1919 A4 Forums banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,808 Posts
It is unwise to expect CA, NY, IL or their respective circuit courts to respect 2A. They have, with little variation, been anti-2A for a long time. At least in NY and IL the level of corruption in state and local governments leaves courts open to direction from the corrupt government leaders. DC, though handing down several surprising judgments, is anti-gun; look at the years of stalling they exhibited in recent cases, prompting Alan Gura to beg and force the court for a decision.

USA has been awash in anti-gun garbage for a century now. In some places the trend is now to favor 2A, but just as vehemently some states/ jurisdictions have see draconian anti-gun laws supported by courts. It is not unlikely that states will swing toward anti-gun, after all, who would have expected Colorado to pass their anti-rights laws? Who would have thought Virginia would see gun rights losses?

Some gun owners took a narrow view of events. "Screw New York!" "Move!" "Vote them out of office!" These are shallow views, with the thinking that those living in oppressive states some how could have avoided the anti-gun situation. It divided gun owners into haves and have nots, with the haves thinking they were somehow immune to anti-gun movements.

All gun owners should have supported (including monetarily) the pro-rights movements in the oppressed states. Instead, the "can't happen here" blinders kept them largely unmotivated. That was a mistake.

Now we have anti-gun Circuit court decisions against "assault weapons" and magazine capacities in NY, CT, and IL; these also cover Wisconsin, Indiana, and FA-loving Vermont. Don't think they'll spread? You'd be wrong...just as Coloradans were.

All gun owners across the nation are right now at a critical juncture. If SCOTUS takes the case and the pro-rights side wins, it will kill many anti-gun laws, even those you think can't happen where you live; if SCOTUS refuses the case, then the disease WILL spread to your region, your state, and your home.

EVERYONE should pray that SCOTUS takes the IL case (and, thus the NY and CT cases) and shoots them all down. If not, it's only matter of time until you sound like Martin Niemoller.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,129 Posts
NJ had a case the court was going to hear that had potential to open up the restrictive laws but about 2 months from the hearing date the court reversed its decision to hear the case.

I suspect the court has done as much ruling as they want to on gun laws and will be refusing to weigh in on any more for fear they will have to throw out more anti gun laws
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,202 Posts
Some gun owners took a narrow view of events. "Screw New York!" "Move!" "Vote them out of office!" These are shallow views, with the thinking that those living in oppressive states some how could have avoided the anti-gun situation. It divided gun owners into haves and have nots, with the haves thinking they were somehow immune to anti-gun movements.

[/QUOTE

The list of SAFE exemptions here in NY include FFL holders and pretty much ANY kind of law enforcment, from dog catchers to campus security guards.....yet there is NO provision for National Guard members or other military status. Most of my LEO friends tell me 'dude, dont worry about it, you will be fine'....

I had a kid in my unit who was a part time dog warden. He was exempt from registration, possession laws and magazine restrictions.
Ive got a C&R FFL, over 15 years in Combat Arms related MOS's and Im currently serving as a readiness NCO for a MP unit. (MP qualified)....yet I had to get rid of all my high cap mags and register all my EBG's.

I really think Cuomo did this intentionally. Get the support of all the LEO's on whatever level, just to drive a wedge in the common good of the gun owning comminuty.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
885 Posts
"Divide and conquer" is how they have been doing it for years. Segment the population of gun owners, and start with FA's - paint them as a small number of VERY dangerous weapons, get the general population or legislature convinced this is a drop in the bucket owner and weapon-wise, so its no REAL violation of the 2nd amendment, and every body buys in. Then ban the assault rifles while grandfathering in the old ones, then go after the old ones, then go after high-cap pistol mag's. You get the general population conditioned to have them gradually disappear. All the while you are passing so many contradictory, overlapping, no-sense laws it becomes a felony to thing about buying a gun, and making it so expensive with taxes, fees, tests, and safe requirements people become inclined to take up cheaper hobbies like collecting Ferrari's.

It's like eating an elephant. If you try to do it all at once it will kill you. So you do it one bite at a time, get your fill, then come back later and chew up a little more. Repeat until the elephant is gone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,129 Posts
Problem is sometimes the elephant stomps you for biting it too many times;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
283 Posts
I wonder how many New Yorkers actually complied with that BS law? I wouldn't. If the gub'mint tells me I don't need a gun, I need a gun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
803 Posts
It is unwise to expect CA, NY, IL or their respective circuit courts to respect 2A. They have, with little variation, been anti-2A for a long time. At least in NY and IL the level of corruption in state and local governments leaves courts open to direction from the corrupt government leaders. DC, though handing down several surprising judgments, is anti-gun; look at the years of stalling they exhibited in recent cases, prompting Alan Gura to beg and force the court for a decision.

