jrm

That makes sense. I had no idea this wasn't the process all along. I though I heard stories (unconfirmed) of this happening in NYC and on Long Island. Prior to this, if the pistol owner died, the surviving family members were in possession of an unregistered pistol. That, I believe, is a crime in NYS. If they were license holders, it could also be cause for revocation of their license. What was the procedure in the past? Surely, the police didn't ignore the pistols registered to deceased people? While I don't agree with the law, after the 14 day grace period you are in violation of the law. The family has options during that 14 days. Any pistol license holder should have a plan in place to avoid turning their surviving relatives into unwitting crimnals. I agree the tactics suck, but this is really just an aggressive enforcement of a law that has been around for a long time. The original post and the article it references imply that this is something new when for a long time it has been a crime for an unlicensed person to possess an unregistered handgun. The problem to me is the law itself which needs to be changed. If these are swat team style raids, or police forcing entry into homes to search, that changes everything.

I am with you on the concept, but I don't quite understand the timing on this "announcement." This has been around for a long time. As you know, in NYS you must have a pistol license to possess a pistol. If there is only 1 pistol license holder in your home and he/she passes away, you have always had 14 days to either surrender the pistols or make other arrangements (to another license holder or FFL). What has changed? Of course, the "assault weapon" thing is fairly new. For anyone who ended up registering one, life is much more difficult. You have to get it out of state. You have to be 18 to purchase, but not 18 to operate. As long as the gun is purchased by and adult, a minor is permitted to use it. Oddly enough, this also applies to pistols. You must be 21 to get a pistol license in NY. However a 14 year old can shoot that pistol without a license (certain conditions apply). Once he turns 21, he can no longer handle that pistol without a license.

Rather than add to the "constitutional" argument on this (and I agree that roadblock/stops are a blatant violation of rights) look at it this way... You are driving home from the Catskills to Long Island. Normally a 3-3.5 hour drive. Tonight you hit a massive backup that adds another hour to your trip. The goon squad is running a roadblock at the bridge. Since they are sooooo important, they set it up in a way to disrupt the maximum amount of traffic, closing a few lanes. Probably also get some help from the MTA police, meaning there are fewer toll lanes in operation and things bog down even more. That adds an hour onto EVERYONE'S trip. Hunters and non-hunters alike. Now you get pulled over to this checkpoint. This is the "price you pay" for having an NRA sticker on your bumper or simply driving a pickup instead of a toyota camry. Add another 30-60 minutes onto your trip. You also have to understand how roadblocks work in NYC/Long Island. SOMEONE has to get paid. That means they keep looking until they find SOMETHING to write a ticket for. Doesn't matter how legit the ticket is - they have quotas to meet. I sometimes think these guys work on commission. So you have just wasted 1-2 hours in traffic and came away with a ticket that could cost several hundred dollars (for a bogus or non-existent violation). Things only get worse if you actually have a legitimate violation of some kind. That's the big deal. And that's without even going down the 4th amendment road. It is a money making scheme and nothing more. A few years back they would put up "seat belt" roadblocks on Long Island. They would block a very busy highway onramp at a key rush hour time. Then they would move to a key off-ramp to catch everyone as they arrived at their offices. If didn't take long for folks to realize what was going on... extra 1/2 hour to get on at your usual entrance and an extra 1/2 hour to get off at your destination. So 99% of people made sure they had their seatbelt on while waiting in line. That meant the cops had fewer tickets to issue, so they started getting creative. I was told to pull over once. Before I did so, I asked "why." Copy responded "seat belt." I pointed to my properly worn seatbelt. He told me "pull over anyway." Once pulled over I was told "My Sgt is watching - since I pulled you over I have to write a ticket for something." Without asking for a seeing my valid insurance card, he wrote me a ticket for driving uninsured. I had to take a day off, go to traffic court and produce documentation proving I had insurance (they don't accept the insurance card in court - I had to get a certified letter from my insurance company. Thirty plus wasted minutes trying to get to work, being late for work, losing a day of work to fight a bogus ticket in court.... while the putz who wrote the ticket is getting paid >$100k/year plus great benefits. So yes, despite being completely "legal" I think it is a very big deal.

I admit I cannot back up the following claim with a link or legitimate reference. From everything I have looked at on the topic I am told over and over that it is a crime to lie to a police officer. However, it is not a crime for them to lie to you. If you ARE in possession of a gun and lie about it to a police officer I would bet that you are in for a boatload of trouble.

