New York Firearms Forum banner
1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
196 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I haven't seen much discussion about the new law being proposed and I'm really concerned if it passes. Here is an article about it.

New York state lawmakers propose law to punish gun owners who don't lock up weapons - NY Daily News

This is a link to the actual text of the law.

Bills

I don't know if my interpretation of the law is correct, but to me it looks like the gun has to be in your immediate possession or control if it's not in a safe. No exceptions. I take this to mean that even if there's no kids in the home and everyone present can legally possess a gun, you can't just leave it on top of the dresser readily available while you are home.

Another concern is the law leaves it up to the state police to determine what an adequate way of securing the weapon is. Does anyone trust them with this responsibility? What kind of standards would an antigun police administration come up with? Will the state police be held responsible when their "approved safe" is proven to be insufficient and gets broken into?

My understanding of state law is that a firearm is defined as an illegal gun, meaning an unregistered handgun, unregistered "assault weapon", or a gun possessed by a felon. This law defines a weapon as a rifle, shotgun, firearm, antique firearm, or machine gun. Does this mean a registered handgun wouldn't be affected by this law?

On a side note but related to the above paragraph, would a county law outlawing firearms in a county park actually allow registered handguns? I was looking specifically at the Monroe County law preventing guns from county parks, which is 323-28 in the below link. I don't see where the county law defines "firearm" so would it default to the state definition? I'm sure someone smarter than me would have seen this long ago if handguns were actually allowed but I can dream right?

Monroe County, NY PARKS

Back to the safe storage act, if I report my gun stolen and then it is used in the commission of a crime I am actually held to a higher penalty because of this law. Whatever happened to going after the actual criminals?

Everyone is distracted by the micro-stamping fiasco right now and I'm afraid this law will pass right under our noses. I've got an email from Senator Mike Nozzolio, who is chairman of the codes committee assuring us that the micro-stamping won't even get out of the codes committee but nothing was said about the storage law. We need to be attacking this law just as strongly as the micro-stamping law.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
196 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
didn't the Heller case (spelling) say that having your guns locked up violates the 2nd amendment for self defense ?
It did, but that is irrelevant with the current legislators we have today. They will pass the law and then use our tax money to defend it in court for the next 10 years. Even then we may not get our rights back.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,953 Posts
I think they are using the tragic death of some kid shot by his brother (or friend) with one of 3 unregistered handguns the kid's dad owned. My thinking is that if the gun owner did not obey the law by possessing a permit to own the guns he probably wasn't going to give a **** about another law that states he has to keep them locked up. Or is it just me.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
148 Posts
It would be interesting to see the final written law to know more details. But, since you're protected against random search and seizures in your home without a warrant, I don't see how they would know if you left your pistol on the dresser during the day. If somebody broke in and took it I suppose they could then charge you with failure to secure it. Otherwise, I just don't see how they would know.

