Of course it has. In The People of the State of New York v. Frank T. the New York State Court of Appeals found that Penal 400 doesn’t address the manner in which licensed firearms may be carried. The court ruled that only remedy available to the state was administrative.
This makes sense. Once you have a handgun license, the laws prohibiting simple possession don’t apply (Penal 265.20 Exemptions) and you can transport the firearm unrestricted.
This means that the transport conditions on a license are actually restrictions, not enhancements. And the courts have ruled that licensing officers can place restrictions on licenses.
The Frank Thompson case dealt with a carry license, albeit restricted, that was issued pursuant to §400.00(2)(f). Premise licenses issued in New York City are issued pursuant to §400.00(2)(a) for residences and §400.00(2)(b) for businesses. The case you refer to is based on a licensee with a carry license being arrested for violating the restrictions of a carry license.
To make things clear: Carrying "beyond your restrictions" on a carry license is an administrative violation. Carrying on a premise license is a violation of the law. See §400.00(15).
The courts made it clear that you can restrict a carry license. It did not address the issue of enhancing a premise license to allow for things that go beyond what the law provides.
In fact, to allow NYC (or any other licensing officer) to create a new license, that, when the terms of which are violated, is a criminal violation is unconstitutional (in New York). In the Empire State, the power to create laws rests solely with the legislature. See Article III, Section 1 of the NYS Constitution. Since the state did not give NYC the ability to craft law in this area, it (legally) can’t.
Further, in New York City, Title 38 explicitly gives Premise license holders authority to transport the firearms to a range. Therefore, the authorization is legal. There simply is no question about it.
Title 38 of the Rules of the City of New York are regulations (think of it as the NYCRR for New York City). The NYPD cannot make laws. Rules, even in NYC, cannot exceed the power (or authority) of the enabling law. More importantly, the penal law does not grant NYC (or any other municipality) the right or power to re-regulate a Premise license (or any other license) and give it features as they see fit -- New York City does not have the ability to create a new license type or create hybrids.
Not true. The NYPD changed their scheme for issuing licenses in the summer of 2001 -- no member of the judiciary had anything to do with it.
I’m sure there was a case what was the catalyst for this change, although I’m having trouble locating it. If I find it I’ll post it. I find it hard to believe that New York City would decide, for no reason, to ease the restrictions they’ve placed on firearm possession.
How did you interpret this wholesale conversion of licenses as being an easement of restrictions? If anything, they have tightened the noose more! The NYPD knew exactly what they were doing. They criminalized carrying by licensees, and then tried to placate them by saying that you can now keep you pistols that used to be on your target license loaded at home.
(For those of you who are not familiar with NYPD regulations, under the old [pre 2001] system, most restricted carry licensees were not supposed to keep their guns loaded at home. Premise licensees were allowed to keep loaded weapons at the licensed premise. This was a rule created by the NYPD and not a law.)
A premise licensee who carries on their license can be arrested (violating the license law is a class A misdemeanor) and could face up to a year in jail.
I do not believe this is correct. See THE PEOPLE &C., APPELLANT, v. FRANK THOMPSON.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/nyctap/I98_0139.htm
Once again, People v. Thompson refers to carry licenses, not premise licenses. The case you should be looking at is People v. Parker, 52 NY2d 935 (1981). In this case, the ruling makes it clear (specifically to the New York Police Department) that the correct charge for a person violating the terms (specifically carrying) of a (premise) pistol license is violation the a provision of the pistol licensing law (§400.00(15)).
I found no law within the existing NYC code that makes a crime of carrying a firearm under a premise license. All that exist on this matter comes from the introduction of handgun licensing in Title 38
Once again, see §400.00(6), §400.00(15) and read People v. Parker. If you need help finding the case, PM me.
MJ
P.S. We’ve drifted horribly off-topic in this thread. If you want to continue this, please create a new thread (and let me know that you did, I no longer have the time to read THR daily
)