jrm

up front... I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV. I recently looked into this subject for both myself and a group I am affiliated with. I came up with the same conclusion. There is no liability. Further, the property owner has no obligation to notify a dangerous condition on his land. If there a a pit or tree about to fall over (from _natural_ causes) that is the way it is. You are not liable. Of course, if you CREATE the dangerous situation or set up a trap for a trespasser, than you are screwed. You will be liable for civil action and could face criminal charges. Application of theses concepts will vary. If you are in a small lot in suburbia and do nothing to correct a tree that is obviously about to fall over... you will likely lose in court if it hits the neighborhood kid riding a bike past your house. If you have 50 acres in the country and a tree falls on a hunter passing through some wooded part of your property, I bet the outcome would be different. The thing is that anyone can sue anyone else for anything. There are plenty of ambulance chasers out there who work on contingency. If you have homeowners insurance, they will take virtually ANY case because they know the insurance company will write a check. They have a price schedule based on type and severity of injury and pretty much know in advance what the payout will be. One other point about land, posting and trespassing. While it is always a good idea to post your land, it isn't always strictly necessary. Posting is actually only required for _undeveloped_ land. According to the DEC, something as simple as brush hogging marks land as "developed" and removes the _requirement_ to post. So if you see a driveway, a manmade trail, a shed, a fence... you are trespassing whether or not there is a sign. (of course, if your public trail crosses directly onto unposted private property things become cloudy as there is a presumed right of way/easement). I am pretty sure there is not an assumed "right to use" private land. The purpose of posting is to delineate private land from non-private land when the distinction isn't clear. If you KNOW you are on private land and do NOT have the permission of the landowner, you are trespassing. The only thing that reduces it from trespass to an honest mistake is not knowing. I was at a group event less than a year ago where several "expert hunters" were talking about this. Amazing how much bad/wrong information they gave out about posting and private property. They basically had a "better to ask forgiveness than permission, but better to not be caught at all" philosophy. They claimed posted signs were not valid at all unless on a dedicated post (no trees or fences)with a specific type of backing material and placed a certain height off the ground. According to them, if you see a posted sign on a tree, you are free to ignore it because it isn't "valid." IMO, you should post proper signs and have a good homeowner's policy. That will likely cover you from most frivolous liability issues. Setting up booby traps may sound like fun for those of us who grew up watching Road Runner cartoons but, like the cartoon, it is usually the one setting the trap who gets screwed in the end.

Interesting question. I never thought about being "proud" (or not) of being from NY. I have been very proud of several local town based organization's I am a part of because of the good things we have done. I have lived my entire life on Long Island - Queens to Nassau to Suffolk. My work requires me to travel around the country and I get to meet with many people from many different areas and upbringings. Some people look at New Yorkers as bad, some look in wonder because we live in the "center of the universe." It's all stereotyping. I have property in Delaware County, NY where they call folks like me "flatlanders." Same type of stereotyping (which can be based somewhat in fact). I am very happy for where I was born and raised. Having access to the big apple has given my opportunities that many people outside this area do not have. Working in Manhattan for over 20 years has given me experiences and taught me things that you will never learn in school. But there are unique experiences to be had anywhere. When people think you are an "expert" because you are from the NYC area, it can be an advantage. When people think you are a loony liberal, or a con artist because you are from here, it is a disadvantage. There are geniuses and halfwits everywhere. There are right-wingers, left-wingers and everything in-between everywhere. God made the land, so I can't take credit for that. I didn't vote for Cuomo, so I won't take blame for that. As others have mentioned, it is luck of the draw where you are born. There are a lot worse places to live than NY. It's what you do that counts, not where you are from.

Interesting. I have progressive too. Must be something my agent requires. I will have to ask about that. Thanks.

