Fox News: NYPD Sent 500 Confiscation Letters in November

 Screen-Shot-2013-11-27-at-9.31.12-AM

The, uh, friendly missives that the NYPD recently sent to owners of the wrong kinds of guns has caused something of a stir. In the wake of our post, though, some doubts were raised about the letters’ authenticity. You know…Photoshop and all. Surely that can’t be real, right? Some dug around in authoritative sources like forum posts and then dismissed the whole kerfuffle as a hoax. Well, we have this to say about that. First, don’t call us Shirley. Second, foxnews.com has now confirmed the story . . .

An estimated 500 recipients of the notices, which were mailed on Nov. 18, were given the options to surrender their gun, permanently move the gun out of city jurisdiction or employ a licensed gunsmith to modify the weapon to get into compliance with the law. Rifles and shotguns with a capacity of five or more rounds are affected.

The letters aren’t directly related to New York’s egregious new SAFE Act. But the Orwellian-monikered statute that was rammed through the Assembly may have emboldened particularly anti-2A jurisdictions like New York City to step up their enforcement efforts.

“These letters appear to be another example of the Nanny State,” (New York State Assemblyman James) Tedisco said. “Hypothetically, it can start with a letter, and then that can lead to someone knocking on your door saying, ‘I want to see your gun.'”

What could possibly go wrong?

comments

  1. avatar sagebrushracer says:

    But, but, Obama said he didn’t want to take our guns!

    1. avatar Jim Barrett says:

      But Obama is not taking your guns. NYC is. Or more correctly, they are forcing you to make some modifications to it to make it less dangerous. For your own safety of course. And for the children…

      1. avatar Michael B. says:

        Or as you might say, “for the common good.”

        The majority of NYC’s society has decided that owning firearms that accept magazines capable of holding five or more rounds is contrary to the common good. So that means they’re in the right because might makes right, right Barrett?

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          +1 🙂

      2. avatar Eric says:

        What exactly makes 5 rounds more dangerous than, let’s say, 6 rounds?

        1. avatar 505markf says:

          Because NYC police always take down gun owners using six or more cops in the raid.

          Just kidding. Maybe.

    2. avatar Daniel Silverman says:

      Did anyone else notice the shout out we got from FoxNews????
      “Although an NYPD spokeswoman told FoxNews.com the law has been on the books since 2010, critics say this year is the first time the notices were so widely dispersed. The notice was first reported on the website TheTruthAboutGuns.com.”

      WAY TO GO RF!!!

      1. avatar Anonymous says:

        TheTruthAboutGuns.com > foxnews

        1. avatar Stinkeye says:

          Faint praise, indeed.

        2. avatar tommyr says:

          FOX “News” sucks.

        3. avatar William Burke says:

          Tell me somethin’ good…..

  2. avatar Matt in FL says:

    I’ve been looking into this, and a found a comment on ar15.com that sounds logical and makes sense. In part, it read:

    The NYPD is pretty much just going through all of their records and trying to spot any guns that MAY be illegal. Since they only make 7 round commercial mags for Marlins, those are “suspect.”

    So it appears they may be hitting a bunch of people that have mag caps >5 “on paper” and then making them prove that they’re legal. It still ain’t pretty.

    1. avatar Pascal says:

      Look at the new NYC mayor, it will get much much worse.

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        Who’s the vice (ahem) mayor? Seems to me the mayor is gonna have some downtime in the slammer or the drunk tank, from time to time….

    2. avatar Henry Bowman says:

      And I always thought it was the state’s burden to prove a citizen has broken the law, as opposed to the citizen proving his compliance. Where has our liberty gone?

      1. avatar John in Ohio says:

        When shall not be infringed no longer means simply that then our Liberty is not going to be secure.

        1. avatar Anonymous says:

          Thats right. Our predecessors should not have “compromised.”

      2. avatar Anonymous says:

        Beat me to it.

        In NYC you are guilty until proven innocent.

      3. avatar Jus Bill says:

        Oh, it’s still there in the Bill of Suggestions.

        1. avatar Avid Reader says:

          It’s busy being trampled along with the principle of mens rea.

      4. avatar William Burke says:

        Away.

  3. avatar Paul B says:

    My bet is the letters where sent to the High Rollers districts in NYC and nothing will come of it. They would not send these into the boroughs that have the higher crime counts.

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      “Bet”? “High rollers”? You have a gambling problem, friend? You DO have a gambling problem: you have gambled that they don’t REALLY want to confiscate all the guns, and, like a person with a gambling problem, you look for reasons to believe the Universe is looking for a way to make things go your way.

      It is not. It is entirely neutral in nature, it doesn’t get involved, and you will lose your bets again. THEY REALLY DO intend to get all the guns – if they can find a way to do it.

    2. avatar CA.Ben says:

      Maybe that is because none of the guns in the boroughs are registered?

  4. I wonder how many of these will end up in a forcible attempt of violating the 2nd amendment? And of those, how many is any one willing to bet that the owners give them the rounds in their mags first?

