[Leadwipe]

Any restriction that isn't solidly found in facts and rational reasoning but based in public hysteria is an uncalled for restriction. If you can vote, be required to serve in the military (drafted at 19 years old), drive a 4,000 pound vehicle on public roads you shouldn't be prohibited from buying a rifle because a miniscule number of deranged individuals abuse that right. The horrendous act that took place in Texas could have been carried out with handguns or other firearms. This individual could have waited for school dismissal and mowed down a bunch of kids with the truck he stole. We should focus our energy and resources on things that can have a real impact (harden building security, arm teachers, etc.) and not feel good legislation that infringes on the rights of the many based on the evil actions of a few. When the evil actions of a few become the basis for creating legislation all of our rights and freedoms are in jeopardy.

Paul, this is not the first time legislation infringed on the rights of many because of the actions of a few. This has been going on throughout the 20th Century in the USA. I can read through each of the Bill of Rights and honestly say, I don't know anyone who has ever hid behind the Amendments and libeled someone, misused firearms, gotten away with a crime because of evidence improperly obtained, etc. That's probably true for most Americans. One of the reasons we ended up with a pistol license in New York was that the attempted assassination of NYC Mayor Jay Gaynor in New Jersey. Even if NY completely banned handguns, nothing done would have affected New Jersey. But even back then, the media pushed the licensing narrative using the attempted assassination as a talking point in favor of the Sullivan Law. Better yet, if what I've read is true, the assassin, James Gallagher was a "Watchman" on the docks in NY. This guy would have been permitted to be armed even under the Sullivan Law. This is how silly it gets.

So I agree with your points wholeheartedly. Most "mass shooters" are not under 21. But in this society, the demand to "do something", is prevalent and ongoing. Raising the age for pistol licenses was accepted as 21 and I'm sorry to say, will be for semi-auto rifles. Of course, NY took it a step further and will require a license for those rifles. Maybe even a "common sense" and "reasonable fee" of $20,000 a year for the license will be instituted, who knows. Our best defense is to get back the State Senate and hopefully the Governorship to Republican control. I'm not optimistic.

 

[2edgesword]

Paul, this is not the first time legislation infringed on the rights of many because of the actions of a few. This has been going on throughout the 20th Century in the USA. I can read through each of the Bill of Rights and honestly say, I don't know anyone who has ever hid behind the Amendments and libeled someone, misused firearms, gotten away with a crime because of evidence improperly obtained, etc. That's probably true for most Americans. One of the reasons we ended up with a pistol license in New York was that the attempted assassination of NYC Mayor Jay Gaynor in New Jersey. Even if NY completely banned handguns, nothing done would have affected New Jersey. But even back then, the media pushed the licensing narrative using the attempted assassination as a talking point in favor of the Sullivan Law. Better yet, if what I've read is true, the assassin, James Gallagher was a "Watchman" on the docks in NY. This guy would have been permitted to be armed even under the Sullivan Law. This is how silly it gets.

So I agree with your points wholeheartedly. Most "mass shooters" are not under 21. But in this society, the demand to "do something", is prevalent and ongoing. Raising the age for pistol licenses was accepted as 21 and I'm sorry to say, will be for semi-auto rifles. Of course, NY took it a step further and will require a license for those rifles. Maybe even a "common sense" and "reasonable fee" of $20,000 a year for the license will be instituted, who knows. Our best defense is to get back the State Senate and hopefully the Governorship to Republican control. I'm not optimistic.

My lack of optimism for any change in NY is why I am now in Florida. After trying to move the needle in NY for 50 years voting, joining pro2-A groups and writing I decided to vote with my feet.

 

[Leadwipe]

My lack of optimism for any change in NY is why I am now in Florida. After trying to move the needle in NY for 50 years voting, joining pro2-A groups and writing I decided to vote with my feet.

Well even in Florida, they raised the age limit to 21 to purchase firearms, instituted a 3-day waiting period (Counties can raise it to 5 days) and pretty tough "red flag" laws. But I think they did it right. After Parkland, there was no stopping the "we must do something" movement. No legislator would have been able to duck out from that narrative. So they gave the masses the "bread and circuses" they demanded. But they didn't design the law to really discourage ownership of semi-autos...no license required. NY of course, now requires a license for Semi-Auto rifles. THAT is more disconcerting to me than raising the age limit. They are already throwing out ideas in Washington to levy a 1000% tax on "assault rifles" (I hate that term) and magazines that hold over 10rds. Happily, should this tax legislation pass into law, the wealthy will continue to enjoy AR style rifles and the protection of large capacity magazines.