Jumping in late on this topic... I have a 2011 Polaris Sportsman 500. I use it for fun and some work on the property. The work involves brush hogging trails for hiking and ATV and dragging a horse arena (130x300). The Polaris is great and I love it, but I did run into a lot over overheating problems with it when hogging or ring dragging for long periods. Nothing major, but I did have to shut it down for 10-15 minutes before the "temp" warning went away. A 500 (or smaller) can do the work - it all depends how hard you are pushing it and what you are pulling behind it. For what I am doing I think I am at the limits of what this machine can handle. I have since picked up a Can-Am Outlander 800. Big difference. It can work all day without blinking. It is not necessarily a "better" machine, just more suited to the power level I need. Take a look at what you want to do and make sure you don't undersize the machine. Discing a large area or plowing a heavy snow on a long drive _might_ be too much for a smaller machine.

This looks so cool. I am on the other side of Delaware county and would love to attend. Unfortunately, I have a few other commitments downstate that weekend. Do you have a website or mailing list for future rides? Also curious... I understand the insurance requirement (my ATVs are both registered and insured). However, I don't think you can get insurance if your ATV is not registered. My company asks for proof of registration when the policy is renewed. edit - DUH! You did mention Facebook and I just found you there. Thanks.

To get a hunting license in NY, you must take a "Hunter Education" class. This is a one-time deal. It allows you (with the required license) to hunt in rifle season. The "Bowhunter Education Class" is separate, and allows you to get a license to hunt with a bow. (Some places may combine these two classes, but it is rare). Note that the bowhunting license is in addition to the regular hunting license. This means to bow hunt you must first get a regular hunting license (and thus also take the regular "Hunter Education" class). Information on the sportsman education classes in NY can be found here: http://www.dec.ny.gov/outdoor/7860.html The DEC website has lots of useful information on the topic. All these DEC education classes are free. Check the site for availability and register early as they tend to fill up quickly. The quality of these classes vary. However, they also are a great opportunity to get good information and learn about hunting. Many of your questions would be answered in these classes. If you are not familiar with guns, it is a great idea (as someone else suggested) go find and instructor and learn more. Visit some local gun shops (small ones - not places like "Dick's") and ask questions. They will have some advice to offer and can point you towards qualified instructors. It is easy to get caught up in a money trap, but just start slow. You don't need to buy all your equipment right away. Take the DEC classes, work with an instructor - that will help to narrow down the gun options. Where and what you are shooting will also effect your choices. You need a shotgun for birds. A smaller caliber is fine for smaller game. You need something bigger if going for bear. If you are hunting on Long Island for deer, you are restricted to bow. Lot's of variables to consider before deciding what is best for your situation. For clothing - it is easy to spend a fortune. I was in Cabelas last fall and the pricing on some of the hunting camp blew me away. Then I found the "discount" rack. Last year's "pattern" or items without the latest/greatest scent blocking fabric were available for a fraction of the cost. I picked up some great deals.

In theory you are correct. In practice, whatever they decide to honor and enforce is the reality. There are plenty of unconstitutional laws and proposed laws already in effect. We are supposed to have the court system to correct these problems, but the judges have increasingly become beholden to their executive branch masters who appoint them.

If that's the case, I can understand why she didn't confront you directly. She probably would have done the same for dogs barking or any other "problem." I hope I am not that cranky at 80, but considering how cranky I am now it doesn't seem likely. Cut the old folks _some_ slack. I had a similar situation with my "country" home in the catskills. We bought the property in the middle of nowhere just so we could to things like hunt, shoot and not be bothered. The locals call us "flatlanders" (being from downstate) and it takes some doing to get on their good side. After meeting my neighbor, I can understand why. Seems lot's of outsiders move from the "city" to the "country" and then expect to turn the country into the city. We don't shoot often and when we do it is only for an hour or so. I had some relatives over last summer and we were shooting in the back of my property. About 800ft from my own house and close to a 1/2 mile from the nearest neighbor house. The lady that bought the property next door is from a preppy area of CT and came barreling over to my house. Was very "worried" that we were shooting guns. For as scared as she was, I give her credit for coming over to speak with me in person. While I wanted to tell her to "shove it" I took the diplomatic route. Before leaving our "range" area, I packed up all guns (we were done anyway) and handed off everything to someone else to put away. When I spoke to her, I explained what we were doing and all the safety measures that were in place. As things are set up, we actually shoot in the opposite direction from her property (into a natural berm). It seems she was mollified, but I think she is a lost cause for bringing to any understanding. Some folks are just too scared of those "big scary things that go bang." The one or two times that I was shooting after that, I could hear her yelling for her (grown) kids and dogs... she locks herself inside her barn until we are done. What I could not understand is her surprise. On any given weekend you can hear _someone_ shooting in their yard. Like the OP, I don't want to get into a war with the neighbors, but what to do? I don't shoot much and it is both legal and safe. She's made the decision to buy land in the country... in and area where just about everyone shoots on their own property. The ironic part is that while I am legal, she is openly violating a few town code as well as deed restrictions. The deed restrictions affect me, but I don't like to start trouble... at the same time, if I don't bring it up to the town, I could lose my right to complain at a later date (about her or other future violators). I bought land in the country to get away from crazy neighbors. Sometimes you can't seem to win.

