Citizens Firearms ARE Being Taken In NY! Believe It!

[Doc]

annoying his neighbor with constant target practice? if this guy was shooting guns in his backyard in Nassau County, then it's a good thing they took his guns away......so yes, that would be a real wild piece of speculation.

I think I got my point across. Useless speculation without facts is exactly that.....useless speculation.

[Mr VJP]

I think the biggest thing is there was not charges filed, so how can they justify taking his guns?

 

This is exactly the issue here.  How can you deny an American citizen a Constitutional right without due process?

 

If no charges were ever filed to take away his 2nd Amendment right to possess firearms, taking them violates his rights.

 

This is what worries me most about America today.  Average citizens have no idea what they're rights are and assume they are granted to them by government, when in reality, they were born with them and cannot have them taken without due process.

 

If we allow our rights to be unconstitutionally violated, we are giving them up voluntarily and they can never be regained.  That's why, when we hear of cases like this, it is wiser to make the government the party that has to prove they are not guilty of violating someone's rights.

[jjb4900]

I think I got my point across. Useless speculation without facts is exactly that.....useless speculation.

my posts stating POSSIBLE reasons for why his guns may have been taken were more for the benefit of those who just came out and say that "they can't do that" and that it can't happen without "criminal charges".......because it can and does happen, and for exactly the reasons I said..........and like I said earlier, I bet the whole SAFE ACT thing never even crossed most minds.

[Mr VJP]

They can legally take them temporarily.  But they cannot take them and KEEP them for a YEAR, with no intention or timetable to return them, without due process.

 

[jjb4900]

This is exactly the issue here.  How can you deny an American citizen a Constitutional right without due process?

 

If no charges were ever filed to take away his 2nd Amendment right to possess firearms, taking them violates his rights.

 

This is what worries me most about America today.  Average citizens have no idea what they're rights are and assume they are granted to them by government, when in reality, they were born with them and cannot have them taken without due process.

 

If we allow our rights to be unconstitutionally violated, we are giving them up voluntarily and they can never be regained.  That's why, when we hear of cases like this, it is wiser to make the government the party that has to prove they are not guilty of violating someone's rights.

I think this whole thing is much more involved than just on the level with the local P.D.and their policies, I see a challenge to the SAFE ACT in the higher courts.........I think the SAFE ACT played a part of what happened here, and if Nassau P.D. did in fact revoke his pistol license, then confiscation of all his guns is what would have happened........that's why it's so important to hear both sides. This story could have been about anything and I would find it flawed due to it being provided solely by the plaintiff and his attorney..............but I'm just speculating.

[EspressoBuzz]

Apologies to all Firemen I may have offended.

 

I believe that firemen are Brave, Dedicated and Hard Working. I have a high bar for the word Honorable and it is not a word I would paint any group with as a whole. I have lived for most of my life next to two firehouses in Brooklyn one of which was closed during the first wave of major cut backs in NYC during the 80's. I did volunteer work with the firemen of the Middagh St. Firehouse in Brooklyn for most of the 80's as well. I worked at 4 WTC across the street from the Liberty St firehouse for over 12 years and spend most of my summer lunch hours with them gawking at the pretty girls. I have great respect and admiration for firemen.

 

Everyone and I mean everyone is human and as so is subject to human weaknesses and frailties. Being a soldier, fireman or toll collector does not automatically make someone more worthy of owning a gun, or less vulnerable to using it in a moment of uncontrollable emotion.

Edited February 1, 2015 by EspressoBuzz

[HectorBuckBuster]

Also now with the stupid NY Safe Act if you have a pistol permit and its revoked you lose all your firearms. I know people that can not get a pistol permit but can legally own firearms because federal law says they can. So how is that fair in NY says you can no longer own a firearm, but the federal government says you can by passing a background check.

[philoshop]

They can legally take them temporarily.  But they cannot take them and KEEP them for a YEAR, with no intention or timetable to return them, without due process.

 

So much of the US Constitution was stepped on in the passing of the SAFE Act that it's hard to even begin to describe it. The right to due process is certainly one of them. It's almost easier to compile a list of basic Amercans' rights that weren't affected.

