

FFL NICS checks required for all FTF transactions. I am not sure on this one - I believe some states have this already, but the limit of $10 that NY put on the FFLs to process it may amount to a de facto ban and be overturned. No for profit FFL is likely to do a NICS check for $10.

The two big issues - one feature test for AWs, and the mag round limits. How this goes is anybodies guess I think.

Old Fuff
January 21, 2013, 10:04 PM
FFL NICS checks required for all FTF transactions. I am not sure on this one - I believe some states have this already, but the limit of $10 that NY put on the FFLs to process it may amount to a de facto ban and be overturned. No for profit FFL is likely to do a NICS check for $10.

I presume you are saying that when two individuals, where one wants to sell or otherwise transfer a firearm to the other, must go to an FFL and have a background check made.

They can do that, but only if the FFL agrees to go along with it, and the State of New York cannot compel a dealer to do so. If they do go forward, the FFL must first enter the firearm into his Bound Book, and then have the potential receiver fill out a #4473 form. Then they can call NCIS for a background check. If that individual is declined the original owner must fill out a #4473 form and go through a background check to get his/her own gun back.

As you have observed, it is unlikely many FFL dealers will be interested in doing this for $10.00, and the State of New York has no authority to set fees for Federally Licensed Dealers. If for example, they want to set the fee at $100.00 they can do so. The individuals in this example have two choices: Either give up on the transfer, or find another FFL who charges a lower fee.

It seems clear that the legislature and governor in New York believe they can dictate responsibilities and procedures to a Federal Agency. That won't fly.

joeschmoe
January 21, 2013, 10:15 PM
I don't believe that this will be turned over in the courts, by the time it reaches the SCOTUS, it will have been after at least one more far left radical is now serving on it, not that it matters all that much, its pretty likely that chief justice Roberts has been compromised, any pending 2nd amendment issues that reach his desk are going to be treated to the same rehab he subjected Obamacare too.

It won't take the SCOTUS. Any federal court can strike this down.
SCOTUS has already ruled on Heller/McDonald. SCOTUS does not like to repeat themselves, and would probably offer punitive relief if they have to repeat themselves. There are several levels of federal courts that can deal with this.

State courts can also choose to apply McDonlad as an incorporated civil right.

nyctpt
January 21, 2013, 10:57 PM
If I understand things correctly, and that's a big if with this piece of garbage bill, the ammo check will not be done using the NICS system. That portion of the bill doesn't go into effect until 30 days past the time when the NYS police have a background system of there own specifically for ammo purchases. Yeah. Which will not doubt be as expensive and worthless as the COBIS system which was shut down after solving.....wait for it.......zero crimes.

The plan is to just buy ammo out of state, which they can't control, and reload, which it appears they haven't thought of yet.

Ryan

toivo
January 21, 2013, 11:23 PM
What he said.

Folks, before you get all excited about NY requiring NICS checks for ammo sales, that's not what they're doing. They're setting up their own check system, which supposedly will be operational in a year.

If I know anything about this state (and I've lived here for a l-o-o-o-o-o-ng time), this system is guaranteed to be a dysfunctional clusterf*ck from top to bottom.

New Yorkers, you have a year to buy ammo unimpeded: On your marks, get set, go!

larryh1108
January 21, 2013, 11:31 PM
New Yorkers, you have a year to buy ammo unimpeded: On your marks, get set, go!

Ummmm, any idea where they can order some?

toivo
January 21, 2013, 11:40 PM
Ummmm, any idea where they can order some?

Yeah, well, that's the problem ...

bushmaster1313
January 23, 2013, 03:04 AM
What is the chance of someone taking the new NY law by Gov. Cuomo to the courts and having it overturned?

Will not be overturned under the U.S. Constitution.
The Supreme Court (Miller) had no problem with a law that said a shotgun barrel had to be more than 18" or it violated the law in question.

The NFA registration list for machine guns has not been opened by the courts.

Banning magazines more than 10 rounds is not like banning all handguns (Heller)

If I am not mistaken, NYC has a 5 round limit that bans the Model 12 pump shotgun

Old Fuff
January 23, 2013, 11:05 AM
The Supreme Court (Miller) had no problem with a law that said a shotgun barrel had to be more than 18" or it violated the law in question.

Not exactly. What they said was that the 2nd. Amendment provided for a militia, (Unorganized Militia of the United States) and that the members (most male citizens between 16 and 45) had to provide their own weapons. However no evidence had been provided showing a connection between a sawed-off shotgun and the Militia.

The rifles and magazines that New York proposes to ban do have an obvious connection to the Militia.

If you enjoyed reading about "Will the new NY law be repealed by the Courts?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!