Very true. Also keep in mind that the CWC and DEP may be required to pick up the difference in cost if their regulations/requirements are the reason for the increase in cost. For example, if your septic cost is estimated at $6500, but DEP won't approve it and requires a system which cost $10,000, they are supposed to reimburse you the $3500 difference. There is a process for this, and it isn't necessarily easy. If you are in the watershed area, contact CWC (Catskill Watershed Corporation) in Margaretville. They can answer many of your questions. Make sure to research this topic throughly before investing in perc tests, septic designs, etc.

Post #129 (which is a quote of another post) tells a different story. 1. Taking pictures of an abandoned building: The building likely qualifies the land as "improved" so no posting is necessary. 2. Post indicates a sign on one gate, with another gate 1000' away and a second sign i nbetween. a) Gates themselves indicate improved property, thus no posting is necessary with the second sign in between gates that are 1000' apart, the signs would seem to be within 660' of each other. That makes the land properly posted. Based on what was written, there seems to be trespass on land that is both properly posted and improved. The question is, why was the ticket written? From what the local Sheriff's department told me and a neighbor, the only one who can make a trespass complaint is the property owner. Found this out when my neighbor called for some people trespassing on my (improved) property. On the surface, it seems likely that the property owner called in a complaint. I don't get it. Someone sees a property with two gates and a building, but thinks "it doesn't belong to anyone" so it is okay todo whatever you want as long as you enter between the gates?

You guys like taking the long way around. Just about everyone has a smart phone. The built in app on an iPhone (I am sure Android has an equivalent) shows sunrise/sunset right on the notification screen (also shows weather, moon phase and other info). Easier than looking it up on a website (especially when you don't have access to a net connection). What also helps is that the phone will show a very accurate time to compare to the sunrise/sunset time. Also, it is legal to hunt yotes after sunset. The OP never did say what he was hunting.

I'm not too far from you - over by Stamford. Built a log home cabin not that long ago (actually, still building some parts of it.) Block vs poured... I am an old school guy. I like poured. I saw pricing on the new technology foundation which was about the same and still decided to go poured. Check out Ben Reynolds Construction in Walton. He did all my concrete work for my (foundation and garage pad). Good work and reasonable pricing. Jonathan LaFever (LaFever Excavating in Bovina) did my excavation work on the home and dug/put in the septic. Great work, reliable and fair pricing. Bill Boyle Excavating does a lot of work in the area (excavating, septic, foundations, etc.). He quoted on some things for me (reasonable pricing), but I haven't worked with him a neighbor has. They were very happy with his work. The $10k for a septic system sounds reasonable. Size and particular soil conditions are both factors. Are you in the catskill watershed? Doesn't sound like you are because that seems to jack up the cost when DEP is involved. Things to watch out for? Always build bigger than you need to. Most people never say "if only I had 100 sq ft less space." Account for storage space. "Things" tend to accumulate. If you are in the watershed, watch out for the DEP. They can make building/construction a real nightmare. I actually believe their goal is to prevent any construction. The good news is that anything required by the DEP which is over and above normal building practices is fully reimbursable. You just have to know how to work within their system. In addition to my "extra" building/engineering/design costs, they had to reimburse me for over $20k in legal fees for the lawyer I had fighting them through the process. Since you are building on your own, I won't bother you with thing to watch out for with home builders. I will warn you to add 20-50% onto your current budget for things you haven't planned on. Check with the town about permits. They usually require that construction companies have insurance and are licensed. Doing it yourself, you will want to find out in advance what special procedures that might entail. You also need to know the inspection schedule. I find that many of the "regular" contractors know the local inspectors, which makes the process easier. Not know you or your work, the inspector may be more suspect. You will need a licensed electrician (and probably a licensed plumber) for at least some work. If you are hooking to electric look at your distances before you decide on a building location. NYSEG gives you so many feet along the road where they will extend their poles. After that, you pay by the foot. There is also a certain distance from the road that they will bring their line to your panel. After that you pay by the foot. These are all overhead lines. If you want underground lines, you pay them (high cost) or do it your self. I had the excavator dig an electric/phone line trench when they did the foundation. I'm about 250ft from the road and didn't want overhead lines across the property. The trench cost almost nothing because I did it with the foundation. The lines weren't as cheap, but that's the price of wire these days. If you want to contact me directly, PM me.

