NYC Not Renewing Concealed Carry Permits. No Reason Given.

John Farnam writes [via ammoland.com]:

I conducted a Defensive Handgun Course recently for a group of students, all of whom live and work in NYC. We did the Course itself at an outdoor range in NJ. Several of my students (via past political connections) actually had CCW permits issued by the NYPD, nearly impossible to get, but they were very concerned about keeping them.

The sub-department that issues these permits has been fraught with scandal, one right after another. Several higher-ups have been indicted for accepting bribes [to issue permits]. Corruption is rampant and decades old.

Reacting to criticism, the current mayor’s predictable reaction has been to direct the NYPD to even further reduce the minuscule number of permits currently valid.

Hence, many NYC permit-holders, including several of my students, have received letters indicating that their city-issued CCW permits will not be renewed. No reason given. No wrongdoing, real or imagined, on the part of disenfranchised CCW permit holders.Their precipitous castration is completely arbitrary.

Those of us who live in states where CCW permits are easy to get (in fact, taken for granted) find the degrading contempt in which NYC residents are held by the city government (all liberal Democrats) astonishing, and frightening, particularly since NY’s current governor and NYC’s current mayor have both indicated a desire to run for president.

My students, all successful professionals, expressed an abiding contempt for NYC’s entrenched liberals, and pointed out that they stay in power via:

1) Imposing guns laws so voluminous, incomprehensible, arbitrarily enforced, and requiring paperwork that constitutes a full-time job in itself, that being “law-abiding” in NYC is probably impossible. In any event, one could never know if he was of not. What are supposed to be “rights” (and are for the rest of us) in NYC are “privileges,” enjoyed only by the ruling elite and their supporters.

The liberal ruling elite can thus terrorize citizens who dare speak-out against them, by withholding “privileges” and arbitrarily charging them with technical offenses. The euphemism is “selective enforcement.” That means their political opponents must exactingly obey the law (as noted above, an impossibility), but they and their supporters don’t.

2) The maintenance and expansion of a vast and permanent “underclass,” (including many violent criminals whom liberals put to good use in coercing unarmed political opponents) from which there is no escape, and whose votes can be dependably purchased with taxpayer dollars, or terrorized out of them.

Among liberals, the foregoing represents “The Golden Rule.”


About John Farnam & Defense Training International, Inc

As a defensive weapons and tactics instructor John Farnam will urge you, based on your own beliefs, to make up your mind in advance as to what you would do when faced with an imminent and unlawful lethal threat. You should, of course, also decide what preparations you should make in advance, if any. Defense Training International wants to make sure that their students fully understand the physical, legal, psychological, and societal consequences of their actions or inactions.

It is our duty to make you aware of certain unpleasant physical realities intrinsic to the Planet Earth. Mr Farnam is happy to be your counselor and advisor. Visit: www.defense-training.com

comments

  1. avatar Donnie says:

    The Golden Rule: The guy with the gold makes the rules.

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      You mean the guns, right? Because the NYC police is a really big army, to paraphrase the guy in charge of it.

    2. avatar Ollie says:

      In the big blue cities, that applies to EVERYTHING.
      Building permits, zoning matters, city contracts, city inspections, etc all require gifting city officials lots of gold, unless you don’t mind waiting years.

      1. avatar neiowa says:

        So a 3rd world commie shithole? Obviously

        1. avatar Pickle Rick says:

          Apt description of NYC

  2. avatar ucfgrad93 says:

    “As for thee, but not for me.” The liberal mantra.

    1. avatar One Trick Jack says:

      And I am sure that some percentage of the trainer’s students who had previously held permits were perfectly fine with the majority of others not having one, as long as they had theirs..

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        And why not? I seem to recall Donald Trump, during his gun controller years, held a license in NY for 30+ years! There are a lot of things people like him can do which lesser mortals cannot. Should he martyr himself for the benefit of others, who vote for that exact treatment? Would you? I sure would not.

  3. avatar BLAMMO says:

    I live in NY (Long Island, not NYC) and none of us here can understand why the NRA, SAF, SCOPE, the NYSRPA or any of the other local 2A orgs never bring significant lawsuits challenging the egregious anti-2A laws in this state (SAFE Act, Sullivan laws, etc.).