    1. avatar Jim Barrett says:

      In NYC – probably most if not all owners will peacefully comply (except for the criminals who never registered guns in the first place). Don’t expect to see a Ruby Ridge kind of standoff on TV any time soon. Now, if they start trying to pull this sort of shenanigan upstate, well, then things might get a bit ugly

      1. Yeah, I’m not holding my breath on anyone putting up a fight. I don’t want to see anyone hurt, but force is going to have to be met with force at some point, either now, or in the years to come as this trend continues.

      2. avatar John in Ohio says:

        Then again, some may just write how it’s all for the ‘common good’ and mislead a whole bunch of people right into servitude. See how shall not be infringed is necessary to the security of a free state yet, Barrett? Or does it have to be a blood bath for some to realize just how important it is to reign in government early on? By watering down the 2A, the crucial deterrent value of that constraint on government is lost! The only thing left at the end of day is the other utility of the Second Amendment and it ain’t pretty. In those days, there will be some blood on the hands of those who willingly and knowingly mislead their own people.

    2. avatar Lemming says:

      I doubt the sort of folks who’d go down fighting would have registered in the first place.

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        I disagree; many probably did, thinking they’d never see this day. Hello, it’s here.

      2. avatar William Burke says:

        You’re referring to the AR-7 Assault Rifle?

  5. avatar KCK says:

    It is truely a blast of realization when you think high power high capacity pistols is the target of the SAFE act but then you see a AR-7 survival .22 designated as a risk to public safety, all, even non-shooters must realize that something is going horribly horribly wrong.

    1. avatar Jim Barrett says:

      many non shooters neither know nor care about caliber. A gun is a gun is a gun. Try explaining the distinction to any of those nitwits who attend the Moms Demand Action and you will be left with blank stares and claims that you were trying to “intimidate” them by talking about guns.

      1. avatar John in Ohio says:

        +1

        Yeah, it’s kind of like trying to explain shall not be infringed to some other people.

    2. avatar William Burke says:

      You mean the AR-7 Assault Rifle?

      1. avatar Jeremy says:

        of course! clearly the “AR” stands for “Assault Rifle.” I bet it even goes into full semi-automatic mode so it can spray death all over the place with its 22 caliber high capacity fire breathing assault clips. Everyone knows that 22 calibers is way too many calibers, you only really need 9. Otherwise why would the cops use 9mm caliber pistols? that’s all they need (to spray the Empire State Building).

    3. avatar smackit says:

      A copy of this letter should be on the front page of every pro 2A website and magazine to drill home the point to every reader and subscriber what the end goal is for gun grabbers who speak of “common sense”.

      Sure would be nice to wage a campaign that on a specific day that all 2A related websites carry this image predominantly on their website. Extreme pressure should be applied to all manufacturers and retailers involved in the trade to do the same. All companies and retailers who don’t participate should be duly noted.

      All the images should link to a common point that explains the position of gun owners and industry.
      Should be plenty of pictures of little kids holding the fiendish Marlin 25N’s to highlight the stupidity.

  6. avatar Daniel Silverman says:

    So how many people will resist?
    Let’s say out of 500, 100 turn them in, 400 do not reply, and when confronted lets say 10 of those go down in a blaze of glory as it were.
    I have a feeling that the NYPD officers will not want to knock on anyone’s door, unless it is attached to another crime. It will stop before it starts. NYC is massively liberal. It would set precedent to what will happen in the rest of the state for sure.

    1. avatar Braenen says:

      They would just escalate to full-on SWAT no-knock invasions for those who they target. I suspect that will get very ugly very quickly.

    2. avatar Bob says:

      they have SWAT teams, they can’t wait for the slightest excuse to break into someone’s house with guns blazing.

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        The police department responsible for the Abner Louima and Amadou Diallo atrocities doesn’t need a SWAT team. They’ll just shoot you or stick a plunger handle up your @ss.

    3. avatar Ross says:

      Daniel,

      I’m betting not a single person in the 500 resist, they all will go quite, they lost their will to fight a long time ago, if they had not they would not have complied with registration in the first place.

      1. avatar Jus Bill says:

        EXACTLY like it’s gone so far with the California confiscations.

  7. avatar Michael B. says:

    No one’s going to shoot anyone over this. They’re going to give up their guns, have them modified (if possible), or ship them out of the state.

    This is why you shouldn’t move to a state or locality that registers firearms. If you live in a free state and it turns into a hellish nightmare like this with registration, move or just don’t register them.

    1. avatar tdiinva says:

      If you have a CCW permit then they will assume you have guns. So go ahead and register the guns you are most willing to give up. If they ask about others then just tell them, oh I sold them in a private sale or they were stolen.

      1. avatar Michael B. says:

        Pretty good idea, but in the future they might want to inspect the registered guns and the rest of your house.

        1. avatar tdiinva says:

          Part of preserving the guns that you want to make sure that you keep is to hide them away somewhere safe and not leave with the guns that will eventually be confiscated.

