NRA-ILA: The Truth About New York State’s Firearm Recertification Law

The passage of New York’s so-called SAFE Act (“Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act of 2013”) drastically changed the landscape for lawful gun owners in the Empire State. Besides new restrictions on commonly owned semi-automatic rifles the state calls “assault weapons,” bans on magazines, and limits on the number of rounds that could be loaded into a gun, the Act imposed a requirement that handgun license holders be “recertified” every five years, with all licensees completing the initial recertification by January 31, 2018.

The recertification form requires that the licensee disclose his or her “name, date of birth, gender, race, residential address, social security number, [and] firearms possessed by such license holder,” along with the listed identifying details (make, model, caliber, and serial number). (“Firearm” under the applicable New York law means a handgun or other gun of a size which may be concealed upon the person.)

A failure to recertify operates as an automatic revocation of the license. Possession of a “firearm” without a valid license is a criminal offense, and the revocation makes the person ineligible to apply for or renew a license. Once a license is revoked, state law mandates that every gun owned or possessed by the licensee be “surrendered” to a law enforcement agency.

A New York State Police field guide on the SAFE Act, prepared by attorneys for the Division of State Police, unequivocally instructs officers that when “a licensee becomes ineligible to hold a pistol permit, the Safe Act requires the person to surrender all firearms to police, including all rifles and shotguns for which no license or registration is required.” (Emphasis in the original.)

Should the person fail to comply by turning in every gun, the SAFE Act (codified as NY Penal Law § 400.00(11)(c)) not only authorizes but requires that police officers confiscate such property: the guns “shall be removed and declared a nuisance and any police officer or peace officer acting pursuant to his or her special duties is authorized to remove any and all such weapons.”

Once the gun is deemed a “nuisance,” the owner loses the ability to reclaim or legally transfer it. State law directs that nuisance guns be destroyed without the need for a court order or other judicial proceedings, and courts have confirmed that a person has no “legitimate possessory interest” in firearms for which he or she has no license.

The policy of recertification is clear: licensees who fail to comply – by inadvertently missing the deadline, for example – face having all guns, and not just the firearms covered by the license, permanently confiscated by law enforcement officers.

Far from being overblown hyperbole, describing the recertification law as “the camel’s nose in the tent of gun confiscation” is not only accurate but arguably, an unduly benign portrayal of a grossly disproportionate regime to enforce recertification through mandatory surrender, police seizure, and destruction of otherwise legal property.

Even assuming that license recertification is “a step for safety,” as the New Yorkers Against Gun Violence member claims [in a recent editorial] , it’s not clear how much less secure or safe residents would be if the recertification process included, instead, a grace period for late compliance or imposed a penalty fee for licensees who miss the deadlines but are eligible to recertify.

Felons and other criminals are notoriously unlikely to obey gun licensing rules, and state law already makes any weapon that is used in the commission of a crime or that is unlawfully possessed a “nuisance” weapon.

Judging from statistics from the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services (Nov. 2017) on “firearm activity” (based on reports from police agencies across the state), New York residents aren’t significantly more safe since the 2013 gun control legislation was imposed.

The total figures for 2016 for “shooting incidents involving injury” and “shooting victims (persons hit)” exceed the totals listed in each of the previous seven years; the 2016 figure for “individuals killed by gun violence” shows a just under ten percent increase as compared to the five-year average prior to 2016.

In the same way that anti-gun advocates consistently seek to disguise restrictive gun control measures under the veneer of “common sense,” “gun safety,” or “gun law reform,” they aim to influence public opinion towards “strengthening” gun laws by dismissing opposition to such laws by ordinary, informed Americans as the “mindless” nattering of a handful of extremists.

As for New Yorkers Against Gun Violence, the group’s website proclaims that “NYAGV was instrumental in the passage of the NY SAFE Act in 2013.” That being the case, we may be excused for dismissing the article as no more than a stakeholder’s spin, aimed at securing public buy-in for a gun control law that extinguishes rights in the name of “public safety.”

About:
Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit: www.nra.org

comments

  1. avatar little horn says:

    i dont even live there and im f’n pissed about this BS

    1. avatar Bob says:

      Darn right!
      Being here in PA, thats BS is too close to home to ignore.

      If this were any other right it was be national news set ablaze.

      How about women need to have a special permit to vote.

      Or, you need a permit and permission to have a Lawyer.

      FU NY

    2. avatar Baldwin says:

      I don’t live there either, but I’m impacted nonetheless…we’re ALL impacted. The different states are all just cabins on the SAME boat. OUR ship is flooding and compartment by compartment is surely sinking. How much longer are we going to simply stand by and let the tyranny and abuse of our rights grow and flourish?

      1. avatar PATRICK P says:

        The Constitution protects our rights but people don’t stand up and fight against the courts and people that interpret the meaning of our second amendment to their own ideology or party affiliation and not the true intent of law. It’s a no brainier that amendment was to ensure the people always had a means to fight back against a tyrannical government on this land not if but when we need to. Treason is Treason interpretation is nothing more than a cowardly attack against our rights it’s treason and people should look at it as nothing less than assault.