    Are the laws here so fundamentally sound that they can’t be challenged? HAH!!

    1. avatar Nanashi says:

      The NRA was never on your side. Hasn’t been since at least 1934.

    2. avatar rc says:

      Sorry to say it, but elections matter…NY is now completely controlled by the lefties. They’ve installed their own at every level of Government and in all branches. We now have, barely, a tied Supreme Court only because of Trump, which is not enough to get cert on 2A issues. So, given the lopsided nature of the fight, the citizen gun organizations would be throwing money way trying to fight there unless the voters in that state made (and could hold) a major political shift. Nobody sees that happening.

      1. avatar Mark N. says:

        To say nothing of the fact that any plaintiff would necessarily lose in the federal trial and appellate courts, which are staffed with NYC liberal judges who have already come out against the existence of any substantial second amendment right. The only judicial remedy in in the Supreme Court, and other than Heller and McDonald, even getting there is an expensive and iffy proposition, The Second, Third, Fourth and Ninth Circuit courts of Appeals are where gun rights go to die.

    3. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      BLAMMO,

      Are you familiar with Sun Tzu’s Art of War? One of the paramount rules of war is to never engage the enemy on their terms and always engage the enemy on your terms. And why do I say this? Because fighting lawsuits in the state and federal courts that apply to New York and New York City is engaging the enemy on their terms. In other words there is almost zero chance that the NRA or anyone else could prevail in those courts. Therefore, better to fight somewhere else … or not at all.

      1. avatar BLAMMO says:

        You mean like California? Illinois? DC? Are the courts in those places any more supportive of the 2A? But suits have been brought there and won.

        1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          California is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, a notoriously anti-gun Circuit, which ruled (en-banc) against shall-issue concealed carry.

          Illinois did win shall-issue concealed carry in the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.

          D.C. is an interesting question. I have no idea which way the justices there lean. At the moment the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has (very recently) ruled in favor of shall-issue concealed carry in D.C. Who knows whether that ruling will stand.

          As others have mentioned in response to this article, the U.S. 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Circuit Courts of Appeals oppose the Second Amendment and ruled against recent Second Amendment cases. There is no sound reason to expect any of those courts to rule any differently on any related cases. Thus, there is no reason to file appeals in those circuits. (Since the 2nd Circuit covers New York, it doesn’t make any sense to appeal cases for New York until several Second Amendment friendly judges replace existing judges in the 2nd Circuit.)

    4. avatar Ralph says:

      @BLAMMO, every case brought by the SAF and the NRA contesting the validity of NY/NJ firearms laws has been lost.

      If the NRA or any other organization is still fighting for 2A rights in the Second and Third Circuits, they are pissing up a rope.

      Try not electing scumbags next time. Then you won’t have to cry about the NRA.

      1. avatar HP says:

        You’re right, except for your final sentence. I live in upstate. It’s neither my fault nor BLAMMO’s fault that these craven progressives have been elected. It’s not even upstate or Long Island’s fault; the blame lays squarely on NYC. There are more people living there than upstate and Long Island combined. We’re behind enemy lines, and to suggest it’s as simple as not electing these people is laying blame where it doesn’t belong. That Andrew Cuomo is Governor of NY is no more our fault than the election of Barack Obama was your fault.

        1. avatar Hannibal says:

          Did you see the turnout from upstate during the last governor’s election? It was pathetic.

        2. avatar HP says:

          @Hannibal

          Yes. It was pathetic, you are right.

    5. avatar Hannibal says:

      It’s not that the laws are sound, it’s that they are entrenched. The NY state courts and the Federal District here have both shown that they are entirely unwilling to hold gun control laws to any scrutiny. The ONLY thing they reversed was the NY law that said you could only load 7 rounds in a 10 round magazine- because apparently there is a limit to how stupid laws can be.

    6. avatar ANNONYMOUS says:

      @BLAMMO, allow me to help you with this –> Move <– out of New York State and away from all the other states east of PA, North of VA clear up and through to Canada. I would not get to comfortable with the idea of residing in the constitutional carry states within New England. I can almost guarantee –you will cross the border while armed–.

