Gun Control Bill Headed To The Senate

[9jNYstarkOH]

11 minutes ago, Steve D said:

That won't fly here in NY. You have to show the permit to make the purchase. Take the purchase slip(not the gun)to your county clerk with your permit that amends your permit and gives you a slip with the county clerk seal on it to take back to the gun dealer to show it has been registered before they will turn it over. A royal pain especially if you bought it from somewhere on the other side of the state. The other option is to buy, get a copy of the purchase, take that to your county clerk, get a copy of the clerk paper, to the place where you made the purchase and have them send it to a FFL near you. You would also have to provide the seller with a copy of the FFL where it would be sent. Once your designated FFL gets it and you show them your permit and slip from the county you can take it home.

 Adds about $100-$150 to the price of the gun for shipping and FFL fees.

Didn’t figure New York would let this fly. We didn’t even bother with pistols when we lived in New York as we heard it was quite a hassle to put it lightly.

[Steve D]

1 minute ago, 9jNYstarkOH said:

We didn’t even bother with pistols when we lived in New York

Permits can be time consuming to get but what really sucks is the different ways each county runs their permit licensing system when it is issued as a NYS permit.

[Five Seasons]

18 hours ago, Grouse said:

If you believe the paperwork you fill out when you buy a firearm is completely destroyed and no records are electronically maintained illegally by the federal government, you are being naive.

Besides, how would they check the sale of private firearms you own without recording their sales to you from someone else and without the serial #'s and make/model of the gun on file?  How can the private sale idea work without it?

Well government law prohibits it, but sure I guess the moon landing could have been faked to right? I've worked with the government, they can't even manage the post office, if you think they have the ability to pull off an illegal gun registry without a  single leak to prove it... well I don't know what to say to convince you otherwise.

18 hours ago, diplomat019 said:

So with that being said, we already have a gun registry. Correct?  If that’s true why is anyone still discussing this topic? 

exactly, all non private sales (this has to be 98% of sales is my guess) and for all us New Yorkers are already logged of course

18 hours ago, Grouse said:

Belo, read info on pages 5 through 8.  If this law passes, full gun registration will be needed for it to work.  It's next.

https://d3uwh8jpzww49g.cloudfront.net/sharedmedia/1507342/nij-gun-policy-memo.pdf

 

"The challenge to implementing this more broadly is that most states do not have a registry of firearm ownership. Currently NICS background checks are destroyed within 24 hours. Some states maintain registration of all firearms. Gun registration aims to 1) increase owner responsibility by directly connecting an owner with a gun, 2) improve law enforcement’s ability to retrieve guns from owners prohibited from possessing firearms. Gun registration also allows for the monitoring of multiple gun purchases in a short period of time"

i'm not clicking a link that looks like that

18 hours ago, Grouse said:

Because it's illegal for it to exist at this time.  The Dems plan to change that after this bill passes, saying it's required for the bill to work.

wait so it's illegal now, but it does exist already? And again, your argument is based on what might happen, not the bill itself? Am I getting this all straight? You've very much lost me.

18 hours ago, Steuben Jerry said:

I'm not disputing the probability but can you back this up?

I think this is the key. I don't even disagree that the end game is clear. But we need to intelligently communicate and debate this topic here and now. The tin foil hat and bogyman argument instantly dismisses you from any real and honest gun control argument. We are better off using gun control laws and examples where they already exist to show and prove how these national laws do not work.

[Five Seasons]

18 hours ago, Steuben Jerry said:

That's a private citizen speculating about it to another private citizen. Again, I don't dispute your assertation at all, but if I'm citing a source to an anti-gunner to back up my argument, I'm going to get laughed at if I cite a meateater podcast.

I read the same article. The people quoted in the article are from 2 pro-gun groups. One, the NRA, which in my opinion has done wonderful things in the past, but lately cut off its nose to spite it's face and that's why I stopped renewing my membership that I had for 15 years. They both only cite future concerns and fears and have no credible argument on the current bill.

[Five Seasons]

13 hours ago, Steve D said:

 Unfortunately incidents like yesterday with a legally purchased gun will not help our  cause and will only enforce their argument that we need more laws.

