New York Governor Andrew Cuomo courtesy nypost.com

Add another one to the pile. This time, it’s the NY State Rifle and Pistol Association, along with just about every other NY-based firearms organization they could scrounge up that have filed a lawsuit against Governor Cuomo and his cronies in an effort to stop the SAFE Act from being enforced. You can read their full text of the filing here — it largely follows the same formula that the Tresmond case laid out, but I’ll give you the highlights anyway . . .

In the section arguing that magazine restrictions are unconstitutional:

91. Magazines that have a capacity of more than 7 or 10 rounds of ammunition are commonly possessed by law-abiding citizens throughout the United States for self defense, target shooting, hunting, and other lawful purposes. Such magazines are useful for militia purposes.Many firearms are designed for and sold with magazines that hold more than 7 or 10 rounds.
92. The need for and usefulness of magazines holding more than 7 or 10 rounds forlawful defense of self and others is demonstrated by the fact that they are issued to law enforcement officers. Criminals have and use magazines without any limitation in capacity. The Act‟s provisions on magazines put law-abiding citizens at a grave disadvantage to criminals, who will notcomply with the seven-round limit.
93. The Act‟s limitation of magazine capacity to 7 rounds or 10 rounds, depending onwhen they were obtained, and the Act‟s prohibition on loading more than 7 rounds in any magazine,facially and as applied, infringe on the right of the people, including plaintiffs, to keep and beararms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment, and as made applicable to the States by theFourteenth Amendment, of the United States Constitution.

Arguing that magazines are applicable for self defense situations by pointing out that the police use them was a nice touch. They go on to illustrate how low capacity magazines are detrimental to self defense, using the home invasion scenario as an illustrative example. Also how people normally don’t carry multiple magazines when they head to bed.

They used the same argument as Tresmond about the “assault weapons,” namely that the definition includes almost every commonly owned firearm, and therefore is unconstitutional.

As for the ammunition sale restrictions, they use an interesting argument: requiring ammunition stores to register with the NY State Police and only allow sales to NY residents from those stores violates the “dormant commerce clause.” It then regulates and restricts what was previously a booming interstate commerce in ammunition, a privilege reserved for the federal government.

34 Responses to NYSRPA Files SAFE Act Lawsuit

    • I think that’s his “fistful of Obama pose”
      COUMO: “See I grab him like this…stuff him in my facehole and he said I could be president next!”

      • Is the full 4th circuit any better? Is this case more likely to be appealed directly to SCOTUS (if that’s an option)?

    • So self defense is not a valid reason in Maryland……..I am still trying to wrap my head around that one. The question that immediately pops into my noggin is-what then IS a valid reason for a permit?

    • the thing about that ruling is that they held that self defense outside the home gets less strict scrutiny than self defense inside the home.

      Inside the home, they said that restrictions have to been given strict scrutiny, which means to me, mostly unconstitutional. And thats two Obama and one Clinton appointee. Who is going to say that one does not need a 20 round mag in your home in case of home invasion by multiple intruders, or drug cartels in texas? I still say thay there is hope/ optimism that a lot will get struck down, especially outlier laws like NY and CA

        • yup, courts disagree. i was just trying to find the (small) gem in the trash. i am still waiting to hear the one before the IL court too (Wilson v cook), i thought it went to trial in jan but dont know when they’ll rule. I think there was better evidence in that one. I expect one of these inside-the-home cases to go before the court first to establish the standard of review. I remain optimistic because kagan and scalia hunt together, so i doubt kagan will be confused by the scary black rifle jedi mind trick. semi-auto technology has been around for 120 years. once you let that is, everything else is cosmetic. judges will be looking for evidence that 10 bullets is ok, but 11 is not (the bright line). good luck with that when the police carry them.

  1. Budgets are tight everywhere, but legislatures and governors still want to fight expensive court battles that they’re likely to lose. If this weren’t an effort to violate basic rights and a bloody-minded waste of time, it would be amusing.

    • It isn’t their money. They don’t care.

      They can trumpet the fact that they passed a law to make the children safer and then blame the Evil Courts and the crazy NRA.

      Truth, logic, civil rights and data make no difference. It is all about the show.

  2. It strikes me as ridiculous that they’re trying to woo technology companies to NYC and become the next Silicon Valley while outlawing technology. How people can capriciously differentiate between “good” and “bad” technology while adamantly defending science and evolution, I’ll never understand.