      Employ the above, instead of requesting (or waiting for assistance) from the NRA, and the like. The voters in New York State (N.Y.S.) have spoken at the polls.

      Either live with that decision, or move.

    7. avatar W says:

      The NRA has challenged SAFE. See the article below.
      It’s kind of odd that there is so much NRA bashing on this website. The NRA has been fighting the fight since many leaders of alternative organizations (SAF, NAGR, etc) were barely out of their diapers. As someone who has fought against gun control since the 1970s, I am kind of disturbed that newbies attack my organization. There would be nothing to fight for if we hadn’t been doing it for 4 decades.

      http://buffalonews.com/2015/10/19/appeals-court-upholds-safe-act-but-rules-against-seven-bullet-limit/

      1. avatar Guardiano says:

        There are a lot of “moderates” and “liberals” who frequent this blog, and shitting on the NRA is kewl and edgy in their circles I guess.

  4. avatar Rick says:

    Communist state and city.

  5. avatar Rick says:

    There nothing but scum bags…..2nd amendment I guess means nothing…..

  6. avatar Cundalini says:

    CA to follow

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      California has already been there, done that. California has a discretionary, “may issue” system that allows issuance “for good cause shown.” That which is good cause is up to the discretion of the county sheriff or local issuing police chief.

      In the case of Peruta v. Gore, the Ninth Circuit ruled en ban that there is no right to a concealed carry permit. In so doing, it intentionally and expressly ignored the fact that open carry in all urban areas is illegal. The Supreme Court denied cert.

      1. avatar Vinny says:

        Echoes from the not so free Maryland.

  7. avatar Geoff PR says:

    This must be the blowback from that guy selling influence for 18,000 bucks a pop a number of months back.

    Brain’s a bit fuzzy, but as I recall the guy inside the NYPD was clearing $6,000 per permit for his wink and nod…

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      So instead of eliminating the financial incentive resulting from the rarity of issuance of permits, which could be accomplished by making them much more easily obtained, the Mayor doubles down and makes them rarer still. Smart man that, no wonder he is making a career in politics.

      1. avatar Ad Astra says:

        “Never let a tragedy go to waste.”, remember?

      2. avatar Ragnarredbeard says:

        Its likely he has some financial interest in making the permits harder to get. Kickbacks, anyone?

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          I have absolutely no doubt.

  8. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    This is yet another example of “might makes right” … which shows that we are now a nation of men rather than a nation of laws (where the laws are based on sound, timeless, and righteous principles).

    I cannot figure out why anyone believes they owe any allegiance to men and women in government office who violate our rights … and who violate sound, timeless, and righteous principles.

  9. avatar Colt Magnum says:

    Does this mean our president won’t be able to renew his permit, should it expire during his term?

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Really, really, REALLY good question.

  10. avatar JD says:

    This is only one reason why I have never and will never pay for a privilege. I already have the right to bear arms. It’s been there since before the USA was the USA. Nobody should fall into the trap of asking permission and paying a tax to excercise a right. The RTKABA will only be won in the commie states using jury nullification. That’s why I choose to never visit much less live in one of those places.

    1. avatar Yada says:

      I owe it to my children to do everything I can to stay out of jail, for me, it’s not as simple as not asking for permission.

  11. avatar Paelorian says:

    I took a CCW class in NYC. Since NYC doesn’t issue permits to the hoi polloi, it was for permits for other states for carrying when in other states (and don’t you dare bring anything back into the city). Generally Utah or Florida, but students could use the class toward any state they chose. Since I hadn’t ever been fingerprinted and I did my research, I chose to apply for a Maine permit, which worked for me and allowed me to avoid unnecessarily volunteering my fingerprints to the government. I don’t know if they’d ever had a student who had, or had been given permission by the authorities to receive, a local permit. The course was totally geared around requirements in other states. It qualified as an NRA Basic Pistol class and took place at the only gun range open to the public in Manhattan, but due to the local laws students never stepped onto or even observed the firing line as part of the class. You have to work for the city as a police officer in order to carry a gun, and even the restrictions are onerous. Akira Kurosawa’s film Stray Dog comes to mind, the plot of which is a Japanese detective conducting an investigation to recover his stolen handgun. A stolen handgun in 1949 Tokyo, then a city of six million people (now 13.5 million). Well, for the Japanese with their strict gun control, it’s a real emergency. If the gun control advocates have their way, permits will be slowly choked off until they don’t exist anymore, and a single stray handgun will be a crisis to the authorities. If we ever have to defend our lives, at best it will be with kitchen knives, improvised clubs, and homemade molotov cocktails against machine guns. No matter how motivated the resistance, it would be a slaughter like the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising.