        1. avatar Recce1 says:

          Patrick P, if you want to be taken seriously as a conservative, constitutionalist, and American patriot please learn what the definition of treason is and where you can find it in US law. Here’s a hint, it’s in the same document that contains the 2nd Amendment.

        2. avatar Recce1 says:

          Patrick P, if you want to be taken seriously as a constitutionalist and American patriot please learn what the definition of treason is and where you can find it in US law. Here’s a hint, it’s in the same document that contains the 2nd Amendment.

          As Justice Story, appointed to the SCOTUS by Pres. Madison, wrote, “The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against usurpation and arbitrary power of the rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.” That means that without the 2nd Amendment the people have no way to secure the rest of the Bill of Rights, what’s left of it.

    3. avatar Joe R. says:

      It makes me want to get dressed in indian garb and throw tea in Boston Harbor.

      I could get a band of drunkards together to wage Civil War on NY / NYC, but I do all my own lite work, and NY is a piss ant small state.

    4. avatar BLoving says:

      Okay.
      So y’all aren’t New York residents (neither am I, thank God), but you’re pissed about this.
      How pissed are you? Enough to send a donation to the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action?* If so, good, because you sure as hell can’t vote in any New York election – therefore the ILA is the only thing we can affect here.
      🤠

      *yes, it’s separate from the dues you send in for NRA membership. It goes directly to the lobbying division.

    5. avatar Jack weiss says:

      It’s a great law! Owning a gun unless you are part of a militia is not a right. This isn’t the 18th Century. It’s the 21st. Your gun won’t do shit against an M”1 Abrams Tank. Grow up!

      1. avatar ARJAY says:

        Text of the 2nd Amendment:
        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.
        And you gun grabbers conveniently disregard what the 2nd Amendment ACTUALLY MEANS!!!!
        What part of “…[t]he right of THE PEOPLE to keep (have/possess) and bear (CARRY) Arms, shall not be infringed.” do YOU NOT understand? The right of the people means, THE INDIVIDUAL has the right, NOT referring to an army (collective right).
        Research what was meant by the founding fathers when they referred to “A well regulated Militia”. Back then, they meant EVERY able-bodied man who knew how to handle a gun (meaning well trained) WAS the Militia!
        You must remember that the founding fathers used the meanings of the words when they wrote them, NOT THE MEANINGS USED TODAY!
        Considering the fact that if a man wanted his family to have MEAT, he had to go HUNTING to KILL an animal, USUALLY WITH A GUN/RIFLE! (You DO realize that back in the 1700’s, there were NO grocery stores with REFRIGERATED meat displays, where the woman of the house could go to buy a steak or roast to fix for dinner that night!?!?) SO MOST men WERE well trained, therefore WERE “well regulated” the Militia!

        “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

      2. avatar Recce1 says:

        Jack, please research what the Framers of the Constitution wrote about the militia. Some of us deplorables take an exegetical approach to interpreting the Constitution, not the eisegetical approach you seem to do.

        I believe Justice Joseph Story, appointed to the SCOTUS by Madison, put it best when he wrote, “The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against usurpation and arbitrary power of the rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”

  2. avatar robby says:

    Any one who would sit still for silly shit like this from the government, deserves what they get.
    I have no sympathy for people who stay and take this crap, Get the hell out or stop crying about how bad you have it.

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      That’s like giving away real estate, and that’s exactly what those MFs want.

      1. avatar Mark N. says:

        The Governor publicly declared that gun owners are not welcome in New York State.

        1. avatar JebTN says:

          Yep he did and I moved. Now wondering if I should mail back my license before they come to TN and confiscate my guns.

        2. avatar Reverend1 says:

          To hell with that stupid retard of a Governor. Next time, vote his ass out of office or stop your crying.

        3. avatar Jim Bollman says:

          We tried to vote him out last time around and NYC area vote is about 50% of the population of the state so we needed to carry all the rest of the state and hope to have a bigger turn out than they do. After much effort the last time with the same result I decided it was time to leave. I hated to leave my conservative friends behind to fight the liberals but sometimes you have to take care of yourself. After almost 3 years in a free state I still have to stop and remind myself how different it is here in TN as far as less restrictions on personal rights in general and lower taxes. The better weather is a bonus.

      2. avatar Lewis Tripp says:

        In the end, if you come for mine,you better bring yours.

    2. avatar RandallOfLegend says:

      Not everyone can uproot their entire lives and move. The “just leave” argument is stupid as hell. NYC drives our politics. And NY/CA will keep trying to drive national regulations when all the gun owners flee to flyover states without much voting power.

      1. avatar HP says:

        Nailed it. The “just leave” people are silly and ignorant. Rest assured, when the Democrats retake power at some point, and they definitely will, the happenings of California and New York will be models for how the Feds operate. Then there won’t be anywhere to run to.