This is spinning away from the original point and I am not sure if you are intentionally misunderstanding me or not. To clarify, I do not think laws should be intentionally vague. I believe they should not be overly specific as they are meant to cover a range of acts. Murder is illegal. I do not think there should be separate laws for murder by gun, by knife, by pencil, by paper clip. I do not think there should be separate laws to cover murder on Monday vs Murder on Tuesday. Of course, I also believe there should be an exception for murder in self-defense. I just don't think it is such an easy task to write a single law to cover every possible situation. I also think that there should be room for common sense interpretation in a law. Look at some of these school kids getting suspended and expelled for having a pop-tart in the shape of a gun or pointing a finger at another kid and saying "bang." This is a direct result of the type of "all encompassing" rule you are championing. It spells out the infractions to cover all instances, has a "zero tolerance" provision and no allowance for circumstances. No interpretation, nothing vague, no trial needed. I guess we are on different sides of this issue. I have been on rules committees for various organizations and have seen the side effects of "well intended" rules. It sounds easy to make a rule, until you see what happens to it in the wild. Fortunately, we were a local organization and any rule mistakes we made didn't ruin lives. Laws, even good ones, have unintended consequences. I submit it is virtually impossible to write a law/rule that will cover every possible situation and circumstance. Our founders recognized this fact which is why our system is the way it is. "Better nine guilty go free than one innocent be convicted." Courts are cluttered sorting out situations because people don't agree. That's what the courts do. Sometimes the law is vague, sometimes it is not clear if the law applies, sometimes people don't agree with the law. Sometimes, there is not law to cover the exact situation (which isn't always a bad thing - we have too many laws already.) I am much more comfortable with a judicial system and jury of my peers settling a dispute than I am with a legislator - with no knowledge of the specific situation - predetermining the outcome. It would be nice if life were black and white and there was a law to cover every possible circumstance for everything we do. Actually, I don't think that would be nice - it would suck. I really think we would be better off without government writing a rule for every little thing. A little more reliance on common sense would be refreshing. Back to the original question - I tried to find something regarding pointing a weapon at someone else (which was the scenario you claim would be "non-actionable" for someone "target shooting" in their backyard.) The closest I could find to a definitive answer is here: http://www.lawqa.com/qa/what-crime-and-sentence-for-pointing-bb-gun-at-someone The question is regarding pointing a BB gun at someone, and a NY Lawyer answers: "You would probably be charged with Menacing, which is an A misdemeanor. You can get up to a year in jail or three years probation, but if you retain a good criminal lawyer you may be able to get a Disorderly Conduct with a fine." So I still maintain there is a law and penalty for such an action, which doesn't require anyone to get hurt before it is invoked. Again, I am a big fan on enforcing some of the many laws we already have rather than writing new ones to cover the same situation.