So what will NY do with this new rifle license? How much will they charge? Is it going to be another backlog of applications taking months to process? Better yet, will they once again change the definition of a "mass shooting"? What will it be now....two people shoot at each other is a mass shooting just to raise up the numbers?

 

[2edgesword]

Well even in Florida, they raised the age limit to 21 to purchase firearms, instituted a 3-day waiting period (Counties can raise it to 5 days) and pretty tough "red flag" laws. But I think they did it right. After Parkland, there was no stopping the "we must do something" movement. No legislator would have been able to duck out from that narrative. So they gave the masses the "bread and circuses" they demanded. But they didn't design the law to really discourage ownership of semi-autos...no license required. NY of course, now requires a license for Semi-Auto rifles. THAT is more disconcerting to me than raising the age limit. They are already throwing out ideas in Washington to levy a 1000% tax on "assault rifles" (I hate that term) and magazines that hold over 10rds. Happily, should this tax legislation pass into law, the wealthy will continue to enjoy AR style rifles and the protection of large capacity magazines.

So what will NY do with this new rifle license? How much will they charge? Is it going to be another backlog of applications taking months to process? Better yet, will they once again change the definition of a "mass shooting"? What will it be now....two people shoot at each other is a mass shooting just to raise up the numbers?

And this is why I warn my family and friends in FL not to take ANY new firearms legislation lightly. I give them a run down of the state of affairs in NY to get a pistol license and buy a handgun. Their jaws drop...literally.

I walked into a sporting goods store and an hour later, after showing my Florida driver's license an after a NICS check, walked out with a new Ruger LCP Max. Getting the CCW took a whopping 45 days and it's an actual concealed carry license. No references, no medical or criminal background questions about my wife, etc.

Unfortunately I think the SC decision on the NY case will have more of an impact in other states versus NY, where legislatures and courts will block any advance of 2A rights by any means necessary.

Beyond the impact on individuals what will the impact be on businesses like DSI have if rifle registration goes forward?. I know they were in the process of moving some of the manufacturing to FL. What happens to NY sales if some of these legislative proposals go through? Does an incentive remain for them to keep a retail store in NY?

 

[Leadwipe]

And this is why I warn my family and friends in FL not to take ANY new firearms legislation lightly. I give them a run down of the state of affairs in NY to get a pistol license and buy a handgun. Their jaws drop...literally.

I walked into a sporting goods store and an hour later, after showing my Florida driver's license an after a NICS check, walked out with a new Ruger LCP Max. Getting the CCW took a whopping 45 days and it's an actual concealed carry license. No references, no medical or criminal background questions about my wife, etc.

Unfortunately I think the SC decision on the NY case will have more of an impact in other states versus NY, where legislatures and courts will block any advance of 2A rights by any means necessary.

Beyond the impact on individuals what will the impact be on businesses like DSI have if rifle registration goes forward?. I know they were in the process of moving some of the manufacturing to FL. What happens to NY sales if some of these legislative proposals go through? Does an incentive remain for them to keep a retail store in NY?

Was the Florida waiting period waived because you have a CCW? I have one and from some other states as well. The joke is, that the background checks are no less than my NY Pistol License. Florida at least requires some training. People in NY misled on by an anti-gun media, think that because it takes so long to get a Pistol License in NY that they are doing some sort of forensic examination of the applicant's history above and beyond what Florida and other CCW states do. It's only the difference between a State (Florida) that doesn't want to inhibit gun ownership to a State (NY) that does. Honestly, if you have a NY Pistol License, that should be enough for this precious "semi-auto" license they are putting together. Who knows what they'll come up with. The Legislation is so broadly written, that they could require anything to get one.

NY doesn't care about businesses like DSI. These people push their own agendas and simply don't care. The Town of Riverhead is considering re-writing its zoning regulations to prohibit gun stores in the Riverhead downtown area. I guess they don't want "the children" to see a gun. This is getting silly now and will continue.