        Not to mention the fact that leaving your family, friends, job, and everything you hold dear just so you can have an AR-15 with all the naughty features and permitless handgun carry is incredibly dumb. I’ve said this here before and I’ll say it again: “Hi Mom! Yes, I miss you all terribly, and while you and my friends are irreplaceable and I’m all alone here, I can finally have a 30 round magazine!”

        If more lax guns laws are more important to you than the people you love, then you’re deranged.

        1. avatar JebTN says:

          There are more reasons than guns for leaving NY. Taxes, cost of living and weather are just three of many.

        2. avatar robby says:

          If it were just about having a 30 round magazines, YES it would be silly, but It is much much more.
          Don’t get me wrong, Texas has it’s problems, but we are far from oppressed.
          We don’t ask much from the state and they don’t ask much from the people.
          For the most part the state treats us like grown ups, and stays out of our business.
          Our state legislature is only in session for a couple of months at a time and
          we only let them do that once ever 2 years!! They all have regular jobs.
          I have never had to pay a state income tax, I do not have to ask the state if it’s ok
          with them if I make improvements or changes to land I own. I could go on and on.
          Freedom in Texas, seems to be a world away, from what is seen as freedom in places like NY, NJ,CA.
          I am grown, my parents finished rearing me before they died. There is no need for the government to
          try and parent me.

  3. avatar How_Terrible says:

    Shit like this makes me glad that I live in Iowa, and not some shit hole like New York, Hawaii or California.

    1. avatar California Richard says:

      Are you kidding me? This crap makes California look like a pro 2nd ammendment paradise! I couldn’t belive this part and had to look it up just to make sure RF wasn’t screwing around with me…:
      “If a licensee at any time becomes ineligible to hold a license, the license is considered to
      be revoked under an amendment to PL 400.00 (11). In such case, the person is required to
      surrender his or her license to the appropriate licensing official and any and all firearms,
      rifles or shotguns owned or possessed by the person must be surrendered to a law
      enforcement agency.”

      …. but there it is in black and white. Fail to register you pistols and you lose ALL your guns! Even California won’t go that far!…. yet….

      1. avatar Don of TN says:

        Watch your state closely, Richard. California may be next. Time to rally the troops and prepare for the worse. If NYS gets away with this nonsense (there are cases in the wings) other like thinking states (NJ, CA, HI, IL) will be doing the same.
        After the rally, if it’s not needed, then no harm done, but if the rally of 2nd Amend. supporters isn’t in place when needed, then all can be lost for the State of California. The people will loose to a small band of supporters of anti-American norms and the U.S. Constitution. It would be a dark day.

    2. avatar Reverend1 says:

      Love KY….

  4. avatar Vanished, Like a Fart In the Wind says:

    Forced gun registration; Let your license expire and you become an Ex post facto criminal
    The brown shirts come steal your guns then destroy them? A model for liberal bastions.
    …………….. What recourse can be taken IF any? How far are we from Molon Labe blood bath, will the “Greeks” surrender?

    1. avatar California Richard says:

      And whose going to come to their houses to take those guns? Andy Cuomo? No?…. well, these guys aren’t either: https://www.policeone.com/chiefs-sheriffs/articles/6435415-NY-sheriffs-We-wont-enforce-gun-laws-magazine-limits/
      No cop in-their-right-mind would do that crap…. i suppose there are more than enough cops not-in-their-right-mind to do the job, but thats just asking for civil war. Albeit local, but still.

  5. avatar HP says:

    In Erie County, where Buffalo is located, there are still over 50,000 permit holders who have yet to recertify. Anyone want to take any bets that not all 50,000 make it before the deadlline? Even if 30,000 manage to do so in the next month, that leaves 20,000 people that police are going to be ordered to confiscate all firearms from. The town/village departments won’t do it, and Erie County Sheriff Tim Howard has instructed his deputies not to enforce the SAFE Act. So I guess the Troopers will be kicking in doors? I also can’t wait to see the lawsuits pile up when legal long guns are confiscated illegally by the police because someone didn’t realize they had to recertify a permit they’ve had for decades. It’s not that most people are willfully being disobedient, it’s that most don’t know they have to recertify. Imagine some guy with an old revolver on his permit, and he now loses his beloved 12 gauge and lever action rifle because of this. February 1st is going to be an interesting day. Something tells me the liberal, downstate tyrants running things in Albany didn’t quite think this one through.

  6. avatar Ccityguy says:

    What country is this happening in? Sure as heck can’t be the U.S. Sounds more like East Germany or old Soviet Bloc rules.

  7. avatar Excedrine says:

    And here I thought the gun-grabbers don’t want to grab your guns.

    Oops. Oh, wait. They do. That’s why they’re rightly called gun-grabbers. NOT “gun control advocates.” NOT “gun safety advocates,” NOT “gun reformers,” or any of the other flavor-of-the-day bullshit label they want to cloak themselves with.