USA has been awash in anti-gun garbage for a century now. In some places the trend is now to favor 2A, but just as vehemently some states/ jurisdictions have see draconian anti-gun laws supported by courts. It is not unlikely that states will swing toward anti-gun, after all, who would have expected Colorado to pass their anti-rights laws? Who would have thought Virginia would see gun rights losses?

Some gun owners took a narrow view of events. "Screw New York!" "Move!" "Vote them out of office!" These are shallow views, with the thinking that those living in oppressive states some how could have avoided the anti-gun situation. It divided gun owners into haves and have nots, with the haves thinking they were somehow immune to anti-gun movements.

All gun owners should have supported (including monetarily) the pro-rights movements in the oppressed states. Instead, the "can't happen here" blinders kept them largely unmotivated. That was a mistake.

Now we have anti-gun Circuit court decisions against "assault weapons" and magazine capacities in NY, CT, and IL; these also cover Wisconsin, Indiana, and FA-loving Vermont. Don't think they'll spread? You'd be wrong...just as Coloradans were.

All gun owners across the nation are right now at a critical juncture. If SCOTUS takes the case and the pro-rights side wins, it will kill many anti-gun laws, even those you think can't happen where you live; if SCOTUS refuses the case, then the disease WILL spread to your region, your state, and your home.

EVERYONE should pray that SCOTUS takes the IL case (and, thus the NY and CT cases) and shoots them all down. If not, it's only matter of time until you sound like Martin Niemoller.
How do you figure it covers Wisconsin? We don't have any mag bans or belt length limits!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,682 Posts
I did some figuring on the governors anti-gun law (called the “safe act”) and the ACTUAL percentage of firearms that were registered. Here are some numbers to ponder.

The NYS Troopers FINALLY released the number of FIREARMS registered under the new anti-gun legislation (after they were taken to court to have it released) - less than 45,000 in all of New York state (in a recent turn of events the NYS troopers have told Cabelas they could not sell certain models of the Golden Boy lever action rifle because they hold more than 10 rounds – that would make every tube fed rifle built after 1898 – by New York states own definition – an assault rifle and illegal to own. Considering now that any 1873 or 1892 Winchester (or any lever action, pump tube fed rifle bigger than .22lr) that can hold more than 10 rounds is an “assault rifle” this would drive the number or unregistered firearms up dramatically).

Population of New York - 19,378,102 as of 2015 (source - Suburban Stats web site).
Gun owners as a percentage of population of New York - 18% - 3,488,058 gun owners (source - About News web site).

If half of those gun owners own what would now be determined to be an "anti-safe act" firearm the number of actual "evil guns" in New York state would be 1,744,029 (I believe this to be a very conservative figure since every Ruger 1022 or Mini 14 with a muzzle break or folding stock or Glock with a high capacity mag would fall under the law along with all ARs without that goofy stock).

Now throw in the fact that many of us have more than one of these "evil guns" - that figure could EASILY rise to 2,616,043 (some may have quite a few more than 1).

Figuring the number of evil guns in New York state to be closer to 2,616,043 with the total amount of firearms registered at 45,000 the actual percentage of firearms registered under the governors anti-gun law is much closer to .017% - LESS than 2%.

It's too bad the media doesn't do a little bit of research - they would be more credible.

Feel free to share this with all New York firearms owners you know.

You think this won’t happen in your state? Think again.

Unfortunately firearms owners are no different than any other group. There are upland bird hunters, deer hunters, clay breakers, paper punchers, various collectors of all specific types, turkey hunters, hangunners - all different groups who don't give a **** about the others. Split factions - just like the bike clubs and motorcycle riders I used to run with. If they'd all get their heads out of their asses and realize that it's just as important to help protect my right to own an AR15 as it is for me to protect their right to own an A5 Browning we'd be a lot stronger - but they never will. Growing up with a father who had a small town gun shop I have seen it all first hand. The duck hunter who looks at an AR and says "no one should be allowed to own that". The AR owner who looks at a single shot 3" mag turkey gun and shakes his head. A gun is a gun. Protect them all no matter what they "look" like or their purpose. The reality is that they are slowly disarming us.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
391 Posts
"RE" You think this won’t happen in your state? Think again.
Makes me think of this

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

I did some figuring on the governors anti-gun law (called the “safe act”) and the ACTUAL percentage of firearms that were registered. Here are some numbers to ponder.

