New York Firearms Forum banner

1 - 20 of 51 Posts
Joined
·
99 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
Someone will ask so:

SAF AMENDED LAWSUIT CHALLENGES PART OF NEW YORK SAFE ACT
PR Newswire

BELLEVUE, Wash., Jan. 2, 2014 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- An amended complaint has been filed by the Second Amendment Foundation in its challenge of a section of New York's "SAFE Act" relating to an arbitrary limit on the number of cartridges that may be loaded into a magazine, arguing that such a limit violates the Second Amendment.

SAF is joined by Long Island Firearms, LLC, the Shooters Committee on Political Education (SCOPE) of New York and seven individual plaintiffs, including a practicing physician. Defendants are Gov. Andrew Cuomo, and Joseph D'Amico, superintendent of the State Police.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York, contends that the new law limits an individual citizen's self-defense ability, especially if that person is physically disabled, by prohibiting more than seven rounds in a magazine, even if the magazine can hold eight, nine or ten cartridges.

"We have received numerous inquiries and concerns from members and supporters living in New York state about this new statute," noted SAF Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. "Aside from the obvious Second Amendment problems this cartridge limit presents, making it a crime to load more than seven cartridges into a ten-round magazine, for example, is confusing to the point that it is almost entrapment.

"It's not illegal to own an eight-, nine- or ten-round magazine," he added, "but it is illegal under this new law to have more than seven rounds in such a magazine, except if a person is at a firing range. You can't keep that many rounds in the magazine at home, or in a place of business, which simply defies logic unless the goal is to make 'paper criminals' out of people just to disqualify them from being able to own a firearm."

"It is patently absurd to assert that making criminals out of legally-licensed gun owners for loading the magazine or his/her registered firearm to its standard capacity, is somehow going to deter a criminal or make our communities safer in any way," Stephen Aldstadt, SCOPE president observed. "The NY SAFE Act must be overturned."

"Our members are concerned that this statute plays no bearing on law abiding citizens who have gone through rigorous background checks already," added Steven Blair, president of Long Island Firearms, LLC.

Gottlieb said the complaint was amended to allow additional plaintiffs to join the action because people have been harmed in different ways by this Draconian new law.

The lawsuit notes that magazines holding ten or more rounds of ammunition are in common usage by law-abiding citizens for all kinds of purposes, including self-defense. It contends that there is not sufficient government interest to justify restricting gun owners from loading more than seven rounds in their otherwise lawful eight-, nine- or ten-round magazines.

"This law sets an arbitrary limit on the number of rounds a person may load into an otherwise legal magazine," Gottlieb observed. "There is no rational explanation for this, other than to deliberately confuse the public."

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

SOURCE Second Amendment Foundation
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,522 Posts
I think we definitely need a member only forum. I actually suggested it a while back, and it needs a minimum post count to enter such as 100 posts. spies, shills, lurkers, etc... will be much harder pressed to acquire 100 posts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,578 Posts
I think we definitely need a member only forum. I actually suggested it a while back, and it needs a minimum post count to enter such as 100 posts. spies, shills, lurkers, etc... will be much harder pressed to acquire 100 posts.
So ... uh .... can I join? C'mon guys .... everyone likes Chicken!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,234 Posts
OK, I will leave to the forum admin to see if we should keep it in both areas. By the way, the more I read these forums the more I think they are damaging the cause. Thinking we need a member only password protected here or move to another forum (which I already started to set up), thoughts?
The forum should be members only AND by invitation only. That is, the mod should have the authority to allow credible members only. I may not be allowed but I vote for Chicken Shoot and Evil.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,735 Posts
Ya mean even if im a positive guy i cant join . That makes me really sad .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,461 Posts
The forum should be members only AND by invitation only. That is, the mod should have the authority to allow credible members only. I may not be allowed but I vote for Chicken Shoot and Evil.
Universal BGCs for NYF?

Uh-oh... :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,180 Posts
I joined this forum to talk about NYS gun enthusiasm and laws. I have no desire to join another for the same purpose.

Having an area that only "credible" members may have access to may have benefits, but it will have downfalls as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,140 Posts
Do you guys really think they look here for their information?

They had that law ready to go and the answers to the lawsuit in hand before the midnight session.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
481 Posts
If you want a private group, I suggest Facebook. However, my feeling is that private groups is the domain fo the anti-liberty grabber types.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,578 Posts
I get the idea ... I do .... I'm not sure it's actually something that would take off being part of a forum already. Didn't someone say that they are starting another forum that would indeed make it hard for "the other side" to get into?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,220 Posts
I think we definitely need a member only forum. I actually suggested it a while back, and it needs a minimum post count to enter such as 100 posts. spies, shills, lurkers, etc... will be much harder pressed to acquire 100 posts.
I think thats a bad idea. There should be nothing posted on this or any site by anybody that is actually involved in any 2A lawsuit until it is public record. I had suggested that early on myself. Anything else posted is just talk,no harm in talking just watch what you post. By that I mean don't get yourself in trouble with the law.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
249 Posts
OK, I will leave to the forum admin to see if we should keep it in both areas. By the way, the more I read these forums the more I think they are damaging the cause. Thinking we need a member only password protected here or move to another forum (which I already started to set up), thoughts?
Well I guess if a fed Judge wll accept copies of agenda-driven websites as irrefutable evidence, then we SHOLUD keep it away from prying eyes
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,291 Posts
Back to the OP, what did they amend?
 
1 - 20 of 51 Posts
Top