I understand and appreciate your position, but don't necessarily agree. First, I am not sure if such language could be part of the setback rule change. As I understand it, the setback change was part of the budget document. If so, that would limit what it could accomplish. To your point then, why couldn't all this be neatly wrapped up in the penal code as law? My answer is I don't think it is that simple. I also don't think I, or most people, would want things so black and white. One size does not fit all. There is no way to write a law like this which would cover every situation. If it did, it would be very long, complicated and overreaching. Most of us would complain. You can't legislate stupid. Make a law restrictive enough where you think all bases are covered, and someone will still find a way around it. In other words, make something "idiot proof" and they simply invent a better idiot. It isn't always so easy to change a rule or law. No matter how "common sense" something may seem to you or I, there is usually more than one side to the discussion. When making a law/rule, the two sides generally have to compromise on the wording to where they can both live with it. Sometimes that makes for screwed up rule. Most times, however, it is the beauty of our system. The writing/ratification of the Constitution went through the same process. I am aware of the other thread where an arrow hit a neighbors house. According the OP, the police let him off with a warning of sorts (although the neighbor is pretty upset. The OP seems to have learned a valuable lesson. That's the result of our current 'mishmash' of laws. If we look at the other extreme, a strictly defined law would also have a strictly defined penalty... that OP would be arrested, probably lose his bow, possibly lose his ability to own firearms for life and maybe get some mandatory jail time. I guess you could argue for either outcome. I agree the OP did a VERY bad thing and is lucky no one got hurt. Not sure if I would agree his life should be ruined over it. I think the law recognizes there are different circumstances and that the facts are not always so easy to ascertain. The police, DA, judge and jury need some flexibility to determine what the facts are, what the circumstances are and how to apply the rules to the situation. We may not agree, but I appreciate the exchange. I still maintain that if someone is firing a gun or bow in my direction that the police WILL do something about it and the person will be in a heap of trouble. Regardless of how many "hay bales" he is using. In any event, I hope you, I and the other fine folk on this forum never have to find out which of us is correct about this.

I still disagree with the conclusion, including reply #47. Setting up a target range at your home, and effectively using your neighbor's property as a backstop can not be legal. You do not have to wait until something bad happens to have something done. Maybe the act of setting up targets isn't enough to trigger a legal response. However, once you point that gun/bow downrange and a person or their property is in the line of fire, you have a problem. I'm no DA, so can't tell you if it falls under "blandishment" "menacing" "public endangerment" or some other code. There are surely a dozen items they can bust you on for being that stupid without having to wait for a "miss" to puncture another human. We're not talking about an accident that happens despite someone taking precautions. The original premise was "looking down the barrel of." If you are looking down the barrel/arrow shaft, the person on the other end is threatening your life and engaging in an illegal act whether or not they pull the trigger/release and/or hit you. Let's say I take my new bow or my new rifle into my back yard. The neighbor kids and dogs are playing in the yard next door. Now let's say I use them to check out my new bow or rifle. No discharge involved - I am just using them to test the sights. Are you suggesting that the neighbor would be wasting their time calling the police because I have done nothing wrong? On the contrary, I would likely be arrested (rightly so) and have my gun/bow confiscated. This is no different than the original example of a target range pointed at the neighbor's house.

I was getting pretty good with my bow and set up some targets in my driveway. Lot's of land to work with - about 400-500 yards clear behind the targets and then woods going up a steep hill (about 800ft elevation) to create a natural berm. Plenty of room side to side to allow for something going wrong. Using several targets everything worked well. Then, the inevitable "miss" happened and an arrow flew past the targets. Having planned for this, there was no potential for disaster. What did amaze me is how far that arrow ended up traveling and how with how much force. We were shooting at a slight downward angle, but the arrow skidded along for another hundred yards or so and almost completely buried itself in the ground. It's never "just an arrow" or "just a .22" and something_ always goes off-plan. You can never have too much safety. Adequate backstopping is essential. All it takes is one shot to go off course and no one is 100% perfect.

I am relatively new to all this, so hope you all cut me a little slack for some "newbie" questions and observations. I understand some of the points being made about potential problems with a 150' foot setback, but I also wonder if this doesn't reduce some potential problems. With a 150, I am thinking this give people more opportunity to set up facing away from that neighbor's property. With 500', for example, there would be more likelihood of setting up where your shooting lanes are towards another property. With 150' there is more opportunity to set up near the property border and thus shoot towards the inside of your own property. Every situation is different, but does this make any sense? I have to disagree with this conclusion. If someone is firing a gun/bow/whatever and your children/dog/house/whatever is their backstop, you certainly do have legal recourse. The setback rules are not the only thing governing discharge. If you are standing on your property and someone intentionally points a gun or bow at you (no less discharges it), I would bet my last $ there is something you can legally do to stop that, regardless of any "setback" rules they may or may not be observing.