The NYS Troopers FINALLY released the number of FIREARMS registered under the new anti-gun legislation (after they were taken to court to have it released) - less than 45,000 in all of New York state (in a recent turn of events the NYS troopers have told Cabelas they could not sell certain models of the Golden Boy lever action rifle because they hold more than 10 rounds – that would make every tube fed rifle built after 1898 – by New York states own definition – an assault rifle and illegal to own. Considering now that any 1873 or 1892 Winchester (or any lever action, pump tube fed rifle bigger than .22lr) that can hold more than 10 rounds is an “assault rifle” this would drive the number or unregistered firearms up dramatically).

Population of New York - 19,378,102 as of 2015 (source - Suburban Stats web site).
Gun owners as a percentage of population of New York - 18% - 3,488,058 gun owners (source - About News web site).

If half of those gun owners own what would now be determined to be an "anti-safe act" firearm the number of actual "evil guns" in New York state would be 1,744,029 (I believe this to be a very conservative figure since every Ruger 1022 or Mini 14 with a muzzle break or folding stock or Glock with a high capacity mag would fall under the law along with all ARs without that goofy stock).

Now throw in the fact that many of us have more than one of these "evil guns" - that figure could EASILY rise to 2,616,043 (some may have quite a few more than 1).

Figuring the number of evil guns in New York state to be closer to 2,616,043 with the total amount of firearms registered at 45,000 the actual percentage of firearms registered under the governors anti-gun law is much closer to .017% - LESS than 2%.

It's too bad the media doesn't do a little bit of research - they would be more credible.

Feel free to share this with all New York firearms owners you know.

You think this won’t happen in your state? Think again.

Unfortunately firearms owners are no different than any other group. There are upland bird hunters, deer hunters, clay breakers, paper punchers, various collectors of all specific types, turkey hunters, hangunners - all different groups who don't give a **** about the others. Split factions - just like the bike clubs and motorcycle riders I used to run with. If they'd all get their heads out of their asses and realize that it's just as important to help protect my right to own an AR15 as it is for me to protect their right to own an A5 Browning we'd be a lot stronger - but they never will. Growing up with a father who had a small town gun shop I have seen it all first hand. The duck hunter who looks at an AR and says "no one should be allowed to own that". The AR owner who looks at a single shot 3" mag turkey gun and shakes his head. A gun is a gun. Protect them all no matter what they "look" like or their purpose. The reality is that they are slowly disarming us.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,355 Posts
Outdoordave SEZ: ....actual percentage of firearms registered under the governors anti-gun law is much closer to .017%....?
No, actually it's about 1.7%

hueyy SEZ: "Make me think of this:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."


Abominog SEZ: "....EVERYONE should pray that SCOTUS takes the IL case (and, thus the NY and CT cases) and shoots them all down. If not, it's only matter of time until you sound like Martin Niemoller.

And Martin Niemoller SEZ :

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

When Pastor Niemöller was put in a concentration camp; the people who were put in the camps then were Communists. Who cared about them? We knew it, it was printed in the newspapers. Who raised their voice, maybe the Confessing Church? We thought: Communists, those opponents of religion, those enemies of Christians - "should I be my brother's keeper?" Then they got rid of the sick, the so-called incurables. - I remember a conversation I had with a person who claimed to be a Christian. He said: Perhaps it's right, these incurably sick people just cost the state money, they are just a burden to themselves and to others. Isn't it best for all concerned if they are taken out of the middle [of society]? -- Only then did the church as such take note. Then we started talking, until our voices were again silenced in public. Can we say, we aren't guilty/responsible? The persecution of the Jews, the way we treated the occupied countries, or the things in Greece, in Poland, in Czechoslovakia or in Holland, that were written in the newspapers I believe, we Confessing-Church-Christians have every reason to say: mea culpa, mea culpa! We can talk ourselves out of it with the excuse that it would have cost me my head if I had spoken out.

That's what he said he said!


Carry On!
Gary
><>
 
Joined
·
118 Posts
Ruling was by three justices. Two were Obama appointees.

Thank you Obama and Harry Reid.

Guys, we are starting to reap what we have sown. Barack packed the courts with hundreds of these bozos. It's almost over. A supreme court nominee or two will just speed it up. The stuff I hear from my TV that the ones most likely to retire are libs anyway is BS. There is almost no age difference in the top 4. And fresh, young, maniacal Communists beat old libs any day of the week anyway.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top