Long Island Shooters Forum banner

SCPD Pistol Bureau Lawsuit

3822 Views 40 Replies 14 Participants Last post by  stalker42
I read the County’s rebuttle, and it seems fairly strong, but also dances around the threat of arrest during training and disqualifies some key points with technicalities.

Mr. Melloni’s site with Legal info / Docs

I thought I should help out and put in my own “two cents”.

So I just did. ( For a second time )

And now also sharing with You.

You decide on your own.

GoFundMe for the Lawsuit

Thanks for reading.
  • Like
Reactions: 2
1 - 6 of 41 Posts
Rumor going around that SCPD arrested an applicant that took the class and submitted the cert with an original application, anyone heard anything?
Arrested for what tho i have not seen anything when i looked.
Presumably for admitting to shooting a handgun in NY without a license in order to qualify.
oo gotchaa idk why u would go admit to that but oook
If you hand in your application with the 18-hour certificate, you’ve admitted to shooting a gun.
As Peconic Paladin and RSL point out, if the rumor is true, then the person arrested is going to be a very wealthy person, as a result of the civil lawsuit.
Truth. SCPD is aware of the statute and has claimed that they find it confusing and will “let the courts sort it out.” I know applicants who were personally threatened with arrest/denial. I even gave one a copy of the statute to show to someone at the licensing office just to see the reaction and they said something like “there is another law somewhere else that makes it illegal, so the state needs to clarify that, we are confused and will be enforcing the more-strict interpretation.” It’s also referenced in some of the correspondence to gun stores in the lawsuit this thread is about.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
There is nothing confusing about it. The legislature during the drafting and passing of the CCIA specifically added an exemption to the law in order to allow individuals without a pistol license to be able to train and shoot a pistol under the supervision of a duly licensed instructor. In fact the exemption applies to any training under the supervision of a duly licensed instructor and does not have to be related to the 16+2 CCW required course.

I agree that it is not easy reading but if you spend the time it is incredibly clear and it is also clear that the above was the legislature’s intent otherwise they would have not added the section under the EXEMPTIONS section.
It’s not confusing at all, they just want to threaten people. Heck, years ago they told me I was going to jail if I took my gun to PA when I had a PA LTCF. They said “OMG not even cops can do that.” It’s all disinformation to suit their political ends. What some guy says at the pistol counter doesn’t matter as long as qualified immunity is in place and the higher up is giving them clear orders based on the statutes - what does some cop know except what they are told?
We keep hearing that "someone says someone was arrested, for following section 3a" but I've yet to have any confirmation, in the form of a person's name, to verify that. Also, I really don't think that SCPD has senior staff that stupid, to authorize such a thing, knowing that it violates a specific NYS Penal Code exemption and will subject them, personally and organizationally, to monetary damage awards under 42 USC §1983.

For those not familiar with that statute, it reads as follows:
42 u.s.c. §1983
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.

I got it from law enforcement leadership, but seemed dubious
1 - 6 of 41 Posts