    For information on NYC gun laws, Glenn Herman, NewYorkCityGuns.com, is the expert and the only guy teaching firearms classes in New York City. Meet him and he can tell you all about it and offer guidance and advice if you’re going through the process. He’s truly one of us, a hardcore member of the gun culture. I think the guy wears his prescription shooting glasses all the time as a statement. NRA, SAF, GOA, JPFO life member. Great guy. An outspoken straight-talker. Spends an ever increasing amount of time on his property upstate where he can actually carry. I think of him as operating the gun culture Underground Railroad in NYC, providing the only local source of education. He’d be an excellent subject for TTAG to interview next time one of their writers is in the area.

    1. avatar Paelorian says:

      I just watched the Stossel video where he attempts to get an NYC carry permit. I’d seen it before, but it was worth a rewatch. Glenn who I mentioned is interviewed as an expert. After Stossel submits documentation of the many threats on his life he regularly receives for advocating for human rights and freedom as a libertarian in public life and paying a small fortune in cash and time (lost income), he is (spoiler alert) unjustly denied for not having “sufficient need” to carry a weapon. They don’t refund his his application fees, at least $430 dollars, maybe a few hundred more in total costs from what I remember, not to mention the many hours of paperwork, research, and mandatory waiting in person. They also deny the upstanding veteran who lives in a housing project with his family where violence is all around them and a man was recently beaten to death right outside his home. They might as well sneer “Insufficient need, peon! We don’t care if you’re the next Petit family! Just cry for help like Kitty Genovese!”

    2. avatar AaronW says:

      I second that! I took his Utah CCW class – very informative. Glenn is an excellent instructor.

  12. avatar Carl says:

    I have no problems carrying in NYC.

    1. avatar Paelorian says:

      Until you get caught and lose your life to mandatory years in jail, as well as being a felon upon release with far fewer civil rights including gun rights. This is also the city of “stop and frisk”. Of course, the murderers have no problem carrying and hardly any of them would apply for a permit even if it was shall-issue by mail and cost five dollars. The city government are more harmful to the citizenry than the gang members. Unfortunately, most of the citizenry are members of the freedom-hating leftist death cult and have been indoctrinated to demand slavery for themselves and everyone else, even those thousands of miles away with whom they have nothing in common. If I find myself dying in the street, murdered by criminals, I’m going to let anyone around hearing my last words that I’m furious with the oppressive left-wing government who share responsibility for my death and many others by restricting our rights. But since violent crime is fairly low in my neighborhood in recent years, I’m more afraid of the NYPD than I am of the criminals and so I don’t carry a gun when in town. That’s right, I have a reasonable fear that there’s a greater chance of the NYPD ruining my life more than crooks. There’s a lot of moral equivalency between the authorities and the crooks.

      1. avatar Carl says:

        All part of civil disobedience

        1. avatar Joel IV says:

          Food for thought.

          Why don’t we have some “million person marches” into these anti-gun areas? Line up on the border armed. Step over. Step back. Prove that an influx of even a million firearms (or more if we carry multiples) do not pose a threat to anyone.

          I’m not an events planner, so have no idea how to even start something like this.

  13. avatar Roger Cain says:

    Laws only have force when you obey them. If you deem the laws in New York State are oppressive as a resident…..
    chart your own course.

  14. avatar ButtHurtz says:

    If there was any real men there, this would of never happened. Dead bodies would be everywhere.

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      Lead them on, Man. An injustice anywhere is an injustice everywhere. Why aren’t you leading yet?