Georgia spa shootings: Suspect confesses, claims he was not racially motivated, sheriff says (wsbtv.com)

this new bill or even a registry wouldn't have stopped that. Until they have a probe to stick up your ass and accurately depict if your sex addiction will lead to mass murder, it'll continue to happen because the gun is a tool only and is not the issue here.

mental health is the issue.

and this is where republican's shoot themselves in the foot and a big reason we are losing. The american people are screaming for health reform. Many don't want universal health care, but they want better access to mental health, substance abuse help and cheaper prescriptions like insulin. And all the republicans do is try and repeal obamacare while only talking about some plan of theirs but never talking about it or doing anything.

If the gun isn't the issue, and the person is the issue, you need to pivot the discussion away from the guns and replace it with your healthcare plan. We haven't done a good job or any job at doing this.

[Steve D]

30 minutes ago, Belo said:

this new bill or even a registry wouldn't have stopped that. Until they have a probe to stick up your ass and accurately depict if your sex addiction will lead to mass murder, it'll continue to happen because the gun is a tool only and is not the issue here.

mental health is the issue.

and this is where republican's shoot themselves in the foot and a big reason we are losing. The american people are screaming for health reform. Many don't want universal health care, but they want better access to mental health, substance abuse help and cheaper prescriptions like insulin. And all the republicans do is try and repeal obamacare while only talking about some plan of theirs but never talking about it or doing anything.

If the gun isn't the issue, and the person is the issue, you need to pivot the discussion away from the guns and replace it with your healthcare plan. We haven't done a good job or any job at doing this.

 

30 minutes ago, Belo said:

If the gun isn't the issue, and the person is the issue, you need to pivot the discussion away from the guns and replace it with your healthcare plan. We haven't done a good job or any job at doing this.

That is pretty much the gist of this entire thread. Unfortunately the politicians do  not see it that way and would rather restrict  access and ownership  than address the real issues. Their thought process is to eliminate or restrict the tool not the cause. 

 I have yet to hear a politician say that we need to get to the root cause to solve the problem without mentioning gun control. Mainly because they don't have a clue what the problem is and those that do; don't have a clue how to fix it without hurting someone's feelings,  offending someone, or worse yet being a racist.

Time for some of then to grow a pair and do the right thing instead of doing what will get them re-elected.

 

 

[Five Seasons]

12 minutes ago, Steve D said:

 

That is pretty much the gist of this entire thread. Unfortunately the politicians do  not see it that way and would rather restrict  access and ownership  than address the real issues. Their thought process is to eliminate or restrict the tool not the cause. 

 I have yet to hear a politician say that we need to get to the root cause to solve the problem without mentioning gun control. Mainly because they don't have a clue what the problem is and those that do; don't have a clue how to fix it without hurting someone's feelings,  offending someone, or worse yet being a racist.

Time for some of then to grow a pair and do the right thing instead of doing what will get them re-elected.

 

 

Many dems have put together plans for improved healthcare though, and while some are loony toons, others are respectable. Republicans have put forth no plans. However, I do agree that the gun grabbers don't make this connection either.

[Grouse]

The government plays the gun control game the way people play chess.  It thinks 3 moves ahead and never gives any indication it plans to put it's opponent in Check Mate.

If the opponent sits there thinking, "Well, there's no evidence in his last move to indicate he will do anything in his next couple of moves to put me in Check mate.", the opponent is naive and about to lose the match.  You win by anticipating your opponents next moves and blocking them.

The end goal in the governments assault on gun rights is the end of individual gun rights altogether.  Anyone who isn't aware of that by now, or who denies it, hasn't been paying attention.  You need to employ some foresight, basic analytical skills and the ability to extrapolate into the future, based on existing evidence.

 

[Steve D]

1 hour ago, Belo said:

Many dems have put together plans for improved healthcare though, and while some are loony toons, others are respectable. Republicans have put forth no plans. However, I do agree that the gun grabbers don't make this connection either.

What really irritates me is they don't enforce the laws they have on the books now and are allowed to plea bargain down is most instances. Why create more when what you have does not work or seldom gets applied.