Yet our elected officials take an oath to uphold those rights whenever they're sworn into office. Apparently they're 'just so many words' in a lot of cases.

 

I worked for a boat builder years ago who also did some restoration work. After spending a few hours inspecting one of the restoration projects he said that the boat couldn't be fixed and that he would ask the owner if he wanted a new one built. The guys in the shop asked why the old one couldn't be fixed, and the reply was that the rot was just too deep.

[jrm]

Also now with the stupid NY Safe Act if you have a pistol permit and its revoked you lose all your firearms.

 

I see this claim thrown around a lot. I don't believe that is what the law actually says.

 

The section of the law which includes confiscation refers to two instances when other guns get confiscated. Those are being convicted of a felony or being judged mentally incompetent. Both situations involve due process and would disqualify you from owning those other guns anyway.

 

What they actually do might be another story. How a judge may rule on it might be a different story. I just don't believe the law explicitly gives them the ability to confiscate all guns if your pistol license get s pulled for some "technical" reason.

 

Unless they are pulling off "swat" raids with illegal searches, I am not sure they can pull it off in practice. Even in NY, I don't think a judge is going to issue a "no knock" warrant for someone who forgot to submit their re-certifcation form on time. Most likely, they will either send a letter or ring your bell asking for surrender of license and guns they know about. There is no reason they should know about guns your wife/brother/son/daughter/friend owns which might also be stored in your house.

Edited February 1, 2015 by jrm

[jjb4900]

I see this claim thrown around a lot. I don't believe that is what the law actually says.

V. PISTOL PERMITS 1. Recertification Process The Safe Act has amended section 400.00 of the Penal Law to require that all pistol permits be renewed, or recertified, every 5 years beginning in January of 2014. Every existing permit holder will be required to recertify using a quick, free process that will begin in early 2014 on a staggered basis. Failure to recertify acts as a revocation of the license by operation of law. During the renewal process, the database will be checked to ensure that the licensee is still qualified to possess the weapon. Detailed recertification procedures are currently being developed and will be explained to all permit holders in 2014. 2. Pistol Permit records to be confidential / “Opt Out” Forms All state records relating to the Safe Act, including pistol permit renewal records, are specifically exempt from disclosure by statute. In addition, county permit records will not be subject to disclosure if the permit holder files an “Opt Out” form with the county. This form is available at http://www.nysafeact.comor http://www.troopers.ny.gov/optoutfoil. 3. Becoming ineligible at later time results in revocation If a licensee at any time becomes ineligible to hold a license, the license is considered to be revoked under an amendment to PL 400.00 (11). In such case, the person is required to surrender his or her license to the appropriate licensing official and any and all firearms, rifles or shotguns owned or possessed by the person must be surrendered to a law enforcement agency. EFFECT ON POLICE Removal of weapons not surrendered If the license and weapons are not surrendered, they will be removed by a police officer and declared a nuisance. At that point, the person would lose the ability to lawfully transfer the weapon. If a person becomes ineligible to hold a pistol permit, the Safe Act requires the person to surrender all firearms to police, including all rifles and shotguns for which no license or registration is required..........

Edited February 1, 2015 by jjb4900

[Five Seasons]

Belo - "For many, their shotgun or rifle and dad's old revolver are all they need."

You really don't get it at all. Your shotgun or rifle will eventually be labeled as an assault rifle, or whatever else they have to classify it as, in order to villify & eventually ban it. Your dad's old revolver? forget about it.

Also, I really don't think many gun owners are liberals. How many Toyota prius do you see with an NRA sticker right next to the obama one?

No YOU don't get it. I'm on your side. I share your views, but not everyone sees the big picture or cares that much. That is my point. I vote republican because I side with their views more than democrats. I still disagree with a lot of their policies. A lot of liberals would give up their guns for social programs and more taxes for the rich. I don't know why it's so hard for some of you to see that.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Five Seasons]

Classic example of 'New Left' thinking here folks. The old left, despite our disagreements, could intelligently form and present a cogent argument, and generally supported the freedom to air our differing opinions. New Left simply wants to scorn, denigrate and shut down free speech. It's everywhere to be seen now.