    They ARE, as a matter of unarguable-fucking-FACT, coming for our guns and you should never, EVER let anyone — not even among our own — even so much as hint at or allude to anything to the contrary. It’s a fucking LIE. A LIE that has been repeatedly exposed and conclusively proven time and time again. They KNOW that it’s a LIE. And they’ll freely and loudly LIE even more to cover up that LIE. Call out that LIE even more loudly, and even more often, and MAKE them admit it until they stop denying it altogether. At which point they’ll either shut up or embrace it and say it loudly and proudly. Don’t ever let them deflect away, don’t ever let them change the subject, don’t ever let them LIE, just MAKE them admit that “gun control,” “gun safety,” “gun reform” etc. etc is nothing other than code for gun-GRABBING.

    THAT is what they want. THAT is their goal. THAT is why gun-grabbing laws are ineffective and immoral. THAT is why their entire fucking enterprise must be MADE to grind to a screeching halt, and REVERSED, and then PERMANENTLY dismantled.

    In its ENTIRETY.

  8. avatar Bob says:

    Maybe the problem is states inability to define.

    Right vs Privilege?

    right

    1) n. an entitlement to something, whether to concepts like justice and due process, or to ownership of property or some interest in property, real or personal. These rights include various freedoms, protection against interference with enjoyment of life and property, civil rights enjoyed by citizens such as voting and access to the courts, natural rights accepted by civilized societies, human rights to protect people throughout the world from terror, torture, barbaric practices and deprivation of civil rights and profit from their labor, and such American constitutional guarantees as the right to freedoms of speech, press, religion, assembly and petition

    Privilege

    A particular benefit, advantage, or Immunity enjoyed by a person or class of people that is not shared with others. A power of exemption against or beyond the law. It is not a right but, rather, exempts one from the performance of a duty, obligation, or liability.

    Which does it sound like to you.

    I would also like to entertain the idea that it appears false that the second amendment doesn’t apply to concealed carry, as it does not specify the type of bearing that is performed, therefore according to common law, the lack of definition makes obvious there is no limit.

    Holiday Inn Express, 1995

  9. avatar Joe R. says:

    When are people going to learn.

    It’s a ‘bright, sunny, day, until it ain’t.’ Proceed at your own peril.

  10. avatar 33Charlemagne says:

    Deport New York “Governor” Michael Cuomo to North Korea!

  11. avatar Avid Reader says:

    So, if they start to confiscate, can they be sued under the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment? It would appear they’re taking property without due process or just compensation. Of course, they’ll argue it’s contraband, but they’re still seizing private property.

    Ralph? Anybody?

    1. avatar Anymouse says:

      It opens the door to all kinds lawsuits. Not renewing your license isn’t a felony, but they’re being denied their 2nd amendment rights based on state rules. Declaration of nuisance sounds like denial of property without due process. Potentially, it could reach the Supreme Court and affect all of us. I feel sorry for the poor sucker who becomes the test case.

      1. avatar Red in CO says:

        No way it’ll reach the SC, not unless we get a few more originalist judges first. You know how hostile half of them are to the 2A; they regularly refuse to even hear cases on such matters.

    2. avatar Hannibal says:

      If they actually push it to its end, they’ll probably run afoul of all sorts of legal issues.

      But generally what they’ll do is use it tactically against defendents who either won’t be able to raise a good challenege due to other crimes they committed or because they don’t want to spend thousands on lawyers.

  12. avatar Jay Who used to be in NY now in Florida says:

    As a former NYer. Gone from NY over 20 years. I cant tell you why but………………Besides the “Safe Act” being a totally unconstitutional bunch of BS.
    The recertification is a joke. Just take my word for that as a person who had/has a full carry CCW from NY State not a county based license.. Prior to the Safe Act……………Good for LIFE until death………..or if its revoked. Whichever comes first.

  13. avatar SAMUEL LEE says:

    THE VAMPIRE STATE

  14. avatar Scott says:

    So how are they going to confiscate guns stored out of state? Snow birds in Florida for example. Or stored with a family member in Montana. That’s the first thing I would have done when they enacted SAFE.

    1. avatar Jay very Happily in Florida and keeping his property in NY sans his guns. says:

      Even though I did recertify. Weeks ago online no less. I don’t have as much as single round of 22lr in NY. If Mussolini Jr wants to send a cop down here to say hello. I could care less. I have no plans to be back North until Im put in the ground.

  15. avatar Ragnar says:

    The voter recertification form requires that the licensee disclose his or her “name, date of birth, gender, race, residential address, social security number, [and] firearms possessed political party by such license holder,” along with the listed identifying details proof of citizenship, criminal background, education level, IQ, activist organizations and affiliations…

    We can play this game in all sorts of ways.

  16. avatar Jeff O. says:

    “The recertification form requires that the licensee disclose his or her ‘name, date of birth, gender, race, residential address, social security number, [and] firearms possessed by such license holder,'”

    I self identify as an Apache Helicopter, and as such I find it racist, and against my religion to need paperwork! It’s a burden on me and ARMLESS helicopter brethren to fill out paper work, I’ll need a state appointed clerk to do this all for me, otherwise, as I’ve stated, it’s racist. But, you’re still violating my religious rights!