Of course the other side of the argument is that because NY doesn't give a lot of people a carry permit, they are forcing those people to leave their guns at home where they are more likely to fall into the wrong hands. Let everybody carry, and then it will always be on your person and not sitting around waiting for the neighborhood kid to wander in while you're at work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
891 Posts
If it is mandated, then make the cost of a safe 100% tax deductible - or better yet, have the state provide them for free. Won't all the antis downstate just love knowing that their tax dollars are being used to buy us gun safes? Of course they will love it: It's for the children!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,999 Posts
I think heller negates it but it can be carried out further. IF i lock up my guns in a safe and the safe is broken into, i could still be charged with a crime if i report it stolen. Also, it does seem to keep having a loaded gun secured in a safe as well. I don't think it will survive a court challenge in its current form.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
278 Posts
And added confication
40 1. WHENEVER (A) A PERSON IS CONVICTED OF FAILURE TO STORE A WEAPON
41 SAFELY IN THE SECOND DEGREE UNDER SECTION 265.52 OF THIS ARTICLE OR
42 AGGRAVATED FAILURE TO STORE A WEAPON SAFELY IN THE SECOND DEGREE UNDER
43 SECTION 265.54 OF THIS ARTICLE, AND HAS A PRIOR CONVICTION OF FAILURE TO
44 STORE A WEAPON SAFELY IN THE SECOND DEGREE UNDER SECTION 265.52 OF THIS
45 ARTICLE OR AGGRAVATED FAILURE TO STORE A WEAPON SAFELY IN THE SECOND
46 DEGREE UNDER SECTION 265.54 OF THIS ARTICLE; OR (B) A PERSON IS
47 CONVICTED OF FAILURE TO STORE A WEAPON SAFELY IN THE FIRST DEGREE UNDER
48 SECTION 265.53 OF THIS ARTICLE OR AGGRAVATED FAILURE TO STORE A WEAPON
49 SAFELY IN THE FIRST DEGREE UNDER SECTION 265.55 OF THIS ARTICLE, THE
50 COURT SHALL REVOKE ANY EXISTING LICENSE POSSESSED BY SUCH PERSON, ORDER
51 SUCH PERSON INELIGIBLE FOR SUCH A LICENSE, AND ORDER THE IMMEDIATE
52 SURRENDER PURSUANT TO SUBPARAGRAPH (F) OF PARAGRAPH ONE OF SUBDIVISION A
53 OF SECTION 265.20 OF THIS ARTICLE AND SUBDIVISION SIX OF SECTION 400.05
54 OF THIS CHAPTER, OF ANY OR ALL FIREARMS OWNED OR POSSESSED, OR SUSPEND
55 OR CONTINUE TO SUSPEND ANY SUCH EXISTING LICENSE POSSESSED BY SUCH
56 PERSON, ORDER SUCH PERSON INELIGIBLE FOR SUCH A LICENSE, AND ORDER THE
A. 8293--A 4

1 IMMEDIATE SURRENDER PURSUANT TO SUBPARAGRAPH (F) OF PARAGRAPH ONE OF
2 SUBDIVISION A OF SECTION 265.20 OF THIS ARTICLE AND SUBDIVISION SIX OF
3 SECTION 400.05 OF THIS CHAPTER, OF ANY OR ALL FIREARMS OWNED OR
4 POSSESSED.
5 2. ANY SUSPENSION ORDER ISSUED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION SHALL REMAIN
6 IN EFFECT FOR FIVE YEARS.
7 3. (A) WHENEVER A PERSON IS CONVICTED AS PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH ONE OF
8 THIS SECTION, THE COURT SHALL REQUIRE THE RESPONDENT TO INFORM THE COURT
9 OF ALL FIREARMS HE OR SHE OWNS OR POSSESSES. ANY ORDER TO SURRENDER ONE
10 OR MORE FIREARMS SHALL SPECIFY A DATE AND TIME BY WHICH THE SURRENDER
11 SHALL BE COMPLETED AND, TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE, SHALL DESCRIBE SUCH
12 FIREARMS TO BE SURRENDERED AND SHALL DIRECT THE AUTHORITY RECEIVING SUCH
13 SURRENDERED FIREARMS TO IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE COURT OF SUCH SURRENDER.
14 (B) THE PROMPT SURRENDER OF ONE OR MORE FIREARMS PURSUANT TO A COURT
15 ORDER ISSUED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION SHALL BE CONSIDERED A VOLUNTARY
16 SURRENDER FOR PURPOSES OF SUBPARAGRAPH (F) OF PARAGRAPH ONE OF SUBDIVI-
17 SION A OF SECTION 265.20 OF THIS ARTICLE. THE DISPOSITION OF ANY SUCH
18 FIREARMS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SUBDIVISION SIX
19 OF SECTION 400.05 OF THIS CHAPTER.
20 (C) THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION SHALL NOT BE DEEMED TO LIMIT,
21 RESTRICT OR OTHERWISE IMPAIR THE AUTHORITY OF THE COURT TO ORDER AND
22 DIRECT THE SURRENDER OF ANY OR ALL PISTOLS, REVOLVERS, RIFLES, SHOTGUNS
23 OR OTHER FIREARMS OWNED OR POSSESSED BY A RESPONDENT PURSUANT TO THIS
24 CHAPTER.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top