  15. avatar TruthTellers says:

    This is unconstitutional. Donald Trump should declare Martial Law in NYC and detain indefinitely every city councilman, Mayor deBlasio, and Gov. Cuomo and send them to Guantanamo Bay where they can be with their fellow travelers who were captured in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      While some may scoff at your comment, the proper answer is that fedzilla really should charge Governor Cuomo, Mayor De Blasio, New York City prosecutors, and associated police under the federal statute for denial of rights under color of law. Since their denial of rights included kidnapping (arrests and trip to jail) and threat of deadly force (police would have shot people who refused to submit), all of them should face the maximum penalty which is the death penalty under the federal statute.

    2. avatar CLarson says:

      I think we all know the Republican Party will never do that. At some point we need to explore alternatives.

      1. avatar TruthTellers says:

        The alternative is Civil War. If the Federal government will not arrest them, the people of the United States should.

  16. avatar beefeater says:

    So in NY, you basically need your permit to even own a handgun. Since this basically makes it illegal for permit holders to possess the guns they already have, without cause, would they have some kind of court case?

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      NY =/= NYC. In NYC you can get a permit to own a handgun without being able to carry it. In fact, no NYS permit is considered valid in NYC unless you have the signature of the NYPD Commissioner (or something similar ridiculous) saying you can.

    2. avatar DEE says:

      In NY state you do need a pistol permit to own a handgun (or even look at one in your local gun shop). Your permit will also tell you how you can use such handgun i.e.: domicile, hunting and range, no restrictions. Each and every handgun you own will be listed on the back complete with description and serial number. The application process is long and arduous depending on the county you reside, some are better than others. From those I have spoken to, you can expect roughly a year or so in the application process. Mine took nine, but was the exception to the rule.

  17. avatar damion cocchi says:

    “Sullivan Law’s” are unconstitutional laws they are not legal or enforceable with any Constitutional basis…

    No the preamble, to the Bill of Rights, and the Ratification of the 10th Amendment assured it was to prevent all government’s (federal, state, local) from interfering with the people’s civil liberties.

    Once the US Constitution became to supreme law of the land, and even during the debates it became apparent that their was weaknesses in enumerated restrictions on the newly formed government, that many feared would cause government abuses… so they drafted 12 new amendments, only ten were ratified, and became known as the Bill of Rights, to which a preamble (the reason why they rarified the constitution to add additional protections)….

    The Preamble to the Bill of Rights

    THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution

    Amendment II

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    (No where in the 2nd Amendment was the right delegated to the states, it was written, delegating the right and guaranteeing it to the “We the People”….The Right of the People”, would not be interfered with by infringement from government)

    Amendment IX

    The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

    Amendment X

    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

    The Constitution only delegates specific powers to the federal government. The enumeration of certain powers logically excludes all powers not listed. Designato unius est exclusio alterius is a legal maxim meaning, “the designation of one is the exclusion of the other.” You will find no authority to regulate firearms or ban certain types of weapons in the Constitution. The supporters of the Constitution consistently argued that the federal government would not possess the authority to exercise any power not explicitly given.

    As a condition of ratification many states insisted on a Bill of Rights, including amendments to make this rule of construction explicit. The result was the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.

    Simply put, no matter how you care to interpret the 2nd Amendment, based on a constitutional reading guided by 9th and 10th Amendments, the federal government possesses zero authority to enforce any type of gun laws, or infringe on the right to self-defense in any way whatsoever.

    And further the right is one retained solely by the people is the clear text wording within the 2nd Amendment, only identifying the “right of the people”, it enumerated no power to the states to “craft” their own hoplophobic anti-arms laws….

    Never register, never license any “arms”… carry, sell, own, buy, make whatever you want, its an absolute civil liberty.

    http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2017/08/sam-hoober/legacy-sullivan-laws/#comment-3569150

  18. avatar Hannibal says:

    No reason given, and none deemed necessary. But who do I have to vote for nationally that will actually put a bill before congress to do something about it?

  19. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    If California manages to secede from the US (Can I help them with that?) does this mean that upstate gets to secede from down? (Also, inland Washington state from Seattle / King county?)

    Or even the good parts of California then secede from the rest, and we let them back in the union? Dare we hope?

    1. avatar Ragnarredbeard says:

      Not gonna happen. To secede, the Kalifornia legislature would have to agree to it. The lefties aren’t quite that stupid.