    See, you just have to play the game by different rules. If others can self identify however they want, you can too. 😉

  17. avatar John in IN says:

    With the ready availability of these statistics, can NYGAV be successfully sued for wrongful death?

  18. avatar Hannibal says:

    “A New York State Police field guide on the SAFE Act, prepared by attorneys for the Division of State Police, unequivocally instructs officers that when “a licensee becomes ineligible to hold a pistol permit, the Safe Act requires the person to surrender all firearms to police, including all rifles and shotguns for which no license or registration is required…”

    Yeeeah except it doesn’t work that way. Ineligibility to have a pistol permit due to some stupid missed paperwork does render one unable to own guns as a whole no matter what NY says. They’re going to get smacked in the courts IF they actually try to do this against the wrong (i.e. otherwise good) citizen.

  19. avatar Ryan says:

    Thank you NRA for your…. o wait….. yea that’s right. And they wonder why myself and friends stopped sending in dues.

  20. avatar raptor jesus says:

    Fortunately none of the police outside of the NYC area enforce any of this bullshit.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Yet. They will.

  21. avatar Mark A says:

    Another reason to never live in New York. Any state that voluntarily strips law abiding citizens of their Constitutional rights because they miss a date inadvertently by as little as one day with no recourse and then to in essence steal their legally obtained firearms should be avoided at all cost. Once again these idiots prove that other than the police the only people that will have firearms will be the ones that want to do harm to others.

  22. avatar Clemantine says:

    That is what Nazi Germany did after WWI. They were able to go door to door and confiscate specific weapons! It’s a slippery slope they are sliding down…

  23. avatar redmanrt says:

    Sales of 6 inch pvc pipe must be booming in NY.

  24. avatar Don in TN says:

    What’s sad is that most street police officers would like to see trained & armed law-abiding citizens. They are sick & tired of seeing people robbed & shot down like dogs, just because they could protect themselves from criminals who ignore the laws and are armed (imagine that about criminals). Police Chiefs (politicians in a uniform) and city Mayors can afford to oppose lawfully armed citizens. They are either armed themselves or have a protection detail from the local police department. Although I’m a retired fed. LEO & can ignore these archaic laws (they don’t apply to us), I continue to be concerned about the grossly biased opinions of elected officials that are based on voodoo research. My research (data collected over a 10-year period of time), indicates that there are more than 9,000 people alive every year (conservative figure, because of absence of readily available data) because of the lawful use of a firearm to protect oneself, another, or both. Keeping firearms away from law abiding people only makes it easier for criminals to harm these people. When comparing Rochester, NY with Chattanooga, TN (same demographics & SES), although the city of Rochester has 20k more residents, the City of Rochester has more than 2 times the gun related homicides as Chattanooga.
    The difference in laws include stand your ground, castle doctrine, and right to have a firearm (TN) verses retreat doctrine, no right to have a firearm, and restricted when a person does own a firearm (NY). A presentation at a professional conference in Atlanta (ASC) and New Orleans (ACJS), both primary professional organizations in the fields of Criminology and Criminal Justice, yielded much interest, but those in control of the journals would never allow such information to be provided through their journals. However, these same individuals would allow junk science to influence laws and public opinion. This is one great reason why things are messed-up.
    By the way, I never advocate that there are not problems with people having firearms. A person has to keep their firearm safe from unauthorized individuals from having possession of their firearms (e.g., children and felons), which is one of the major problems with firearms in general. A TN State Trooper did not have his service weapon secured and his granddaughter got possession of it and when showing it to her child female friend, she accidentally shot and killed herself. These are preventable accidents. It is more important to make certain that people are securing their weapons and have heavy sanctions in place when they don’t do so (there are many laws that already do this) than to strip honest people of lawful possession of their firearm. In other words, making the sheep vulnerable to the wolf is no more humane than allowing people to possess firearms without encumbering them with the needed responsibility with sanctions.
    Also, although retired, every year I must undergo retraining. I enjoy this training for 2 major reasons. First, I learn of any changes in the laws, if any, and problems that may arise in some US states (retired/active LEOs can carry firearms in every state and U.S. Territory with only 2 restrictions – States can dictate what gov’t property that we cannot carry armed & a private citizen can prohibit the possession of a firearm on their property). Two, I’m able to make certain that I’m able to handle my firearm with safety and accuracy. Carrying a firearm comes with a great amount of responsibility, whether a LEO or private citizen (keep in mind that after retirement, we are a private citizen, but with possible dangers secondary to serving the public).
    With this being said, I would like to see, at a minimum, private citizen undergoing firearms training (4 hours of class (law, safe handling of their firearm, use of firearm when there is a threat to life or limb (laws), etc.) & 4 hours of range (minimum score required – 70% – and safety in handling a firearm) before they become eligible to possess a permit to carry a firearm. After all, there is an 8-hour training requirement before a person can get a hunting license, but many states require no training whatsoever for a person who can carry a firearm concealed. To me, this is setting up a law-abiding citizen to make a mistake and then give anti-gun politicians a reason to cause greater restrictions though new laws. Also, my opinion is that this training for private citizens should be required at least in 3-year intervals. Again, this is my opinion & should not be given any more weight than any other opinion, but should be governed by a reasonable person test.
    As far as states, such as NY, CA, IL, and NJ, they need to get on board with the rest of the United States. Also, to help this along, research should be scrutinized more closely before legislators attempt to throw the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution under a train. And the U.S. Courts need to abide more strictly to the Law of the Land (U.S. Supreme Court cases). This isn’t being done, to date.

