Man you can NOT read lolIf it's not generic then it's specific. Where on the sign does it list a specific law statute or violation? It doesn't. Just says gun violation 1 year minimum.
I have already explained that no person when issued a permit under the penal law may be charged with unlawful possession. It's right in the law in writing. Take a look instead of coming here with your head in the sand and insisting it doesn't. It's easily verifiable. Also it's not some mysterious case law that I heard third hand. I read the court decision for myself. I cant locate it off the top of my head but if you search you will find it. The guy had a home possession only permit and took his gun out in public and used it to commit a crime. He was arrested and charged with unlawful possession but the court ruled he cannot be and dismissed the charge.
You have ignored those facts and have kept with your point that is actually opinion and has nothing to back it up. Please state the charge.
So these jurisdictions are trying to supersede state law, no? They're effectively saying they will not enforce the concealment requirement. Good for them, actually.
My position is as follows:So these jurisdictions are trying to supersede state law, no? They're effectively saying they will not enforce the concealment requirement. Good for them, actually.
My position, however, is how they reconcile that with state law and the "concealed" clause included in a "proper cause" carry license. The only license under the statute that has no "concealed" clause is 400(2)(g) "have, possess, collect and carry antique pistols which are defined as follows: [...]". Presumably one could assume that open carry of an antique handgun with an antique pistol license would be legal under state law, but regardless of these statements by the Chemung Sheriff and a Herkimer licensing officer, the state statute would allow a police officer (particularly the State Police, I would imagine) to take action. Even with an antique pistol license I would expect some sort of summons and trouble for a violation or misdemeanor along the lines of "disorderly conduct" or something to such an effect, whatever the charge may be. Though, the antique pistol license may fare better in court. Then again, judges invented restrictions and restrictions were upheld as acceptable by judges, so in practice it's pointless. There's no real uniform rule of law in NYS.
I agree with the first point.My position is as follows:
1) If something is not banned by law, it is by default legal
2) State law does not ban the carry of pistols, only the possession
3) The fact that the state law specifically allows for concealed carry does not imply nor create a defacto ban on carrying outside those exceptions. Again, the law does not ban the carry of pistols. The fact that you must have a license to possess one has no bearing on the manner in which you may carry a pistol.
Consider that it was not that long ago that folks in PA thought open carry was banned for the same reason: "we have a License to Carry Firearms that grants concealed carry priviledges, therefore it must be illegal for us to openly carry." Folks more savvy with the law recognized the reality of #1 (and the PA variant of #2), and today open carry is recognized across the state as legal (though there are a handful of situations where one must possess an LTCF to do so). This massive about-face came about without any change to the law - rather, a more careful examination and application of existing law.
We're all entrenched in our positions, no one is going to move from their camp.
This reply starts out good (as a solid opinion) then goes right off the rails. You may not be charged with criminal possession if you possess a permit. Period. Regardless of type of permit. Period.There is no ban on open carrying a handgun in NYS. However, it is still illegal.
Handguns are prohibited in NYS unless you are exempted. One of the exemptions is having a license to carry concealed. This isn't because the license itself says concealed, the actual penal code states "concealed". Because possession with this license stipulates the firearm is to be concealed, if you are openly carrying a handgun you can be charged with criminal possession of a firearm.
Thanks for your review of my comment and I support your admissions to the armchair bar.This reply starts out good (as a solid opinion) then goes right off the rails. You may not be charged with criminal possession if you possess a permit. Period. Regardless of type of permit. Period.
This has already been tried and proven in cases that you can look up. The one in particular I read is someone with a household only - not carry permit was charged after using the gun in a crime. The charge was dismissed as the courts ruled the charge cannot stand as he had a permit even though he took the gun out of the household. The law specifically prohibits the charge to anyone licensed under the penal law.
If someone who committed a crime with a gun wasn’t able to be charged under the law with criminal possession certainly a law abiding citizen open carrying on a carry permit could not be. End of story.