boo711 Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 (edited) I just read an article on Syracuse.com from the Onondaga county DA about the recent ruling about the 7 bullet limit in a gun. He says that since this was ruled in a court in western NY that these changes only apply to these areas, that include Buffalo and Rochester. Any other areas of NY state it is still illegal to have a gun loaded with more than 7 bullets. How does it only affect a certain area if a state court has ruled on a state law?? anybody know how this can work like this?? I will try to see if I can post the article on here. Edited January 2, 2014 by boo711 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy K Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Do have a link to the story? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boo711 Posted January 2, 2014 Author Share Posted January 2, 2014 Do have a link to the story? Trying to figure out how to attach it using my phone. I wont have access to my laptop until later tonight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boo711 Posted January 2, 2014 Author Share Posted January 2, 2014 Safe Act bullet ruling only in effect for Western New York, DA Fitzpatrick says Syracuse, N.Y. - A federal judge's ruling this week striking down New York's seven-bullet maximum does not change the current law statewide, according to Onondaga County District Attorney William Fitzpatrick. On Tuesday, federal Judge William Skretny in Buffalo struck down a provision of the NY Safe Act restricting gun owners from loading more than seven bullets in 10-round magazines. That ruling, however, only covers the Western District of New York - an area that includes Buffalo and Rochester but not Syracuse. That means the ruling is not binding in the rest of the state, Fitzpatrick said. That could change if the state appeals the decision and the 2nd Circuit Court rules on the matter. But that could be months away, Fitzpatrick added. Attorney General Eric Schneiderman will decide whether New York appeals the bullet ruling; his office had no comment today on whether he will appeal. Until then, Fitzpatrick's advice for those outside of Western New York is to abide by the Safe Act as written and adhere to the seven-bullet limit. "My advice would be to continue to follow the law as written unless you want to get involved in a lengthy challenge," he said. Contact Teri Weaver at [email protected], 315-470-2274 or on Twitter at @TeriKWeaver. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boo711 Posted January 2, 2014 Author Share Posted January 2, 2014 I posted the article in the previous comment. I couldn't figure out how to post the link so I had my daughter help me get the article on there. yes I am pretty much computer illiterate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NY Indy Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2014/01/safe_act_bullet_ruling_only_in_effect_for_western_new_york_da_fitzpatrick_says.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nomad Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 (edited) From an attorney involved in the lawsuits . Technically a district court opinion would only apply in that district but rarely does one district within the same state (even though these are federal districts) not follow the decision of another. It does happen however. While his claim is technically correct in law, it is very sad and unfortunate that some will kick and scream against this law going down when it only hurts those seeking legitimate self defense. Criminals are laughing at all of this. Only a decision from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals would apply to all districts in the circuit. In my view, the ten rounds is dead, but we don't have a statewide ruling on that yet. Fitzpatrick is just being overly aggressive. But he will not be the one that votes on whether to convict. I don't see any jury convicting anyone of seven round use. Edited January 3, 2014 by Larry302 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 Anyone still think this ruling is a win for us? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbHunterNY Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 Anyone still think this ruling is a win for us? yea no.... however I agree that you'd probably be ok but I'm not sure it's worth the risk. it's still good with that part of the ruling but overall we're still in a pickle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 all the ruling said was you can now put 10 in your pistol instead of 7. we were restricted to 10 before. we get 3 more bullets. The rest was ok according to this wacko. Scary how people say it is a win. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Early Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 He did, however, say that the 7-round law placed law abiding citizens at a disadvantage against criminals with 10 rounds. That speaks volumes.....Now let's hope someone exploits that comment for our good in getting the rest of this bogus law squashed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Culvercreek hunt club Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 He did, however, say that the 7-round law placed law abiding citizens at a disadvantage against criminals with 10 rounds. That speaks volumes.....Now let's hope someone exploits that comment for our good in getting the rest of this bogus law squashed. I would have thought more of the statement if he had said. 7 against 15 or 30 since being a criminal they probably aren't following the 10 round rule anyway...lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 only way it will get squashed is to get rid of the idiots who put it in place. He said that we do not have the same constitutional rights under the 2nd amendment other states have by saying it is ok ot ban guns here but not other places. That may be a fighting point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Culvercreek hunt club Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 I did hear on the news in the car today that the Monroe DA is saying a Federal ruling has no bearing here on the state unless the State court rules or it goes to the SCOTUS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 we can not depend on the courts to do what we need to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunter49 Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 I know this is off subject here but me also being computer illiterate & don't copy/paste things maybe someone could help find & post it. A friend sent me a list of U.S. Senators 46 out of 100 that voted to give our rights away to the "U.N. Arms Trade Treaty" Which would require a world wide gun register & screw with our 2nd. Amend. Thanks for any help, & sorry to get off subject but I feel this would be of interest to people here. These senators need to be voted OUT of office. We must not forget these people when voteing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike rossi Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 How many state reps will run uncontested next election? Is any organization on that or isn't it an issue? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ants Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 I believe that Fitzpatrick also said that he would encourage local Police agencies to continue to enforce the 7 round law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Early Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 There you go: 'LOCAL POLICE AGENCIES".....When our rights are taken away; they will be taking them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NY Indy Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/local/2014/01/06/sheriffs-cuomo-say-7-bullet-limit-not-enforceable/4345739/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ants Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 This whole thing kills me….the judge ruled that telling a person that he/she can load a magazine with only 7 rounds was "arbitrary". But telling a person what stock he/she can put on their long gun isn't "arbitrary". Now we have DA's who are interpreting the decision differently? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 This judge basically said it was not against the constitution to ban assault weapons that are constitutionally acceptable in the other states. Now they are limiting the constitution by state. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.