But is there any reason not to put up signs that state "beware of bear traps."? That might make some folks think twice. Will certainly drive them nuts looking for traps which don't exist. You could also put up signs "smile - you are on camera." Whether or not you actually have cameras, this can be a deterrent. Again, it might also drive them crazy searching for trail camera that don't exist. Then again, a well concealed trail camera (no sign or warning) might be a better idea. Catch them in the act and report them. Getting hit with a fine and/or being charged with a crime might be enough to teach them a lesson. Trespassing is bad enough. Destruction of property (even if it is "just" a sign) brings it to a whole different level. I simply can't wrap my mind around why people do these things.

I am going to add my completely unqualified comments to this topic. I have not (and will not) travel through NY with firearms - too many horror stories. What I find a bit scary is that you are planning to travel with an unregistered handgun and an unregistered "assault weapon." Not only are you planning to do so in NY state, but in NY city - which makes NYS look like a walk in the park. NY does not honor handgun licenses from out of state. NYC does not even honor licenses from inside NYS. That means your handguns are technically illegal to possess. You could cite the federal "safe passage" rules, but that may not apply once you open the case for required inspection at the airport. I know it is a catch-22, but there are recorded cases of people who have been caught in that trap. The AR is also scary. Unless registered, completely illegal to posses in NY. It would be interesting to see what happens at a NYC airport with one of those. I fully understand how you are are supposed to be fine by following the rules. I also understand that NYS and especially NYC likes to have its own set of rules. Domestically, I would suggest shipping to your location. Internationally, I don't think that is an option. Best of luck. I hope you end up being one of the lucky ones.

It was mentioned... Astorino said he would appeal it and the Libertarian candidate also said either it was bad or it should be repealed. You are right - it wasn't discussed. I actually think that is a good thing. Astorino said he would work to repeal the "unsafe" act. That told us folk "in the know" what we needed to know. If the topic was discussed, that gives Cuomo an opportunity to make a "it's for the kids" speech. Hard to counter with uninformed masses. Argue against that and you might be viewed as a "baby killer." In a true debate it might make sense. In a "you have 60 seconds to respond" format with no rebuttal allowed, some topics are better left alone.

But what do we do about the downstate "republicans" - like Skelos? He got into bed with Cuomo and strong-armed the downstate republicans into passing the safe act. That's the big problem. Even if him and his buddies don't run unopposed, we only have two choices - democrat on the democrat line or democrat on the republican line.

It has been suggested that posting that information in a public forum is a bad idea. Big Brother is watching. The information is out there on a few message boards like this, but I don't want to make it any easier for the keystone cops to figure it out. PM sent to you and pistolp71

There are still some online retailers who will sell and ship ammo to NY. Much fewer than there used to be, but they do exist. IANAL - The current thinking is that it is still permitted to buy/sell ammo online because that provision is not active until the database is up and running. The big retailers caved immediately because they didn't want to deal with the hassle of NY.

I won't contradict Sogaard's answer, but the question does seem interesting. If you "assist" in any way with the hunt, you are considered "hunting." That is why you both need a hunting license. So, two hunters go out to hunt deer. Both "assist" each other in the hunt. Both have a license and a valid tag. Maybe one is driving the deer. Does it matter which one pulled the trigger? According to the rules, they both were "hunting" - and hunting the same deer which is being tagged. Seems that either hunter's tag should be legitimate in that situation. Again, I am not contradicting the answer given. Just wondering about the application of the term "hunting" in the context of tags and licenses.

Thanks. Makes sense. Would that also be the case it you had a NY license and used your deer tag?

I'm curious... that you would not need a NYS hunting license to hunt tribal lands makes sense. However, what happens when you transport a deer off those lands for processing? DEC rules require an attached tag. How is that situation handled?

While this doesn't give a specific answer to your question: from: http://www.eregulations.com/newyork/hunting/access-to-hunting-areas/ From this, it would seem the answer to the question lies in the specific tribal land in question.

