Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"The SAFE Act stops criminals and the dangerously mentally ill from buying a gun by requiring universal background checks on gun purchases, increases penalties for people who use illegal guns, mandates life in prison without parole for anyone who murders a first responder, and imposes the toughest assault weapons ban in the country. For hunters, sportsmen, and law abiding gun owners, this new law preserves and protects your right to buy, sell, keep or use your guns."
What I find amazing is that no one has ever asked Cuomo how he can pass the "safe act" in minutes, but can't decide about fracking after years of "study"
I'm admittedly not a gun person.. so I tend to stay out of the gun debates.
However, having read the SAFE Act (in its amended form)... I'm not exactly sure where the outrage comes from. How does it prevent one from acquiring a firearm?
The problem is that Cuomo "Ill Duce" really doesn't care. After all people that do not think like him are not welcome in New York State. As he stated "that's not who we are". This act was nothing more than political retribution to punish his political enemies. People that don't vote for him. The big question is, what's next? Now that so called "assault weapons" have to be registered, confiscation and criminalization will soon follow. Don't think so? Under the "Safe Act" possession of any magazine feeding device that holds more than 10 rounds are now illegal subject to criminal prosecution, including those that were previously lawfully owned. "Ill Duce" made it clear that before the passage of the "Safe Act" that "confiscation was indeed on the table". He then had the gall to state after the act was passed "For hunters, sportsmen, and law abiding gun owners, this new law preserves and protects your right to buy, sell, keep or use your guns." Really? This man is nothing more than a contemptible swine. For what's in store look no further than New York City under the "Dink", registration came first followed by confiscation. I'm just so glad I got out of there a few years before this travesty took place. As this last election proves New York State is like a broken record. I really feel bad for those who for some reason or another are stuck there. It never ceases to amaze me that this is the type of government that New Yorkers choose to represent and legislate over them. It doesn't really matter what side you are on. Using the force of government to punish your political enemies is blatantly unconstitutional. It violates the principles that this country was founded on that we are a "Constitutional Republic" and not a democracy/dictatorship.
Last edited by Ex New Yorker; 11-09-2014 at 09:53 AM..
I'm not exactly sure where the outrage comes from. How does it prevent one from acquiring a firearm?
Outrage? Now why would anyone be outraged? At the stroke of a pen "Ill Duce" forced tens of thousands of otherwise law abiding citizens to forfeit their lawfully owned property or face criminal prosecution. Nothing to be outraged about, just a minor little inconvenience.
Outrage? Now why would anyone be outraged? At the stroke of a pen "Ill Duce" forced tens of thousands of otherwise law abiding citizens to forfeit their lawfully owned property or face criminal prosecution. Nothing to be outraged about, just a minor little inconvenience.
Can you verify that?
All you've provided is outrage. Where in the law does it say you can't own a gun?
I'm actually not trying to be a jerk in this thread (can't say the same for others LOL). I just really never understood the knee jerk reaction from the SAFE Act. Is it fear, or is it the law? From what I've read of the actual text, it doesn't prevent people from owning a firearm for personal use.
§ 265.36 effective March 16, 2013 makes possession of the large capacity magazines (more than 10 rounds) that were previously lawfully owned prior to the 1994 ban a Class A Misdemeanor. There may be some sort of grace period involved, but after you are informed, you need to turn it in or sell it to someone out-of-state within 30 days.
Perhaps reading comprehension is not your forte. The issue is that it has turned tens of thousands of otherwise law abiding citizens into criminals with the stroke of a pen. This has nothing to do with whether an individual can still own or carry a firearm. The Supreme Court has already ruled that the 2nd Amendment in both the Heller and McDonald decisions is an individual right not related to service in a militia and applies to weapons that are in common use today. You may want to read it but I doubt that you will understand it either, or will apply your own interpretation as to what the decision means.
Many people who went through the arduous process of obtaining a handgun permit in New York State have in their possession such magazines. Many of those handguns came from the manufacturer with standard magazines that hold more than 10 rounds that were perfectly legal before this asinine law came into effect. Those owners could now be subject to criminal prosecution because handguns by law have to be registered with the State of New York. Making it a fairly simple process to locate the owners of such handguns and magazines. The only option is for the owners to purchase all new magazines that comply with the law and to dispose of the magazines that originally came with the weapon. Because of the wide variety of handguns that came with magazines that hold over 10 rounds. Many of the 10 round replacements might not be readily available to New York State residents. Regardless, it is unjust confiscation of ones personal property forced upon those who played by the rules and have broken no laws.
Owners of so-called assault rifles must now register those rifles with the State of New York or permanently modify them to comply with the law to avoid registration. This will cost their lawful owners hundreds of dollars for those modifications. The same rule applies to the magazines that originally came with those rifles that also apply to handguns.
There now is that so difficult to understand?
Quote:
I'm admittedly not a gun person.. so I tend to stay out of the gun debates.
Obviously! But you tend to inject your opinion into it anyway. So why make a fool out of yourself over a subject you know absolutely nothing about? Or is it that you just like to argue?
Does anyone seriously believe that this law will have any affect on the criminal mis-use of firearms? Does anyone seriously believe that a determined individual that intends to commit mass murder is really going to abide by this ridiculous law? Oh, wait I can only have a ten round magazine lest I be charged in addition to mass murder with a class A misdemeanor. Progressive stupidity at it's worst. Political retribution at it's best.
Last edited by Ex New Yorker; 11-09-2014 at 03:19 PM..
I actually don't care. I own a single gun for protection only, and this law didn't change that fact. So I literally don't care.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