I think all of you are missing the real issue. The OP can't do anything with his newly aquired .22 because there is no where to obtain ammo! Where the heck are you finding .22?

That's the thing. What I wrote was more sarcasm and hyperbole. In reality, I would probably leave and just buy it somewhere else. However, I have shopped in Cabela's, Dick's, Gander Mountain, Wal-Mart and Sports Authority. (Mainly looking for ammo although I did buy a gun in Gander once). I have never come across anyone at the hunting/gun department who came across as anti-gun or anti-hunting. Despite the job market, I find it odd that anyone who had a problem with hunting would apply for a position at a store like that. Even if they did, it would be odd for them to work the gun counter.

You guys are too nice. I would have said: "Killing cute, fuzzy defenseless animals. You know, like Bambi." Upon hearing the comment, I would have replied: "Yeah, but the gun is better and less messy than the rock I have been using." If people don't want to hear the answer, they shouldn't ask the question. Especially when it is none of their business. Of course, this could have been a security question. You know - like when they used to ask people boarding airplanes if they packed any explosives in their luggage. After all, they caught SO many criminals with that clever strategy.

I didn't make the original statement but what it means is this... There was a legal challenge to the "safe" act. The court which reviewed the challenge basically upheld the law. There is one section, however, that the court struck down. The law references a "muzzle break" of which no such thing exists unless the muzzle is broken. (It should have been muzzle brake). Due to this illiteracy on the part of the lawmakers, the court ruled this provision invalid. However, there is still some controversy. I haven't heard anyone explain how this ruling will work in practice. Some people have claimed their local law enforcement states the ruling is only valid in the district covered by the court and not the entire state. I know that the ruling actually happened. I personally can't speak to the rest. Like anything else, the only way to know for sure is if someone gets arrested and either convicted or released.

That's the rub. Here are some ideas: 1. Read and understand the law. That will give you first hand knowledge which is better than what a bunch of strangers on the internet will tell you. 2. Contact a lawyer who in knowledgeable in the area. 3. Search forums like this and nyfirearms.com 4. Find a KNOWLEDGEABLE gun store and see if they are selling the same gun you have (in the same configuration). If so, there is halfway decent chance you do not have to register. 5. Check the NYSP website to see if your configuration gun is described (I don't recommend dealing with the NYSP at all on this topic as they can be wrong, can over-interpret the law and may put your information in a database for tracking purposes). Basically, if you have a semi-auto firearm with a detachable magazine and ONE "feature" as listed in the law, you need to register. Check the law for a list of applicable features.

I have no idea if that particular item requires registration. You can keep it either way: If it needs to be registered, register and you can legally keep it If it needs to be registered, don't register and you can keep it until you are caught If it doesn't need to be registered, you can legally keep it without any further action

Correct. One other thing. If you are going to sell an _unregistered_ "AW" to an FFL inside NY, do so before 4/15. After that, you better make sure it is registered or you are likely to get into trouble.

Effectively, yes - it is illegal to sell one inside of NYS. The registration requirement goes into effect April 15, 2014. However, the prohibition on transfer went into effect immediately when the law was signed - January 2013. At that point, gun stores stopped sell anything that met the new definition of "assault weapon." At that time, it also became illegal for anyone to sell, give or otherwise transfer such a gun in NYS. That's not to say is isn't possible some private sales/transfers took place "under the radar" but the law did make such transfers illegal. There are some exceptions. You can sell to an FFL, although that FFL cannot re-sell inside of NY. There is also a requirement for all sales - including private - to involve a background check. This typically means you have to go through an FFL. So if someone attempted to skirt the law with an illegal transfer, they would also run afoul of the background check requirement. Be careful with the NYS website. They don't have all the questions, nor do they have all the answers. ...and yes, if you don't register, surrender or transfer out of state by April 15, you are committing a crime. (applies to a gun that requires registration. It is possible to remove that requirement by modification).