This is an Internet forum. There's no such thing as freedom of speech here. The owner and mods have the right to censor what they want without violating your rights. Good lord.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Five Seasons]

None of your examples have anything to do with protecting a Constitutional right... if you start losing that right in one state, the rest of the states could fall behind it. And, WE didn't elect him... THEY did.. most of WE didn't even get out to vote and I'm betting because they have a similar thought process as you... I tend to give you a little bit of a pass though.. you're the same age as my sons and, like them, it isn't that you're not able to get it... you just have a lot to learn yet.

I do not disagree with any of what you or anyone else has said. For the final time, I'd just like to come here and talk about hunting. The occasional firearm post is fine. But it seems 2 members insist upon bombarding the site with links to websites like prison planet and rightwingnutjob.com you make conservatives look just as bad as the Prius driving granola liberal does the democrats. You refuse to compromise or see the others point of view. So congress just stalls and nothing ever gets done.

I know there are plenty of forums on the net to discuss these things for those interested in it.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[jjb4900]

No YOU don't get it. I'm on your side. I share your views, but not everyone sees the big picture or cares that much. That is my point. I vote republican because I side with their views more than democrats. I still disagree with a lot of their policies. A lot of liberals would give up their guns for social programs and more taxes for the rich. I don't know why it's so hard for some of you to see that.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I agree with you 100%, I know several people who are "gun owners".........that consists of the gun they got from their grandfather that sits in a case under the bed, or the guy who takes his rifle out once a year to go deer hunting 2 days, or the guy who goes skeet shooting once every three years when asked.........I guarantee you there are more important things to them come election time then that gun that their life does not revolve around.......and I don't need to hear from anyone that it's about the Constitution and it being trampled on, I'm well aware of what it's about, bottom line is that there are many who don't care what the big picture is and guns really aren't that important in their lives.

[Mr VJP]

 bottom line is that there are many who don't care what the big picture is and guns really aren't that important in their lives.

 

This is what is so hard for me to believe.  Having seen what it's like to live in a country where rights do not exist, I cannot fathom how ANY American citizen, gun owner or not, can think there is anything more important than protecting your freedom and challenging oppression.  To be more concerned about trivialities like football stats or Hollywood stars, or even hunting, is a sign the political redirection policies of elected officials are working.

 

The last thing American politicians want is people paying attention to everything they do.  It's all about power and control.  That power and control is supposed to be in the hands of the citizens, but many don't seem to want it.  When they delegate it to politicians, they are willingly abdicating their rights and freedoms.  Once that happens, they can never get them back.

[jjb4900]

This is what is so hard for me to believe.  Having seen what it's like to live in a country where rights do not exist, I cannot fathom how ANY American citizen, gun owner or not, can think there is anything more important than protecting your freedom and challenging oppression.  To be more concerned about trivialities like football stats or Hollywood stars, or even hunting, is a sign the political redirection policies of elected officials are working.

 

The last thing American politicians want is people paying attention to everything they do.  It's all about power and control.  That power and control is supposed to be in the hands of the citizens, but many don't seem to want it.  When they delegate it to politicians, they are willingly abdicating their rights and freedoms.  Once that happens, they can never get them back.

I bet Cuomo's "nobody needs 10 bullets to kill a Deer" speech, had many many people nodding their heads in agreement, and that probably included hunters and casual gun owners as much as it did anti gun people...and that was on every major News Station in NY and probably in many neighboring States............I can't think of one rebuttal on any media outlet that reached as wide of an audience, how many people did not even stop and think for one second what it really meant?...I bet not too many, and sadly, at this point I think that opportunity is gone.

[Mr VJP]

Unfortunately, there are many guys who do need 10 bullets to kill a deer.  But it's not about hunting, it's about freedom and rights.  I agree the majority of NY residents didn't stop and think what that statement meant, but I can assure you, much of the rest of "free" America heard it and are determined to prevent that virus from spreading to their states.

