jjb4900

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.

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..........

I would come back as a Coyote......

it would be interesting to see an actual breakdown of the numbers and where & how they got them...........if the number is 240,000 and only about half are from actual reports, then they are coming up with 120,000 from other estimated sources...

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.

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.

there's a couple possibilities .........I could tell you why , but I would be accused of saying what happened to him was justified.

thanks for the link, I posted it on page #5..............I'm not saying that hunters are not under reporting, because it's quite obvious that they are.......I think that the # they eventually come up with is probably fairly close after all the data they add up.

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.

that one is virus free...trust me on that.

is that a porn site?

yeah, no kidding.....happy hour must just have ended.

and right or wrong, shedding some light on what may cause a persons guns to be confiscated in no way says I agree with it......the amount of people out there who are clueless as to what could happen because of a single act or statement is probably staggering. I wonder how many would read a story about someone losing all their guns after having a pistol license revoked would even realize that it happened because that's what the SAFE ACT says should happen...I bet not too many.

like I said earlier this is nothing new, it's been happening to people for many many years, but all of a sudden, for some reason people are now waking up, and maybe a bit too late....I guess I should have given reasons why it was wrong along with the reasons it may have been right, but saw no need to based on the fact the story gave the reasons for it being wrong...and don't confuse excuses for possible reasons...and it only took me a few minutes to dissect the story and come to the conclusion that it may have been a revocation of a pistol license that caused the confiscation of all guns thanks to the SAFE ACT...certainly not taking sides but offering some logical explanations of what transpired...and yes, occupation has nothing to do with it other than to gain some sympathy.

correct, you really got to look at the definitions to be 100% sure you're in compliance.......something as simple as a chicken coop that sees human activity on a regular basis would probably require you to be 500' away from to discharge.

if you look at last years harvest # it was about 240,000 deer taken......that's a lot of deer, I can't imagine it being that grossly under reported by whatever means they use.

because it's probably not?

I think you're thinking about the shrinkage report...two different things.

even if you're on your property, and there is a dwelling on an adjoining property under that distance you can't discharge....take your dwellings out of the equation because they don't count.......but, yes, barring any local ordinance you can discharge on your property if you meet that requirement...but keep in mind, that there's no guarantee that what isn't there today might be there tomorrow.

you gotta be 500' from a dwelling if gun hunting unless you own or have permission from the owner............so it really depends on if there are houses around it, if none you have free range of the place, if it's surrounded by houses that's going to cut your legal hunting area down quite a bit.....and consider what may come in the future.

wow, someone happy that Coyotes are putting a hurting on the wild turkey population and killing old rutted up bucks...that's gotta be a first. I thought there was a place for all God's creatures on this planet?

Kangaroo's

I'm not saying I approve or that it's justified.....I was saying that might be the part that was left out, my comments are directed solely at this story and nothing more........I never look at one side of any story and make a determination as to who is right or wrong, nor should anyone else.

I don't think anyone can argue that there is more to that story, we're only hearing from one half of the involved parties....and like I posted above, if they revoked his pistol license then all his guns go......just speculation, but that would fill in the pieces of the puzzle.

probably like stated before.....it would take jobs away from the people who are out in the field working on getting harvest counts.