• Class A Misdemeanor – Criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree
• Class E Felony – Criminal possession of a weapon on school grounds
• Class D Violent Felony – Criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree
• Class C Violent Felony – Criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree
• Class C Violent Felony – Aggravated criminal possession of a weapon
• Class B Violent Felony – Criminal possession of a dangerous weapon in the first degree

• A weapon “with intent to use [it] unlawfully against another.”
• A weapon which has been altered or defaced to prevent tracing it back to the owner or user.
• A firearm for which he or she does not have appropriate permits and licenses.
• A shotgun, rifle, or other firearms, despite having a previous felony conviction.
• Any prohibited weapons, such as stun guns, switchblades, and brass knuckles.

NY Mandatory Minimum Sentencing for Gun Crimes

NY Penal Law § 70.02, which sets forth sentencing laws for all types of violent felonies, establishes the following mandatory minimum sentences:

• Class D Violent Felony – While the normal mandatory minimum for a Class D violent felony is at least two years, the statute makes an explicit exception for third degree weapons possession, for which the mandatory minimum is increased to three and a half years.  The maximum sentence is seven years.

• Class C Violent Felony – Aggravated weapons possession is also subject to an increased mandatory minimum: at least five years, instead of the normal term of at least three and a half years.  The maximum sentence is 15 years.

• Class B Violent Felony – The mandatory minimum for a Class B violent felony like first degree weapons possession is at least five years.  The maximum sentence is 25 years.

Not saying I agree with any of the above but if they don't work change them instead of making new ones.

 

 

[Chef]

Whatever CRAP is in any one of these bills now or coming up , I can see that the Supreme Court is going to be a very busy place at least for the next 2 years. 

Not for nothing the passing of one of these bills with be the best thing that has ever happened in this country as far as gun rights. It will force the Supreme Court to hear a case that will essentially tackle the safe act and other restrictive laws. With the makeup of the current court the law will be thrown out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DoubleDose]

12 minutes ago, Chef said:

Not for nothing the passing of one of these bills with be the best thing that has ever happened in this country as far as gun rights. It will force the Supreme Court to hear a case that will essentially tackle the safe act and other restrictive laws. With the makeup of the current court the law will be thrown out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That is a dangerous strategy.  The SCOTUS gets to pick and choose which cases they will hear; and historically they rule VERY narrowly.

[Steve D]

7 hours ago, DoubleDose said:

That is a dangerous strategy.  The SCOTUS gets to pick and choose which cases they will hear;

I agree. One can never guess what their ruling might be. Letting it get that far could be bad.......especially if they pack the Supreme court like they have been talking about for the last two-three months.

Anytime it gets to the Supreme court one can never count on a favorable decision and quite often they come up with a "compromise" ruling or send it back to the lower courts. It is a gamble no mater which way it goes.

[Grouse]

And if by chance the SCOTUS rules against gun owners, we are screwed for life.

Universal background checks, while inconsequential to public safety, are a necessary piece of an overall puzzle that will transform the US right to keep and bear arms into a European-style privilege.  The left is planning a raft of international-style gun control laws within a narrow time window.  As each new law proves to be ineffective, the demand for more restrictive and expensive oppression will be touted as the next required law.  Eventually, only the wealthy elite will be able to afford to comply with the burdensome, bureaucratic procedures to acquire a firearm.

If every single firearm transfer not done through an FFL becomes a felony, people living together could be in trouble, adults living with children not there own could be in trouble, Uncles could not give a gun to their nephews, cousins could not give to their cousins either.

A suicidal person could not give their gun to another for safe keeping,  a widow could not give her husbands guns to someone for proper storage until sold, a car accident victim and CCW holder could not ask an EMT of fireman to safeguard their gun in his vehicle.  All of these transfers would require processing through an FFL, and the FFL's will be able to charge whatever fee the market will bear to do it.

All of the above will be a felony violation too, with expensive fines and possible jail time.  

Why would politicians ever consider such oppressive legislation when it will have no effect on crime at all?  This is why.

 

Edited March 19, 2021 by Grouse

[Steve D]

42 minutes ago, Grouse said:

And if by chance the SCOTUS rules against gun owners, we are screwed for life.