 

Maybe after the smoke clears, NY will get it's gun rights back, but it will only be because much of America will refuse to allow that anti-gun attitude to migrate outside the borders of NY State.

 

[jrm]

V. PISTOL PERMITS 1. Recertification Process The Safe Act has amended section 400.00 of the Penal Law...

 

<snip>

 What you posted is crystal clear. 

 

Where did you get that text? It looks like an explanation/interpretation of the law, rather then the law itself.

 

I have full text of the entire safe act and cannot find that wording anywhere. The actual section of the act regarding confiscation is in:

 

"11. License: revocation and suspension."

 

There is no "V. PISTOL PERMITS" section in the actual law (S2230-2013/A2388-2013). 

 

Again, I have no doubt they want to and will attempt to take away all guns whenever they have an opportunity. I am only asking where in the actual law is the text that give them the clear authority to do so. 11.(a)-© are the sections which deal with the mandatory surrender and reasons for it. I can see how some would want to read it that way, but I don't think it is clear either way, especially when other parts of the law are read and don't mention surrender of long guns.

 

The only thing clear to me is that it is both a waste of time and a good reason for a court challenge. If not rendered unable to pass a NICS check, you could drive down to police HQ to surrender your shotgun and then buy a new one on the way home (legally). The safe act may provide for confiscation of long arms in certain situations, but it doesn't have language to preclude someone from future ownership of a rifle/shotgun. IMO, this adds an even stronger argument for my reading of the section. Confiscation from a "non-prohibited" person does nothing to "serve the public good" and is merely an unjust penalty applied to someone who has only been guilty of a "technical" rules violation (as opposed to a crime) without any due process.

[jjb4900]

 What you posted is crystal clear. 

 

Where did you get that text? It looks like an explanation/interpretation of the law, rather then the law itself.

 

http://www.nypdcea.org/pdfs/NYSP_Safe_Act_Field_Guide.pdf

[philoshop]

I don't have any way to post the actual legislation here right now. It says, in summary, that if a licensing official or a mental health official declares you unfit to hold a pistol license, you are required to surrender all firearms to the state. Page 32 of the SAFE act legislation.

The reasoning behind such declarations is essentially left open to the discretion of the officials making the charge, although I don't happen to have the 'mental hygiene health code for the state of NY' in front of me. I don't know what might be in place to restrain the 'discretion' of these officials, especially a mental health professional, in these actions. Could be they just don't like your pants or something and maybe that's enough.

So, don't get on the bad side of your government and don't tell your doctor anything and you'll probably be fine. See how this works?

It's basically a form of low-level terrorism and it's very effective.

[HectorBuckBuster]

The Safe Act states if your pistol permit is revoked at all, say ex-wife feels threatened , doctor reports you saying you may have a mental problem (which you have not way of knowing if you are even listed in the data base) you lose ALL FIREARMS.

[Four Season Whitetail's]

Unfortunately, there are many guys who do need 10 bullets to kill a deer.  But it's not about hunting, it's about freedom and rights.  I agree the majority of NY residents didn't stop and think what that statement meant, but I can assure you, much of the rest of "free" America heard it and are determined to prevent that virus from spreading to their states.

 

Maybe after the smoke clears, NY will get it's gun rights back, but it will only be because much of America will refuse to allow that anti-gun attitude to migrate outside the borders of NY State.

Many states tell you to carry because the local PoPo may not be there to protect you from the bad guy!

[The_Field_Ager]

 The owner and mods have the right to censor what they want 

 

 

Yeah, and at your behest and desire it would seem. Don't make us lol with your pallid attempt at laying this issue at someone else's doorstep. This is not the first time you have attempted to shut down opinions you don't like. We've noticed you know.

Edited February 2, 2015 by Papist

[The_Field_Ager]

For the final time, I'd just like to come here and talk about hunting. 

 

 

How about you go right ahead and do that. Stay away from threads you are not interested in. Not too difficult I would imagine.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

So congress just stalls and nothing ever gets done.

 

I would be just fine if they got NOTHING done.  Remember the safest day for Freedom is when they are not in session.