    1. avatar Don of TN says:

      With this being said, the NRA-ILA may be the only body able to change the hearts & spirits (and votes) of the Legislators of NYS (we have to start, or continue, somewhere). Giving the NRA-ILA contributions, no matter how small (e.g., $1, $2, etc.) may be the best way to battle this beast. I will make a point to contribute more this year.

  25. avatar GerryM says:

    When the safe act was voted in 6 or 7 {enough to deny it} were turn coat republican,s who
    Voted for it , The NRA has done very little at this point to challenge it in supreme court.
    It needs to be done and soon before it spreads.

    1. avatar Tom says:

      What are the names of the trash imitation republican legislators who voted in favor of this?

  26. avatar 2Asux says:

    Having me New Year’s pint, catching up on my favorite blogs. Came across this jewel.

    Admitted, I hadn’t read the full text of the SAFE act until today (this posting). What an elegant and clever way to go about making firearms useless. Should be a model for others to follow.

    Especially impressed by the requirement that a licensed person who fails to renew timely will also forfeit all the firearms for which there was no requirement to register. The prize of the law is that anyone who fails to register on time, and who subsequently uses any owned gun, for any purpose (self-defense?) is subject to criminal prosecution. Mates, rendering guns useless is just as good as confiscating them; society benefits.

    For those not seeing the beauty of the SAFE law….it is possible to require re-registration, without warning, at anytime the legislature sees fit. With short dates for compliance, even more irresponsible gun owners will be either relieved of their guns, or will be identified as no longer being “law abiding” gun owners (no longer “good guys with guns”).

    Gun confiscation does not require directly assaulting a gun owner’s home (an event for which you lot seem to hunger so you can prove your point). A simple traffic stop will discover if the driver is a legal gun owner. Rather, going out with a whimper, not a bang.

    1. avatar PATRICK P says:

      Any attempt at taking my guns illegally no matter of the unlawful circumstances will be met with the same force period. Remember this commie we will come after all traitors! LEAVE Europe awaits

      1. avatar 2Asux says:

        Having a pint yourself, I see.

        There is no need to “take” your guns, only make it illegal to possess or use. “Reasonable restrictions” (Scalia/Heller) include registration, with penalties for failure. You are traveling along, and are stopped for some traffic violation. You are found to be a lapsed registrant of firearms. You go immediately to jail (disarmed at the arrest). You guns are useless to you. Your career is damaged, your family negatively impacted. You now have an offense on your record that prohibits you from buying another gun (and you become felon in possession). There is no end to your misery, and you cannot reverse the outcome with your guns. Your guns can stay at your house, but you cannot legally use or sell them (and the threat remains daily that police will actually arrive with warrant to collect your weapons; let that weigh on the minds of your household, indefinitely).

        The contemplative and reasoning powers of gun owners is quite limited; imagining that the only way to “take” your guns involves “storm troopers” at the door. As I have often warned, there are people on my side who do nothing but devise methods to reduce the threat and actual events of gun violence in the country. Your side built a few walls against the simplest of intrusions, believing that you can go about without further consideration of all the avenues open to installing and enforcing “common sense” gun safety measures. It doesn’t have to be this way.

        1. avatar PATRICK P says:

          Do you think we people keep all of our guns in one location, not hardly commie traitor! I say lets dance liberals we won’t loose just like the founders of this country didn’t against a super power of the time. Righteousness always prevails against evil!

        2. avatar 2Asux says:

          It does not matter where you keep your guns. Once you are jailed for not re-registering, you become a “prohibited person”; your guns rendered useless….legally. The point is not to actually confiscate your firearms, but to make you a “bad guy with a gun”. From that moment on, every time you use or transport your guns, you must worry that you will be found out, and jailed again. That does not account for the financial ruin you will face defending your first infraction.

          You are still operating in the old paradigm, thinking that you can deceive and “beat the system” (which is rather like the mindset of the neighborhood hoodlum, isn’t it?). You have no concept of the damage a single conviction for a gun crime can do. Try to find or change employment with a gun crime conviction. How do you imagine your home and auto insurers will react? Need a mortgage, or in increased credit card limit? All that you will go through will present an effective cautionary tale to your pro-gun friends and co-workers.

        3. avatar PATRICK P says:

          Your not thinking like the conservatives gun owners in this country there are an estimated 90+ million and we would rather die than give up freedom to a illegal government Think millions standing up basically a revolution I won’t be jailed or persecuted I’ll legally stand and fight illegal retard liberals communist agenda. But what will happen is mass deportation and imprisonment, execution of all progressive liberal traitors that’s a fact.

          Below describes the illegality of the law.
          Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242 – Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law

        4. avatar 2Asux says:

          What tommyrot.

          If you are stopped for a vehicle moving violation, you will comply (or you will no longer be amongst the “most law abiding” people in the country. Secondly, you would, as a gun registration violator be arrested (peacefully). Under the SAFE law, police could, could mind you, go to your home and confiscate weapons while you repose behind bars. However, confiscation wouldn’t be necessary because once convicted, you would be a prohibited person, not legally permitted to possess firearms (once you are released from prison). The state may simply let you keep your firearms, and await the next opportunity to catch you out with your guns (transporting or using in self-defense), whereupon you would be re-arrested, and face enhanced criminal charges.

          You are simply spouting bilge water about revolting against “illegal government”. You’ve had plenty of chances (based on what I read) to revolt against a government making armed assault against peaceful private citizens. Yet here you sit, promising to rise up some day, for some reason.

          The beauty of the SAFE act is it leaves your right to keep arms in tact, but sets out reasonable restrictions on where and how you may carry those arms. Thus, the Second Amendment remains in tact, and society benefits from increased safety from guns. Taking New York, New Jersey, Washington and California altogether, a rather fine net of already Supreme Court approved safety measures can be woven. I really do like the fact that “reasonable restrictions” can result in the people of the country owning guns, while being prevented from presenting a clear and present danger to society through restrictions on transport and carry of those guns (I especially like the ammunition restrictions in effect in California and Washington).

        5. avatar PATRICK says:

          OK last time there Liberal Communist Troll or should I say Democrat Socialist Troll same thing though but retards like you don’t know any better. If you want to give up your rights or anything you desire be my guest but don’t ever think you have the right to dictate to the freedom loving Americans to sacrifice their rights for your stupidity. REMEMBER WE ARE NOT A DEMOCRACY WE ARE A REPUBLIC WITH INALIENABLE INDIVIDUAL GOD GIVEN HUMAN RIGHTS. People like you should move to Europe you don’t deserve to be here, you insult every man woman or child that has ever defended or sacrificed their life for this country our rights, liberty and freedom for the last 241 years. The founders of this country new that people needed to be armed for one main reason freedom and rights and the ability to keep them. No sane persons wants to rebel or have to declare war against tyranny but if you have the means your able to defend and fight. The democrats fear that, it blocks there true agenda and that’s their main reason they want gun control, it would lead to confiscation as it did in the UK. That’s also why they want UN membership not the paying non member status we have now and compliance with their small arms trade treaty that John Kerry signed that was an act of treason. The UN wants to be a Government over governments and the democrats want it they kiss ass with Europe to promote there stupidity and socialism, increase bloated government and push for high taxes, healthcare taxes, cause poverty by their ignorance, push welfare, push gay rights, push abortion rights (murder), limit and suppress Christianity but not ISLAM want and use crime as a tool for there agenda, open borders or are against sovereignty or patriotism and morals for total control of the minds of the people. Are Democrats progressives or liberals ignorant or are they evil?

          And what retards like you don’t realize there are laws that protect against state and judicial over reach, but treasonous liberal SCOTUS judges haven’t been following the law the ONE TRUE LAW OF THE LAND THE CONSTITUTION AND BILL OF RIGHTS by their treasonous deceptive interpretation and that will change. But here’s one that backs up the Second Amendment-Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242 – Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law read this dipshit!. And below is a quote of one of our founding fathers ( A Brilliant Man that seen liberal ignorance in Europe when he was alive and warned the American people not to follow there stupidity 240 years ago)
          A quote from Thomas Jefferson if people give up their rights and freedom for the perception of safety and security they deserve neither.

        6. avatar 2Asux says:

          On again, aren’t you?

          You beloved “inalienable” rights are effectively alienated in numerous ways. It is the world you live in. Not to put too fine a point on it, those “inalienable rights” are no where enumerated in the US constitution. Oh, one can make a case that this or that phrase in the document refers to an “inalienable right”, but “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” are no where to be found in the law of the land, are they? Oh the Declaration Of Independence was a dramatic bit of theatre, and served well as propaganda to encourage the (whom you would call “traitors”) rabble to man the abatis in place of the well off princes of the colonies. But those soaring words somehow were not incorporated into the documents establishing the confederation of former colonies.

          As noted (and ignored by you), under the SAFE act, you can keep your guns in your home. You can “bear” them when called up as militia. But as the high court established, you cannot take them about wherever you please. Registering guns with the state or local government is covered by the “reasonable restriction” provision of the Heller decision. Your right to a gun is not absolute, by any stretch. In some cosmic thriller, or film there may be an alternate universe where anyone can possess and carry any weapon they like, without interference from the authorities. In the world around you, there are legal restrictions designed to make the rest of the community safer from those who have gone round the bend, and cannot be trusted with implements of war.

          All in all, it is nice to see gun owners so obtuse that they are girding themselves for gun-meddon while ignoring the more practical and peaceful way of removing firearms from those untrustworthy, those who refuse to re-register timely and those who defiantly refuse to re-register timely.

          Your death grip on a warped perception of what malfeasance “under the color of law” actually means is evidence of information acquired without understanding. However, it serves our side well that gun owners are so ill informed and deluded.

          Yes, it has been a nice bit of comedy jousting with you, but I take unfair advantage.

    2. avatar Tom says:

      You seem to think that civilian legal gun owners do no good. Check this out My research (data collected over a 10-year period of time), indicates that there are more than 9,000 people alive every year (conservative figure, because of absence of readily available data) because of the lawful use of a firearm to protect oneself, another, or both. Keeping firearms away from law abiding people only makes it easier for criminals to harm these people.

      1. avatar 2asux says:

        Oh, indeed, there have been people who benefited from what you call “defensive gun use”. There are police and news reports to that effect. Here, let’s us take your figures of 9,000 people “saved” each year because they had guns available. First number is that you have precisely 0.000028125 percent (9,000/320,000,000) of the population “saved”. The second important number (not in your comment) is the 33,000 dead of gunfire in each of those same ten years. That makes it 0.00103125 percent of the population. Your defensive guns are at deficit of 22,000 each year.

        There are great numbers thrown about using mystical speculation that there are upwards of 250,000 defensive gun used per year. Always is the “thumb on the scale” claim of “unknowable” numbers of successful gun uses because no one was shot. The number of these “unknowable” events is no more valid than stating silver crosses ward off vampires. Any way you put it, the usefulness of guns as defense always lag the damage attributable to the same tool (as you would put it).

        One of the more interesting factors in claims of the usefulness of self defense guns is that since there were 9,000 annual successful defensive shootings, that makes it 9,000 events where we cannot know if an alternative resolution would have been effective. Beginning with not being in the situation in the first instance. We have no idea how more and better policing would have altered statistics, do we?

  27. avatar WhiteFalcon says:

    This BS is an intentional infringement of our right to keep and bear arms, and as such that whole batch of BS should be shut down by the SCOUS. Further, in my opinion, those responsible for the creation of said POS should be prosecuted and convicted of violations of the Constitution of the U. S., and as far as I’m concerned, tossed in prison for a few years, and Andrew Coumo should go with them.

  28. avatar BePrepared says:

    I’ve lived in NYS most of my life. Catskills area. The progressives are so numerous now that the Republican Party did not EVEN RUN an opponent in a recent municipal election in Woodstock, NY and had no contests in many surrounding areas.

    When I first moved up this way 40 years ago it was all Liberal Republican and JFK type democrats. Conservative leaning. People forget that JFK was a Conservative Democrat. Now it’s run by gender twisting, 9 month term baby killers. If you don’t support Planned Parenthood here some medical providers will actually discourage you from being their patient. It’s over the top.

    It took me almost 2 years to get a concealed carry because I got a progressive judge. He was ill tempered for no reason. I finally got transferred to a Republican judge who said she could see no reason at all to delay my license any further.

    Cuomo isn”t a progressive, but he is a little angry Mussolini type. The guy will try to demolish politically anyone who threatens his throne. It’s a sport to him.

    I am looking to leave the Catskills, leave New York. Absolutely great hunting and fishing, but it’s just not worth the Constitutional disdain of the ruling class and populations of the NYC, Albany, Poughkeepsie and Syracuse urban centers. Look at the election map, less than 10% of NY land footprint controls the vote. Farmers, loggers, rural dwellers … we are second class citizens feeding the out of touch. If just NYC became it’s own state, NY would probably vote conservative.

  29. avatar way2confused says:

    Who are they going to get to enforce this if gun owners in NY universally refuse to comply?

  30. avatar Larry C says:

    NYAGV actively promoted the expansion of citizen deaths by firearms to justify this law. While they had active protection, they encouraged the deaths of their fellow citizens. Their sole platform is to disarm all law abiding citizens by gun control. With that accomplished, criminals and illegals they support will have full reign of terror over citizens. And the rights to defend one’s life, family or home will be permanently null and void! With CUNTMO’s help they employed prostitutes, bribery, extortion, physical threats and more against the polecats in Albany to ram through the legislation that has not saved one single life! That is why NO standing member of the polecats in Albany has the backbone to mount a counter legislative effort to turn this and other laws over! As one member said when I asked him, “They are TOO AFRAID” of him”!

  31. avatar Rick says:

    What happens if not only you are a licence owner in NY but also other states like FL and keep your guns there?

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