Previous Post
Next Post

 NY State Senator Martin Golden, retired cop (courtesy

“Without warning, the state Senate approved a bill early Friday morning that would exempt retired law enforcement officers from new ammunition restrictions in New York’s new gun control law, the SAFE Act,” reports. “The measure sprang onto the chamber floor shortly before 2 a.m., and drew howls from some of the GOP’s Republican members . . .

Roughly half of them — including Sens. Kathy Marchione, R-Halfmoon and Hugh Farley, R-Niskayuna — voted against the legislation, generally citing disgust with the process and a desire that the SAFE Act be repealed in its entirety.

And where the Hell were all these indignant Republicans when the SAFE Act was passed, 20 minutes after it was introduced (and then immediately signed into law under the Governor’s emergency powers)? In fact, if you really want your blood to boil check out this quote from Republican Senator Marty Golden, “a retired NYPD officer from Brooklyn, said the change would affect 200,000 people around the state.”

“After working 20 years or 30 years as a police officer, or a peace officer, or as a federal officer, they encounter people when they are with their families and when they are in their communities, and they act appropriately,” he said. “They’re not a separate class of people, ladies and gentleman, but they are an experience class of people. … They know how to deal with the criminal element, so if anybody deserves to have a 10-round magazine” it is them.

If anybody deserves to have a 10-round magazine? I guess the Supreme Court’s McDonald decision, ruling the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right protected by the United States Constitution for all Americans that trumps local and state law, never made it to The Empire State. Nor, I suspect, did legislators contemplate my post Why New York Cops Don’t Deserve a SAFE Act Carve-Out.

They say the people get the government they deserve. As an RI refugee I feel for the pro-gun residents of the New York slave state—who will not accept this clearly unconstitutional thuggery. Again, this will not end well.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. I’m seeing a definate pattern in NY. Unsavory and unconstitutional laws being passed in the dark hours of the morning when honest folk are mostly abed. After this last national election I changed my status as a voter to independent. Too much good ole boy sh!t happening with the 2 main parties.

    • They need to change the NY Legislature’s hours to banker’s hours. Working people still wouldn’t be able to attend, but at least they could arrive to throw rotten fruit after work.

    • Well, considering that the Independent party steals votes from the Republican party, be ready for lots of Democrat’s until the GOP is dead and Independent parties take hold.

      • DEMOCRATS. “Democrat’s” means either “something which belongs to the Democrats”, or “Democrat is,” contracted.

        Don’t write like a seventh-grade dropout house painter. The rules can be grasped by a ten-year old, if you want to grasp it.

        And if you’re suggesting voting for flip-flop Republicans instead of Independents, well, I’d rather stay home and smoke weed. At least one of us will have spent his election day having fun.

  2. As a cop, I think this is a bunch of garbage. I would like to point out that WA has some exemptions for what LE can own, and despite wanting an SBR and SBS really, really badly, I refuse to take advantage of the loophole so thoughtfully provided.

      • Not retired, only been on four years. I could carry verboten items on duty if I wanted to, but I won’t. My weapon selection even leaves me using 8rd mags for my pistol and 20rd mags for my rifle.

        I even qualified on the Remington 870 (very few in my department have bothered), although the lack of a national AWB meant that I didn’t have to give up my rifle on principle. I still consider it, though. The 12ga may be limited in application, but it is still devastating in the right circumstances.

      • Can TTAG agree to BAN the word “civilians” to mean non-cop, non-active duty military personnel? I read the definition posted recently; I think it’s revisionist in nature.

        And I don’t like it one bit.

      • He is a civilian, a government employee not in the military. The people being denied the weapons are citizens.

        • *Sigh* One more time for the learning impaired. We’re all citizens. Whether we work for the police, the military or a private company. All citizens.

          No matter how many times you spout that garbage we’re all citizens.

        • Yes, I am a citizen. I am also a civilian, as I left the Army four years ago and the National Guard one year ago.

          Anyone else who is not in the military is a civilian, and they very well may also be a citizen. Or at least I hope they are, if they are living in the US.

      • I feel exactly the same way-when i have to transit NY state with my HR 218 credential I will carry either a 6 shot 45 ACP revolver or a 1911 with a 7 round mag-there’s no law against extra mags or full moonclips 🙂

  3. I wish I could be an Independent. Here in the Once Free State, you can be a D or R and vote in the appropriate primary, or something else and not have a say in the primary. So I vote for the less corrupt droid in the primary, and watch Baltimore and MOCO put their Dem droid in power.

  4. Yeah…STILL WAITING for that SCOTUS ruling that bans all forms of gun control nationwide, allows open and concealed carry of any type of firearm by any law abiding citizen, overules all state gun control laws, clealry states that no one is above the law (including POTUS), and that whoever is found guilty of violating said supreme constitutional amendment, are waterboarded and executed.

    Rights are rights that are GOD GIVEN, not granted! To hell with unconstitutional laws!

      • Try reading the Old Testament, especially Exodus and Leviticus, for the Mosaic Law. Lots in there about the proper and improper use of force to defend life, liberty, and property.

        And spare us any BS about it not “specifically” saying “gun” or “concealed carry.” Swords were the assault weapons of the day, and knives and daggers were used for carry in your cloak. Get it? Cloaked carry.

        • The Declaration of Independence recognizes this too, when it says “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.”

          Though it does not mention all such rights specifically, I think it is clear that those listed in the Bill of Rights come from this concept.

        • God never said anything about guns or self defense. God didn’t write the Bible or the Declaration of Independence, men did. “Natural Right to Self-Defense” makes a whole lot more sense.

        • Try not to look at the Right to Self-Defense as a religious, Christian, or even American issue. It is a creator/creation issue. It is easily observable in nature, but natural law did not coming into being in and of itself. Therefore it was granted to us by the Creator.

          And anyone claiming that the Founding Fathers weren’t Christian (the majority were)…missed this part of the Declaration of Independence:

          “We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions…”

          Wonder who that Supreme Judge of the world is…must be referring to God King Emperor Barack. OH WAIT!

  5. There are citizens and then there are citizens.

    You might think the optics of passing something insulting to the electorate in the middle of the night would not be lost on them. They couldn’t wait ’til the next morning? What if they had come to their senses?

    Meanwhile, challenges move like glaciers.

  6. They are trying to appease a large portion of their critical ’employee” ie: ‘unionized’ base. It won’t work. ALL people should enjoy all parts of the constitution. This will strengthen the opposition to the SAFE Act. They must stop passing laws in the middle of the night, when there is no ability for the public to be involved in conversation and debate. This is the tell tale signs of a dictatorship with mock representation. I see no difference from this and the queen saying “Let them eat cake”

    • “They must stop passing laws in the middle of the night, when there is no ability for the public to be involved in conversation and debate. This is the tell tale signs of a dictatorship with mock representation.”

      Yeah, pretty sure that’s tyranny and the sort of thing that went on in Soviet Russia. These leaders who’ve been elected by the people seem to have forgotten that rowdy Bostonians would kidnap said leaders in the middle of the night, douse them in tar, and cover them with feathers.

      They would do well to remember this country’s tumultuous beginning.

  7. One of my pet peeves is when government exempts itself from the laws they impose on the rest of us. Congress is a classic example and the New York Assembly are no different. It is government elitism. The political class has elevated themselves as a ruling clique.

    • Statism is alive and well in NY and CA. I can’t see why anyone would respect such measures. This cowardice needs to be reported on the front pages for all to see. I find it truly disturbing that there are so many people who still trust government and wish to increase increase the size and scope thereof.

  8. Deserve? I didn’t realize i had to do something to earn my rights.

    Let’s do a switcharoo here with voting on that block quote of ignorance:

    “After working 20 years or 30 years as a public official, or a lawyer, or as a political science professor, they encounter problems in the world when they are with their families and when they are in their communities, and they vote appropriately,” he said. “They’re not a separate class of people, ladies and gentleman, but they are an expert class of people. … They know how to deal with the economy and understand political issues, so if anybody deserves to vote” it is them.

  9. Fun trivia: Since the 1986 Hughes Amendment, there have only been two instances of registered, select-fire weapons being used for criminal purposes. The perpetrator in both of these cases was a police officer.

    Another bit of fun trivia: Dianne Feinstein’s anti-gun crusade started after the Milk-Moscone assassinations. Milk and Moscone were killed by a former police officer.

    One more, for the hell of it: The number of criminals caught by Federal Air Marshals since 9/11/2001 is smaller than the number of Federal Air Marshals arrested for various crimes during that same time period.

    Yes, giving more rights to current and former law enforcement makes perfect sense.

    • Um, wow. I really wish I had something less… dumb to say than that… (not sure why, it would be a monumental change, I know)… but wow.

    • My question is: what is it about his agency that led Steele to believe he could conduct himself in that manner in the first place?

      This kind of stuff doesn’t occur in a vacuum.

  10. They know the courts are going to tear the gut out of SAFE so they are making as much political hay as possible, now. It isn’t just guns, there are many issues where they are playing electoral math and looking busy.

    SAFE is Jim Crow and they know it.

  11. I am a retired NYS LEO and this carve out from the ridiculous, unConstitutional mess called “NY SAFE” is a slap in the face to every Citizen of the State of New York.

    This is ALL wrong.

  12. “from some of the GOP’s Republican members . . .”

    If only the GOP had more Republican members.

    • It has plenty. It also has RINOs. Remember, the Republican party was founded as an anti-slavery party.

      “Early Republican ideology was reflected in the 1856 slogan “free labor, free land, free men”. “Free labor” referred to the Republican opposition to slave labor and belief in independent artisans and businessmen. “Free land” referred to Republican opposition to plantation system whereby slaveowners could buy up all the good farm land, leaving the yeoman independent farmers the leftovers. The Party strived to contain the expansion of slavery, which would cause the collapse of the slave power and the expansion of freedom.” (source:

      I don’t see anything wrong with that AT ALL. The problem is not the Party. The problem is Liberalism and RINOs (Republicans In Name Only {John McCain for instance}) who claim to be Republicans, but really have lost their way and are Liberals on the Right side rather than the Left. They are not about Conserving the Constitutional Rights of Free men in this country. They are about power and what’s in it for them. Traitors.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here