That is one reason I hope it doesn't get that far. The consequences could be devastating or be in our favor.  If they keep pushing their agenda it will more than likely end up in the supreme court.

[Grouse]

This says it all.  Especially to those who doubt what's coming.

https://patriotpost.us/videos/78494-house-dems-launch-all-out-war-on-second-amendment-2021-03-18?mailing_id=5700&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.5700&utm_campaign=digest&utm_content=body

[Gobbler Chaser]

18 hours ago, Grouse said:

And if by chance the SCOTUS rules against gun owners, we are screwed for life.

Universal background checks, while inconsequential to public safety, are a necessary piece of an overall puzzle that will transform the US right to keep and bear arms into a European-style privilege.  The left is planning a raft of international-style gun control laws within a narrow time window.  As each new law proves to be ineffective, the demand for more restrictive and expensive oppression will be touted as the next required law.  Eventually, only the wealthy elite will be able to afford to comply with the burdensome, bureaucratic procedures to acquire a firearm.

If every single firearm transfer not done through an FFL becomes a felony, people living together could be in trouble, adults living with children not there own could be in trouble, Uncles could not give a gun to their nephews, cousins could not give to their cousins either.

A suicidal person could not give their gun to another for safe keeping,  a widow could not give her husbands guns to someone for proper storage until sold, a car accident victim and CCW holder could not ask an EMT of fireman to safeguard their gun in his vehicle.  All of these transfers would require processing through an FFL, and the FFL's will be able to charge whatever fee the market will bear to do it.

All of the above will be a felony violation too, with expensive fines and possible jail time.  

Why would politicians ever consider such oppressive legislation when it will have no effect on crime at all?  This is why.

 

Grouse, I used to be like you. You state your 65 and have nothing to lose by arming yourself and going up against your government. 65 isn't old and you should be looking forward to enjoying the rest of your life. I live in NY and when the safe act was introduced back in 2013 I freaked out, I went to rallies, spent countless hrs on forums and sent hundreds of emails. But here we are 8 years later and I still have all my guns. All my trusty turkey shotguns, my deer rifles, rim fires all still in my possession and I still carry my trusty sidearm wherever I go. Alright I can't own an unmodified AR or AK and I'm fine with that. Any revolution by urban hostiles will be met with my trusty deer rifles and I'm a great shot. Needing an AR to go up against the NY state police or national guard is not something I'll ever need. I've come accept alot over time and really dont think anyone should have ever been able to purchase a gun without an ffl in a private sale anyway. No one is ever going to take my guns, I have no doubt about that. I've come to accept guns laws and I'm a better man for it. I'm 65, happily retired looking forward to many more years in the field doing what I love. I'm alot less stressed and enjoy time with my family more and I'm alot calmer now. I separated myself from gun forums which was my first big step and only visit here on occasion. So at 65 enjoy life, your well into the last quarter my friend, so make the most of it. Besides a federal pen is no place for for men of our age, lol.

[Grouse]

I guess we value different things in life.

[DoubleDose]

On 3/20/2021 at 3:10 AM, Gobbler Chaser said:

Grouse, I used to be like you. You state your 65 and have nothing to lose by arming yourself and going up against your government. 65 isn't old and you should be looking forward to enjoying the rest of your life. I live in NY and when the safe act was introduced back in 2013 I freaked out, I went to rallies, spent countless hrs on forums and sent hundreds of emails. But here we are 8 years later and I still have all my guns. All my trusty turkey shotguns, my deer rifles, rim fires all still in my possession and I still carry my trusty sidearm wherever I go. Alright I can't own an unmodified AR or AK and I'm fine with that. Any revolution by urban hostiles will be met with my trusty deer rifles and I'm a great shot. Needing an AR to go up against the NY state police or national guard is not something I'll ever need. I've come accept alot over time and really dont think anyone should have ever been able to purchase a gun without an ffl in a private sale anyway. No one is ever going to take my guns, I have no doubt about that. I've come to accept guns laws and I'm a better man for it. I'm 65, happily retired looking forward to many more years in the field doing what I love. I'm alot less stressed and enjoy time with my family more and I'm alot calmer now. I separated myself from gun forums which was my first big step and only visit here on occasion. So at 65 enjoy life, your well into the last quarter my friend, so make the most of it. Besides a federal pen is no place for for men of our age, lol.