      1. avatar Jim Bullock says:

        Hey, not all that long ago the Quebequois got as far as voting themselves to secede.

        The militant kinda-French retreated in goo order (practice, practice, practice) when their soon-to-be-ex partners asked: “So, what are you gonna do for passports? Apply for NATO; that take an armed forces? And about that national debt…”

        Being nice, America’s toque took them back.

        I say, once The People’s Republic votes to secede, it ain’t up to them any more. They’re out, and we dictate terms. If we’re nice we can give them an option for changing their minds … entirely on our terms as well.

  20. avatar glenux says:

    And unconstitutional law is NULL AND VOID.
    If they try to enforce an unconstitutional law
    make them pay with THEIR blood.

  21. avatar rt66paul says:

    Sorry, but the people with the real money don’t want citizens to be armed either. While we seem to have a gun friendly Republican administration, many republicans in power do not support 2nd a rights.

  22. avatar Rich says:

    In a way im glad cause the only ones who have it are the rich and powerful. So screw them.

  23. avatar John Boch says:

    You want the NRA to underwrite lawsuits in New York? Then drop a ton of money on them, with that stipulation.

    The NRA has limited resources and they aren’t big on plowing them into hopeless jurisdictions. Not when they might get a more favorable decision at a lower court. And it doesn’t matter if the NRA / we get a conflicting ruling in NY State or a more favorable district, setting us up for SCOTUS to take the case.

    Ditto for cases where we might get a favorable state supreme court decision.

    The NRA is very much working to help millions of gun owners each day. It’s just that some triage goes on – along with dedicating limited resources where they will do the most good.

    I will say that I fully expect SCOTUS to take on the issue of “may issue” laws within the next term or two, striking them down as unconstitutional.

    John

    1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      Can you explain the reasoning behind your last paragraph?

      If it is based on Kennedy retiring and Trump nominating and the Senate confirming another justice on the Thomas/Gorsuch end of the spectrum, I’d agree with the results of that premise.

      If it is based on something else, they’ve already denied cert to Peruta.

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        There are some *very* elderly justices who bend to the left on that court, and no one is immortal (yet)…

        1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          There is a missing step between “the justices are very old” and one of the justices on the left will die in the next year or two, and the Senate will confirm Trump’s nominee.

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Obama is not immortal? Really? Are you sure? I have it on the authority of millions that his shit don’t stink, I thought he was immortal, too.

  24. avatar Shire-man says:

    Never understood it when bureaucrats get in trouble for corruption. All I can think is “well, what did they expect was going to happen?”

    Being a bureaucrat is like joining the mob. Corruption is to be expected. Rewarded even.

  25. avatar Hugo says:

    Hopefully Trump will appoint at least one more supreme court justice and they will finally address this travesty. I lived in NYC and had my safety threatened regularly travelling to and from work at night. Could not get a carry permit. Thankfully, I’m out of that liberal shit hole.

    1. avatar James Drouin says:

      Well, he’s got over 2,700 days remaining in office, and I’m pretty much positive at least three of the Justices are going to carque it before then.

      1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

        The biggest question is whether or not he’ll have at least 50 senators at the time.

  26. avatar MiniMe says:

    “No Reason Given.”

    Shocker. Not. :-/

    And these NYC corrupt guvment jackasses have the gall to call others people “nazis?” Guess they haven’t looked into a mirror lately. Pot, I’d like you to meet kettle.

  27. avatar Jim Macklin says:

    New York’s SULLIVAN LAW was written by Tim Sullivan, a leader of the Irish 5 Points Gang. It was written to promote crime since Tim could issue a permit to his gang members and deny a permit to rivals.
    It is no wonder that crime is not reduced by such gun laws, they were intended to make crime safer.
    Corruption was intended, except Tim Sullivan didn’t have to worry, he wrote te law ansd he issued the permits.

    This movie scene IS historically accurate http://hobdragon.gdyerwebsolution.netdna-cdn.com/reel/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/bill-fighting.jpg

  28. avatar james says:

    I see some are criticizing the NRA for not fighting in the cities that have the courts stacked against them.

    Remember the push for concealed carry and shall issue carry, well folks that is thanks to the NRA and local grass roots organizations.

    I’m NRA Life Member since 2013

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