That doesn't sound right - now you have me thinking if I understand the rules correctly. Of course, the tag has to be filled out right away. As far as attachment, however, I don't see how they "let you go" in the above. Tag does not have to be attached until "you get to the camp or vehicle." Actually, EC law states "and shall attach it to the deer, except that it need not be attached to the deer while it is being dragged or physically carried by the taker to a camp or point where other transportation is available." Quad, pickup - I guess even a bicycle - would qualify as "transportation." My understanding is that even if you drag it behind your ATV, the tag still needs to be attached. It has nothing to do "with ground contact," and I don't see that term in the rules. On the other hand, dragging by hand or carrying on your shoulders should NOT require attachment of the tag - whether in contact with the ground or not. That would be "physically carry." Am I misunderstanding something? BTW - OP - Google "dec tag deer" and the DEC website with the answer will be at or near the top of the list. http://www.dec.ny.gov/outdoor/8305.html has a section on it. As bad as government agencies can be, the DEC website is actually fairly informative.

One other thing to check is deed restrictions. While not very common for the situation you describe, they do exist. Deed restrictions apply to a individual property and can prohibit or limit things like trailers (or even hunting).

Exactly. Look at the recent case of the gun range that was forced to close. Gun range was there "forever." Developer came in and built new homes nearby. Residents didn't like the range. One resident claims she was hit by a "stray bullet." From everything I read, this claim was never proven - only alleged. Town board gets together and attempts to close range. ConEd (owner of property) agrees to non-renewal of lease. Right/wrong isn't a factor - gun range lost the war. These people were fully aware they were buying homes next to a gun range. However, their "rights" suddenly became more important than those of the range owners/users. Their "fears" - regardless of how unfounded - took priority. This thinking is a big problem. A person sees a gun or finds out their neighbor is a gun "enthusiast" and they get scared. Their "fear" is very real, even if it is irrational. The "system" will often side with the person who is afraid. The actions are often justified by the well publicized cases which could have been prevented. No one wants to be that judge/police officer who ignored that one claim which was valid. Kind of a "boy who cried wolf" in reverse - even knowing that 99% of claims are false, they treat every claim as if 100% accurate. Ironically, this is the opposite of our system which is based on "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer." The more gun owners are driven "underground" and portrayed as "crazies" in the media, the more the non-gun owner becomes "afraid" of guns. The ones who fear guns greatly outnumber those who don't in NY (in my experience). It is this fear that the politicians exploit when they write new laws and what the judges use to justify their upholding of these right-stripping laws.

Wow. According to the article, the guy who introduced this bill is also responsible for many others. He should be an election day target for replacement. In general, you can't prove a negative. I don't know what constitutes "proof" that you are a danger, but it would seem very difficult to "prove" you are not. Based on the views of many an anti, the simple fact that you own a gun makes you a "threat" or "danger." If a bill like this was ever signed, you could say that two branches of government - leg and exec - agree with that premise. That means you have to roll the dice with the judicial branch to "beg" for return of your rights (and property). Would be nice to see the bill include stiff penalties (large punitive damages and/or jail time) for falsely accusing someone of being a danger. Without that you are left with a well-funded group on antis with access to a pistol license holders list.

I used to know the answer to this question. After glancing at the DEC website, a quote caught my attention. After reading it, I am no so sure what the rule is as the statement can be read different ways. (Why can't they simply write in plain english?). From DEC: I would think this means that you can't use rifles during deer season in counties where rifles are not permitted during deer season (exceptions for .22 and smaller rimfire, under .22 centerfire). A comma after "including furbearers" or placing those words in parenthesis would, IMO, make the statement clearer. As it is, this could be read that all rifles larger than .22 rimfire are not permitted anywhere during deer season (which also includes counties where rifles are prohibited for deer). Maybe what is throwing me (aside from the grammar) is that I never thought about hunting furbearers in non-rifle counties. Does this mean that rifles are permitted in those counties when hunting furbearers outside of deer season?

I can't point you to a specific company/policy, but can offer an idea. If you live downstate (or in a city/suburbs) your homeowners insurance company or local agent will likely by useless. They are very good at insurance for the burbs for city, but not for rural areas. Look for an agent somewhere near your camp. These folks generally know and are better able to deal with the needs of the "rural" property owner.

Stick with a bank. Not sure if a big one is better, but that's how I would go. You say she is aware of the foreign transaction fee. Exchange rate also applies. The corner drug store ATM usually has a fee which is over and above any bank fees. Best to stay away from those whether domestic or foreign.