    • Blaming the tool for the actions of the user (or, to cover the incompetence of the user) is a time-honored human tradition.

      Sometimes you do have a poor-quality tool, but that doesn’t make it evil .. Or good, for that matter.

  3. “That was a nice touch, arguing that magazines are applicable for self defense situations by pointing out that the police use them.”

    I have long argued there is no reason that the police need a particular type of firearm or should have unrestricted access to particular magazines that doesn’t also apply to citizens. If anything, the restrictions on citizens are more onerous because we cannot wait for backup.

  4. One big difference between the cases, worth noting, is that while Tresmond filed in state court, NYSRPA filed in federal court.

    Double the fun.

  5. Damn, everyone else was just getting around to that story yesterday, and y’all already had it covered four days ago! I will never doubt you again.

    Note: This is a reply to my previous post about something else.

  6. Cuomo himself is arguing that people should be permitted to buy 10 round mags, but that they will only be allowed to load 7 bullets. So what is the difference between a 10 round mag with 7 bullets and 3 empty spaces and a 20 round mag with 7 bullets and 13 empty spaces? What is the important public purpose that permits them to take my 20 round mags while 10 round mags get government approval? Either way, it’s still a crime to load that eighth bullet, and the only way to verify compliance will be to eject the mag and strip out 7 bullets and see if any remain. The law is arbitrary and makes no sense.

  7. It’s interesting how these cases are wending their way through the arcane Court Systems of the land. Like a grand Kabuki Dance unfolding before our eyes.

    First we had the Heller and McDonald decisions establishing a “right” in the home.
    Second we need a “bear” decision which Scalia is anxious to do. The Maryland Case may be the one.
    Third will be something like a shredding of the Safe Act, deciding limits and regulations. This decision may not be to our complete liking since it may find some limits constitutional that we aren’t going to take to. Even so, I can’t imagine a civil right being subject to “capricious, arbitrary and onerous” – love that phrase – restrictions that burden none of the others.

    It’s sad that these matters have to go through these endless delays but having spent over 3 months over 6 cases on jury duty I’m not surprised. The NYSRPA filings seem to cover every screwy aspect of the dopey Safe Act and provide lots of reasons for throwing it out – hope it speeds along.

    • US v Miller (1939) already established the limits that we are allowed to own: A weapon that ” has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia”.

  8. Apparently Hizzoner Cuomo’s vision is the same as Mr Orwell’s:

    “If you want to imagine the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever.”
    George Orwell

    Too bad only one of them was being ironic.

  9. Here is a bit of recent history:

    “When Governor Andrew Cuomo and his staff huddled with lawmakers earlier this year to craft the toughest gun control law in the country, he wanted to limit the capacity of magazines from 10 bullets down to five.

    But State Senate Republicans pushed back, worried a five-round limit would impact the sale of some handguns, said state Sen. Carl Marcellino, a Republican from Long Island.

    “This was the governor’s compromise,” Marcellino said. “They went to seven and that was the end of it.” ”

    From: http://www.wnyc.org/articles/wnyc-news/2013/mar/21/cuomo-looks-relax-piece-new-law/

    • ….Five would limit handgun sales, but seven is a pass?

      -_-

      I’m afraid Cuomo’s push to allow 10 round magazines is a bait tactic to get these lawsuits dropped. My preban magazines will still be illegal though!

      I’m glad the submitted arguments mention ANY magazine limit, not just < 10. There's no reason I should have to use old gross 30 rounders. I haven't ever even TOUCHED a pmag!

  10. To Admin & rosignol – Both good points.

    I think Miller is somewhat superceded since Heller recognized the 2nd A as an “individual right” regardless of a militia and I think needs (and will get) a modern definition. I think this will go more toward a “self defense” direction rather than military.
    This brings us to the matter of mortars and such. That there will be (and is) a limit and dividing line between really heavy-duty military items and civilian (militia) ones. The latest “Estab-lo-think” on this matter is to cut down on the power of an individual to do damage by limiting types and mag capacities of weapons they don’t really understand and thus the ham-fisted efforts so far. Whether we or I like it or not a 15 or 20 round mag limit may well pass constitutional muster but more civilian defensive handguns and “sporting” longies will be protected.

  11. Paint a little mustache on him and you have a perfect likeness of you know who, both physically and in spirit.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *