New York Issues Revised SAFE Act Guidelines for Law Enforcement Officers


Are you an unlucky Empire Stater who’s feeling the effects Governor Andrew Cuomo’s pride and joy, the SAFE Act? Have you been flipping the pages on your calendar, noticing that the April 15 registration date is coming up fast, and wondering if or how cops in New York will be enforcing this marvel of civil rights abrogation? Never fear, the law enforcement brass are way ahead of you. The New York State Police has recently issued a revised SAFE Act guide (PDF) to its officers to – again – explain the law’s provisions and how they’re to to about enforcing it. And given the the December Western District ruling that the mag cap ban is unconstitutional, they’ll be letting that part of the law slide until the matter has worked its way through the courts. Read it and weep.

[h/t OneIfByLand]


  1. avatar Dave357 says:

    And given the the December Western District ruling that the mag cap ban is unconstitutional

    Let’s be clear here. The total ban on the previously grandfathered over 10-round capacity magazines has not been overturned. Only the requirement to load just 7 rounds into a 10-round magazine has been overturned.

  2. avatar Grunpy F'er says:

    From the PDF guide for State Police:
    A semiautomatic pistol, able to accept a detachable magazine and has at least one of the
    following characteristics:

    a. Folding or Telescoping Stock
    b.Thumbhole Stock


    “A” is a short barreled rifle, and “B” is…what the hell is that? Is there one? I’d like to see a picture.

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      You have access to TTAG but not google? Alright…

      The idea is that it could function similar to a pistol grip. You know, to make the gun more comfortable to hold. Can’t have that!

      1. avatar 2Alpha says:

        He’s saying a pistol with a thumbhole stock. It’d still be an sbr, but this basically makes no sense because neither are pistols and just furthers the notion that they have no idea what they are talking about.

  3. avatar BDub says:

    “If 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.”

    Wow!, just wow.

    1. avatar BDub says:

      The more I read this, the more arbitrary is seems – to the point that is just seems like a set-up for an all out confiscation. Since they can, at a whim, revoke your pistol permit, they then have a reason to seize all of your weapons, of any kind.

      1. avatar NYC2AZ says:

        It’s a feature, not a bug.

      2. avatar GS650G says:

        It’s going to be real simple to just deny renewals. Then the turn in begins, but first they want to see how it goes in CT. Pretty crafty to let them do it first.

        I must have missed that part of the USC where our rights were subject to renewal and approval by the state.

    2. avatar Bob says:

      And then they will promptly arrest you.

    3. avatar Nigil says:

      I would assume that it is not the losing of the pistol license that results in the required surrendering of arms, but the state of ineligibility for such. Meaning, whatever you did (be a felon?) that causes you to be ineligible for the pistol license also makes you ineligible to own long guns.
      It’s still all a load of bullcrap, but perhaps not as arbitrary as it initially seems. What it really depends on is what makes someone ineligible for their pistol permit in the first place, which I’m not inclined to research right now.

    4. avatar Chris says:

      And in good ol’ Ny we lose our pistol permit for things such as being the victims of domestic violence. I wish i was kidding.

  4. avatar Gene says:

    Imteresting… It boils down to “if it has a detachable magazine and a characteristic.”

    I jest, but not by much.

  5. avatar James says:

    As Sam Gamgee once said: “No welcome, no beer, no smoke, and a lot of rules and orc-talk instead.” Welcome to the Shire under Saruman.

  6. avatar Grunpy F'er says:

    From the SAFE Act web site:
    ( )

    Register Your Assault Weapon Here!
    Quick, Simple & FREE!

    OH! It’s FREE. That’s different. I thought it would cost me something. Here’s where the button will send you:

    1. avatar BDub says:

      Hey! lets register a bunch of assault weapons in Bloomie’s name!

    2. avatar GS650G says:

      Free at the moment. I could see them dropping a nice big fee on that, after all it is New York.

  7. avatar Malcolm says:

    The possession of most pistols will now be a crime, given the popular 15 round capacity.

    The possession of a fully loaded pistol will now be a crime (can’t load more than 7 rounds in a mag)

    Background checks on all ammo purchases

    Seizure of weapons without due process based on doctors being required to rat out patients.

    hmmm…. whatever could go wrong?

    Oh… except when the crimminal doesn’t care if they die during their attack; which is, generally…. ALL OF THEM.

  8. avatar Tommy Knocker says:

    SCOPE is a pro gun group in NY. They’ve organized one more Albany rally against the SAFE act on Tues. April 1. One last vocal dissent before the deadline. If your available to attend pls consider it…

  9. avatar Evan says:

    Banning any pistol over 50 ounces? Must be targeted against AR and AK pistols.

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      A ruger redhawk with a big barrel might tip the scales at more than 50.

      1. avatar Anon in CT says:

        I would think a Deagle would. I believe that when CT reduced the two feature test to a one feature test, they got rid of the weight as one feature.

    2. avatar Canon says:

      Desert Eagles 357 and larger are over 50oz. So glad I escaped from NY.

  10. avatar Gurney Halleck says:

    Only bans semiautomatic pistols over 50oz. So the Raging Judge is still legal.

  11. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

    So can we pray that Cuomo gets indicted for something real soon?

    1. avatar MiniMe says:

      He SHOULD be indicted for doing what he did in secrecy, in the dead of night. But considering how of much of a hold the gun grabbers have in the area, little chance of that.

  12. avatar Thomas says:

    Yet another “ugly” gun ban. What does a muzzle brake, compensator, or flash hider have to do with anything? Well, to an uninformed politician, it obviously makes the round more deadly. Bayonet lugs? Give me a break. When was the last time anybody ever put a bayonet lug on a MSR, (with an emphasis on the “M”). You don’t see pics in the posts of this blog, or, what our beloved writers here at TTAG call the dead tree rags, of fancy new rifles with bayonets. This is almost identical to the Clinton ban, yet scarier.

  13. avatar Drew says:

    I wonder if the C96 style pistols(internal, non-detachable magazines) will come back due to regs like this. We’ve already seen a compliant AR-15, albeit it looks like its from Voltron.

  14. avatar tacticaldad says:

    Colt Pythons for everyone!

  15. avatar IdahoPete says:

    Another really fun feature of this un-SAFE law is that police officers – state. local. and fed – will get to find out what it is like to be one of the peasantry as soon as they retire! Their prior immunity from the disarmament provisions will begin to erode as soon as they get their retirement party. Wonder how they will enjoy that?

    Or do all NY cops retire to Florida? I know a huge number of California cops retire to Nevada and Idaho, to escape the taxation and gun laws that they helped to enforce in the PRCa. A certain amount of irony, 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