Remember that I am NOT a lawyer and am simply someone who has been actively following these changes since last January. If you alter a gun so that it no longer fits the NYS definition of "assault weapon" you should be free to sell it privately, gift it to a someone or leave it to your heirs. Selling (and possibly gifting, I'm don't have the law to look it up right now) any gun in NYS requires a background check, even on private sales. If you alter a rifle by, for example, changing the stock I see no reason why you cannot resell the old stock without any restriction. That is just a "part" and not regulated or illegal on its own. The way it has been explained to me, the lower receiver (the part with the serial number on it) is the "gun." The rest is just parts. It is only when you attach those parts to the "gun" that it becomes an issue. I am not going to take a guess on how it would work for an AR upper on its own with a threaded barrel and bayonet lug. That might be looking for trouble. But I would think that having a previously legal stock (i.e. not collapsible) or just a lose pistol grip is not a problem. I am pretty sure you can still buy items like this online. Again, this is all an educated guess. If in doubt, speak with a lawyer (who, by the way, will also give you an educated guess - although his guess is considerable more educated that mine).

All private sales in NYS must involve a background check according to the "safe" act. Effectively, this means the sale is going through an FFL. It applies to all guns, not just those now defined as "assault weapons." You are probably correct about the bullet button, but I have also heard talk that NYS is _not_ recognizing that as a valid device to avoid AW classification. It is very confusing and you are 100% correct - it doesn't make a bit of difference when you are stopped by a cop who is likely just as confused as we are. Probably the safest mod out there is the stock/grip replacement from a place like Stag. If these are indeed being sold at NYS gun stores, you can be fairly sure that meet any qualification. I am also led to believe that the NYSP has "signed off" on these... obtaining a copy of that document and carrying it with you would _likely_ avert any problems if stopped. The whole situation is crap and I don't agree with any of it. We shouldn't have to jump through hoops like this. I am just trying to point out possible ways the OP can avoid selling their gun (as a loss, no less) and stay legal. With any luck, this mess will be struck down by the courts (eventually). The recent 9th circuit decision in CA hints there may be light at the end of the tunnel.

What lurking wrote. If the crate is properly set up for the pup's size, he will do anything to avoid doing it in the crate. They usually have to do their thing not long after eating. After you feed him put him back in the crate for 10 minutes or so. Then bring him right outside. If he doesn't go, put him right back in the crate. Repeat every 10 minutes until he goes. (When he does go outside, make sure to give a reward). Some dogs are a little more stubborn and it takes more work. You do need to nip this in the bud right away as once they get the hang of going inside, it is very hard to fix.

The law requires registration for an "assault weapon." That is defined as a semi-auto with a detachable magazine plus one cosmetic feature from a specific list of features. If you had a NYS compliant rifle before the 'safe' act was passed, the most difficult part to reconcile with the new law is the pistol grip. That's why Stag (and others) have been working on options to eliminate the grip. Without _any_ "evil" features, you don't have an "assault" weapon and thus you don't have to register. On the other side is a mod like the armr2. That changes the rifle to a fixed magazine (as opposed to removable magazine) rifle. This, in theory, allows you to keep "evil" features such as the pistol grip and not do major alterations to the rifle. For "no registration" you have to do one of two things: 1. change the magazine to be non-detachable (theoretically, you could also weld it in place and make the rifle a top-loader). Remember that the magazine still has a max capacity of 10 rounds. OR 2. keep the magazine as detachable and remove ALL "evil" features shown on the state's list. If you do not modify your detachable magazine rifle with one or more "evil" features, NYS says you have an "assault" rifle. As on Jan 2013, you are unable to sell, gift or otherwise transfer that rifle to another regular person in NYS. You can only sell to an FFL (for re-sale out of state), sell out of state or surrender the gun to the NYSP. If you keep the rifle, you have until 4/15/13 to register it or be deemed a "criminal" by NYS. Even if registered, you can never transfer the rifle (not to your wife, not to your child when you die). Upon your death, your heirs can only surrender, sell out of state or sell to an in state FFL for re-sale out of state.