I thought there were many cases of rulings by the Supremes that struck down a specific state or federal law that ended up invalidated other similar state or local laws.
When the Heller ruling came out and struct down trigger locks in DC in 2008, I naturally assumed it would invalidate my local NY law that also requires trigger locks.
No such luck as of 6/2012. Apparently, my local trigger lock law applies only when the gun owner is not in control of his/her firearm. This has been interpreted to mean when you leave your house or vehicle.
I beleive that this is a very bad law because guns locked with a trigger lock or guns locked in a safe are not safe since you cannot use them to defend yourself. In other words, gun safes are inherently unsafe.
I wish the NRA would challenge this law but I am not holding my breath.
When the Heller ruling came out and struct down trigger locks in DC in 2008, I naturally assumed it would invalidate my local NY law that also requires trigger locks.
No such luck as of 6/2012. Apparently, my local trigger lock law applies only when the gun owner is not in control of his/her firearm. This has been interpreted to mean when you leave your house or vehicle.
I beleive that this is a very bad law because guns locked with a trigger lock or guns locked in a safe are not safe since you cannot use them to defend yourself. In other words, gun safes are inherently unsafe.
I wish the NRA would challenge this law but I am not holding my breath.