You don't understand the second amendment.  It was not written to preserve your right to have hunting and shooting arms.  It was written to preserve your right to have arms to go to war with.  It was intended for civilians to have equal footing with the military.  ARs and AKs are precisely the arms it was written to preserve/protect; and it is the ONLY individual right that includes "shall not be infringed".

For those who want to make the argument it was written at a time when the arms were muskets, and the founders could not have imagined AR & AKs, freedom of speech was written at a time of oral or written word, the founders could not have imagined radio, television, the internet, etc.

Rights are not supposed to be conditioned to a time in history, past or future.

[diplomat019]

41 minutes ago, DoubleDose said:

You don't understand the second amendment.  It was not written to preserve your right to have hunting and shooting arms.  It was written to preserve your right to have arms to go to war with.  It was intended for civilians to have equal footing with the military.  ARs and AKs are precisely the arms it was written to preserve/protect; and it is the ONLY individual right that includes "shall not be infringed".

For those who want to make the argument it was written at a time when the arms were muskets, and the founders could not have imagined AR & AKs, freedom of speech was written at a time of oral or written word, the founders could not have imagined radio, television, the internet, etc.

Rights are not supposed to be conditioned to a time in history, past or future.

Americans....  When will you stand up for your rights????  I say enough is enough with typing on internet forums.  I say you finally do something.   Another member is ready according to one of their posts a while back( i will leave them nameless). I say it is time to stop stolen elections and do something.  No more typing nonsense on the internet.  Patriots need to do something ASAP!!!!  What are you planning to do for America???

[Northcountryman]

2 hours ago, DoubleDose said:

You don't understand the second amendment.  It was not written to preserve your right to have hunting and shooting arms.  It was written to preserve your right to have arms to go to war with.  It was intended for civilians to have equal footing with the military.  ARs and AKs are precisely the arms it was written to preserve/protect; and it is the ONLY individual right that includes "shall not be infringed".

For those who want to make the argument it was written at a time when the arms were muskets, and the founders could not have imagined AR & AKs, freedom of speech was written at a time of oral or written word, the founders could not have imagined radio, television, the internet, etc.

Rights are not supposed to be conditioned to a time in history, past or future.

DD , I totally agree w your POV but I think we’ve  ( ie,  the country ) gone WAY beyond there currently , haven’t we ? I mean , SO many states ( and cities) have enacted    Excessively regulatory gun control legislation in the last 40 yrs And consequently, the opposition ( I.e. We  2 nd amendment supporters ) has conceded much in its acquiescence and acceptance of this new reality . Unfortunately, We cannot go back now and complain And try to roll back legislation that has already been passed ; best we can hope for now is to try to prevent further erosion of our rights . 

[Grouse]

The vast increase in concealed carry rights in many states, including the increase in Constitutional carry, requiring NO permit to carry a concealed weapon, would indicate we CAN reverse many of these unconstitutional laws if we have enough people willing to support challenging them in court.  Many unconstitutional gun laws are currently being overturned because people have finally realized they are unconstitutional and detrimental to public safety and self defense.  The best defense is a good offense.

The government would like you to think oppressive laws violating your 2nd A rights are irreversible.  They are not.

The best we can hope for is all gun owners unite and demand these laws be overturned as a violation of everyone's civil right to self defense and freedom of choice.

[Five Seasons]

17 hours ago, diplomat019 said:

Americans....  When will you stand up for your rights????  I say enough is enough with typing on internet forums.  I say you finally do something.   Another member is ready according to one of their posts a while back( i will leave them nameless). I say it is time to stop stolen elections and do something.  No more typing nonsense on the internet.  Patriots need to do something ASAP!!!!  What are you planning to do for America???

now we're talking about stolen elections again? 

[DoubleDose]

23 hours ago, Northcountryman said:

DD , I totally agree w your POV but I think we’ve  ( ie,  the country ) gone WAY beyond there currently , haven’t we ? I mean , SO many states ( and cities) have enacted    Excessively regulatory gun control legislation in the last 40 yrs And consequently, the opposition ( I.e. We  2 nd amendment supporters ) has conceded much in its acquiescence and acceptance of this new reality . Unfortunately, We cannot go back now and complain And try to roll back legislation that has already been passed ; best we can hope for now is to try to prevent further erosion of our rights . 