 

[calvinwch]

I was busy for few month, did not notice this bill. What I have to do now? I have registered my rifles now?
Do I have to do anything for the rifle I already owned?
By the Bills looks like I don't need to do anything , not if I'm buying new one or getting from someone else.

 

[Leadwipe]

Only applies to acquisitions of semi-auto rifles made after the law went into effect.

 

[Leadwipe]

I was busy for few month, did not notice this bill. What I have to do now? I have registered my rifles now?
Do I have to do anything for the rifle I already owned?
By the Bills looks like I don't need to do anything , not if I'm buying new one or getting from someone else.

Only applies to acquisitions of semi-auto rifles made after the law went into effect.

 

[Gary_Hungerford]

It only applies to purchases and other transfers made after 9/1, if one of the pending law suits don't succeed in obtaining an injunction to prevent its implementation
Gary

 

[Sig45]

if you already have an ar or ak or somthing to that effect you wont have to do anything its only for people looking to buy after 9/1

 

[calvinwch]

Thanks guys, just a relief for now. Anyone have pending law suits info?

 

[Gary_Hungerford]

Also, if the court grants the injunction, the WHOLE thing is suspended, until the federal court rules on it. No semi-auto license required and not ANY part of the CCIA will be in effect. If the federal court rules the CCIA to be in violation of the Bruen decision, which is what's expected and the state does not appeal that decision, then CCIA is dead. If the state requests an appeal, the law stays suspended, until the appeals are over or there are no more appeals.
Gary

 

[boosti]

Also, if the court grants the injunction, the WHOLE thing is suspended, until the federal court rules on it. No semi-auto license required and not ANY part of the CCIA will be in effect. If the federal court rules the CCIA to be in violation of the Bruen decision, which is what's expected and the state does not appeal that decision, then CCIA is dead. If the state requests an appeal, the law stays suspended, until the appeals are over or there are no more appeals.
Gary

A recent case from a city in Colorado is bringing hope because of the NYSRPA v. Bruen case.
The judge was an Obama appointee who ruled the city can’t enforce the Magazine and Assault Weapons Ban because of the ruling from the SCOTUS.

 

[Gary_Hungerford]

Thanks guys, just a relief for now. Anyone have pending law suits info?

Yes, go to OK Now What?, for a more detailed discussion.
Gary

 

[300]

Question: If I wanted to transfer an AR-15 to my son, should I do it before 9/1? Or does that not matter?

 

[Gary_Hungerford]

Question: If I wanted to transfer an AR-15 to my son, should I do it before 9/1? Or does that not matter?

If your AR-15 is a post-ban/unSAFE Act acceptable one, you can transfer it but, if it's not and you registered it, under the unSAFE Act, you can't transfer it to your son, unless your son lives in a state without an AR-15 ban. If it's a "banned/assault rifle" version of the AR-15 and you didn't register it, you can't legally transfer/sell it, in NY, per the unSAFE Act.

If you're worried about the 9/1 date, expect an injunction, prohibiting the implementation of the "semi-auto license" requirement. The chance of not receiving an injunction is about the same as a snowball's survival, in the open, in August, in Hell.
Gary

 

[Leadwipe]

If your AR-15 is a post-ban/unSAFE Act acceptable one, you can transfer it but, if it's not and you registered it, under the unSAFE Act, you can't transfer it to your son, unless your son lives in a state without an AR-15 ban. If it's a "banned/assault rifle" version of the AR-15 and you didn't register it, you can't legally transfer/sell it, in NY, per the unSAFE Act.

If you're worried about the 9/1 date, expect an injunction, prohibiting the implementation of the "semi-auto license" requirement. The chance of not receiving an injunction is about the same as a snowball's survival, in the open, in August, in Hell.
Gary

Gary may I ask a few of questions.

• Under the SAFE Act, antique "assault rifles" could be acquired and registered...is this still in effect?
• Reading your reply to the other forum member, we can no longer transfer an "assault rifle" to immediate family members?
• Does this also apply to antique "assault rifles"?
• I get conflicting information about when the law is or went into effect.

Thank You!

 

[Gary_Hungerford]

PM sent.
Gary