      2. avatar John in Ohio says:

        There’s that ‘trading the exercise of a right for a licensed privilege’ thing again. The potential collateral damage when people wholesale accept a privilege in lieu of a right is difficult to thoroughly calculate early on.

  8. avatar ToddR says:

    I shall add this to my list of reasons why I will not (never) live there.

  9. avatar John Boch says:

    While many other gun blogs badmouth TTAG, TTAG is out making national news-worthy reports.

    Nice job, Robert, Dan and Nick.

    John

  10. avatar mark_anthony_78 says:

    Hopefully this wakes up a few fence-sitters. A Marlin 25N is a banned firearm now?

  11. avatar tdiinva says:

    Yep that Winchester ’94 is a threat to the safety of the community. You never know when you will encounter a time warp and Jesse James or Billy the Kid step into 21st Century New York City.

  12. avatar Mike H says:

    Remember this the next time some talking head a-hole assures us that registration is a precursor to confiscation.

    1. avatar tdiinva says:

      I think you made a Freudian slip. Such an A-hole would be stepping out of character and telling the truth.

      1. avatar Mike H says:

        Forgot the “not” in there.

  13. avatar alanhinMN says:

    Wow you got a bump from Fox news. Directly mentioned TTAG. To bad it wasnt a hot link

  14. avatar Ralph says:

    November statistics:

    NYPD confiscation letters: 500
    Obamacare signups: 1

    1. avatar Accur81 says:

      Zing!

  15. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

    Sounds like time for a class-action civil suit. This seems like the ‘taking of property’ without compensation, much like condemning real property for a road project without actually paying the owner for his/her loss.

  16. avatar Kyle in CT says:

    Interesting note, from the letter at the top, it lists an Izmash “B. Trainer”, which I can only assume is a biathlon rifle (e.g. BI-7-4) from the make and description. It should be noted that this is a 10 pound BOLT-ACTION rifle that DOES NOT have magazines that hold more than 5 rounds. The only way it could possibly be construed as violating the law is if you include relay magazines, which hold 5 rounds, plus three in a separate compartment attached to the bottom of the magazine which are intended to be loaded singly during competition. This is a small step above keeping three rounds in a pocket. This just illustrates how much of a fishing expedition these letters are.

  17. avatar Accur81 says:

    I hope a few of these gun owners have the stones to challenge this via SCOTUS, and that SCOTUS still has the ability to vote pro-2A. If this cannot win via a legitimate court challenge, then peaceful resolutions may no longer be an option in the future. Perhaps a courageous war vet with an otherwise clean record could tell the NYPD to pound sand and not bastardized his fine old firearms to satisfy the political whim of a tyrant.

  18. avatar MichaelB says:

    WTF. Can someone define the word “keep” for this magnificent asshats?

  19. avatar dwb says:

    well, i feel so much better that no one is coming for my guns.

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      What a relief.

      1. avatar Adub says:

        The federal government isn’t coming for your guns, just all the blue states and blue cities in red states. Maybe red states should do something similarly punitive to progs living within their borders…

  20. avatar cubby123 says:

    Lawsuit time,2nd amendment INFRINGMENT’S

  21. avatar Steve B in Ohio says:

    Okay, I watched this video on another gun forum last night and when I saw that it was 13 minutes long, I figured I would not sit though the whole thing, but I would check out the first 3-5 minutes. Long story short, I was so riveted by how well it was done and how great the woman made her points, I urge you all to watch it. Her rationale seems to be spot on with what is beginning in New York and states like Komifornia.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20RoAfflGCM

    1. avatar Model 31 says:

      ^^^ This is the stuff that will win the day.

    2. avatar Accur81 says:

      RF, this video needs to be in a separate post. It may be preaching to the choir, but the arguments are succinct and accurate.

      1. avatar Matt in FL says:

        Yeah, she’s new on the (YouTube) scene, but she’s got good things to say.

  22. avatar Pat says:

    Knock knock. Oink oink. Bang bang.

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      That pretty much sums it up.

  23. avatar Jerry says:

    Welcome to the new Amerika. This will be the law of the land one day…not my lifetime, but certainly in my child’s lifetime. I know we all like to make our “clever” comments about this being the “nanny state” or Nazi Germany, but this is REALLY happening guys. This is a new age we live in…individual liberty is being sacrificed for the greater good and generations after mine are willing to make that sacrifice. This is not my world any longer.

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      “Men fight for liberty and win it with hard knocks. Their children, brought up easy, let it slip away again; poor fools. And their grand-children are once more slaves.”
      – D. H. Lawrence

  24. avatar Whiskey Whiskey says:

    Robert,

    Even the New York Times has picked up this story, but because TTAG is the source its authenticity is being called into question.

    http://nocera.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/06/the-gun-report-december-6-2013/#postComment

    Do you have any additional sources beyond FOX NEWS confirming it?

    Supposedly the AP contributed to the Fox News story but I can’t find anything on the AP website about it.

    WW

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      Just in: Taos State Trooper relieved of duties:

      http://news.yahoo.com/mexico-officer-van-shooting-fired-002423553.html

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email