 

18 hours ago, Grouse said:

The vast increase in concealed carry rights in many states, including the increase in Constitutional carry, requiring NO permit to carry a concealed weapon, would indicate we CAN reverse many of these unconstitutional laws if we have enough people willing to support challenging them in court.  Many unconstitutional gun laws are currently being overturned because people have finally realized they are unconstitutional and detrimental to public safety and self defense.  The best defense is a good offense.

The government would like you to think oppressive laws violating your 2nd A rights are irreversible.  They are not.

The best we can hope for is all gun owners unite and demand these laws be overturned as a violation of everyone's civil right to self defense and freedom of choice.

NCM, what I wrote is not a POV.   The anti-gun community wants you to think and believe this is an opinion, point of view, or belief.  It is factual documented (Federalist papers) history.  I do not agree with "And consequently, the opposition ( I.e. We  2 nd amendment supporters ) has conceded much in its acquiescence and acceptance of this new reality."  We, the opposition, have been forced to accept these unconstitutional laws or become criminals.   You state "try to prevent further erosion of our rights ."  One of our founding fathers said "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance".  As Grouse has stated, some of these unconstitutional laws are being overturned, including by SCOTUS.  

[Northcountryman]

34 minutes ago, DoubleDose said:

 

NCM, what I wrote is not a POV.   The anti-gun community wants you to think and believe this is an opinion, point of view, or belief.  It is factual documented (Federalist papers) history.  I do not agree with "And consequently, the opposition ( I.e. We  2 nd amendment supporters ) has conceded much in its acquiescence and acceptance of this new reality."  We, the opposition, have been forced to accept these unconstitutional laws or become criminals.   You state "try to prevent further erosion of our rights ."  One of our founding fathers said "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance".  As Grouse has stated, some of these unconstitutional laws are being overturned, including by SCOTUS.  

You may not agree, but it has become reality, I'm afraid. Also, you say that your statement is not a POV , but (I assume) a fact; well, the other side would disagree with that assertion and many would agree with them--Im afraid--as they are numerous and quite powerful , as demonstrated by the 2020 election results. Thats what I'm saying ! We have  already lost extensive ground over the years, piece by piece , little by little and positing the argument now, that absolutely NO gun control legislation is constitutional, will get you nowhere, IMHO. Again,  Although I agree with that sentiment (i.e., that it is indeed, unconstitutionaldue ) , Im afraid it would be a rather unpopular and fruitless endeavor right now, circa  2021.

[DoubleDose]

9 hours ago, Northcountryman said:

You may not agree, but it has become reality, I'm afraid. Also, you say that your statement is not a POV , but (I assume) a fact; well, the other side would disagree with that assertion and many would agree with them--Im afraid--as they are numerous and quite powerful , as demonstrated by the 2020 election results. Thats what I'm saying ! We have  already lost extensive ground over the years, piece by piece , little by little and positing the argument now, that absolutely NO gun control legislation is constitutional, will get you nowhere, IMHO. Again,  Although I agree with that sentiment (i.e., that it is indeed, unconstitutionaldue ) , Im afraid it would be a rather unpopular and fruitless endeavor right now, circa  2021.

NCM, agree this is an accurate assessment of the current state of affairs.  This is primarily due to the education system, mainstream media, and the powerful brainwashing the masses about 2A.  It is the responsibility of gun owners to correct that brainwashing and never throw in the towel.

Look at the history, as criminals use different guns in high profile crimes those guns become highly regulated or illegal (tommy gun, sawed off shotgun, Saturday night special, AKs, ARs, etc).  The criminal minority causes the loss of rights of the majority.  

Hunters, as gun owners, need to understand that their guns are NOT safe; they are just further down on the list.  A large number of anti-gun folks are also anti-hunting.  King Andy said "How many bullets do you need to kill a deer?"!  At some point in the future an argument will be made that hunters should only have single shot firearms (more sporting) and all others made illegal because the criminals are using non-single shot hunting arms in crimes.