New NYS gun legislation????????

[FX]

Re-posting these as well:

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/ ... 27fZ9uT.01

From Legacy/Rob:

http://www.guns.com/2013/01/17/shot-sho ... ent-video/

Shawn

[skipper19]

More buses available to the march and rally February 28th. Senate conveining on the same day 11:00 to 14:00. Make your voices heard.

Check here for more buses in your area, and reserve a seat. http://scopeny.org/unite_for_our_rights.html

Oswego, Onondaga, Long Island federations now added to Erie for buses. More to come.

Mark

[ Post made via Android ]

[Shorthanded]

The link below is to the NRA's Grass Root Advocacy page and considerable resources for us. To my knowledge you do not have to be a member to signup or take advantage of the resources.

That said, it is beyond me why anyone who takes seriously the current threats to our 2nd Amendment rights is not an NRA member.

http://www.nraila.org/get-involved-loca ... roots.aspx

[Shorthanded]

Published on Mar 9, 2012

FBI Director Robert Mueller on Wednesday said he would have to go back and check with the Department of Justice whether Attorney General Eric Holder's "three criteria" for the targeted killing of Americans also applied to Americans inside the U.S.

[mostlymuskies]

They are pushing the NY Safe Act ,trying to give us no time to react,try to make this important meeting!

Tuesday, January 29

12:00 PM Mike Green, Executive Deputy Commissioner, Division of Criminal

Justice Services and Steve Hogan, First Deputy Counsel, New York State

Police present the NY SAFE Act in Erie County

Clarence Public Library

3 Town Place

Clarence, New York

OPEN PRESS

No notice,but if you can get there,please go!

Capt. Larry

[L&M]

Meetings to be held in Oswego and LaFayette on new state gun laws

Officials with two state agencies will meet with the public and local law enforcement to discuss the new NY Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act in two meetings Wednesday in Central New York.

Attending both meetings will be Michael C. Green, executive deputy commissioner of the Division of Criminal Justice Services, and Steve Hogan, first deputy counsel for the state police. They will be answering questions regarding the NY SAFE Act, which was signed into law Jan. 15 by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo

The first session is scheduled for noon Wednesday at the Oswego Y & Y Armory, 249 and 265 W. First St., Oswego.

The second meeting will be at 5 p.m. Wednesday at LaFayette Town Hall, 2577 Route 11 N., LaFayette.

The public is invited to attend and to ask questions.

[mostlymuskies]

I just came from the Clarence, NY. Safe meeting.Standing room only pro gun crowd. Those who own by NY State Defination an Assault Weapon must registor it.No pistol with more then 7 round magazine can be sold in NY state, so 90. percent of all pistols will be banded from being sold here. If you own a NY State designated Assault Weapon it can be kept if registered.But once it has been registered ownership can not be transfered,not even to a family member.It must be turned into law envorcement when you die or they will come and get it.If you purchased ammo from mail order that will end on April 15th,you must show up in person to have check done to purchase ammo.If you order ammo out of state in large quanities delivered via trucking,must be shipped to FFL where you show in person for check.Ranges must be certified to sell ammo to be shot at the range.Uncertified ranges you can only have 7 rounds in your magazine.Persons in transit flying in from other states and countries can no longer carry unregistered Assault weapons or ammo through airports in route to states or other countries.

This bill just about ties you up and takes your firearms away!

Capt Larry

[ Post made via Android ]

[Shorthanded]

I just came from the Clarence, NY. Safe meeting.Standing room only pro gun crowd. Those who own by NY State Defination an Assault Weapon must registor it, it can't be transferred to anyone else in your family.So when you die it will. be taken. Ammo purchases from out of state must be shipped to FFL and you have to show up in person to collect.No pistol with more then 7 round magazine can be sold in NY state, so 90. percent of all pistols will be banded from being sold here. If you own a NY State designated Assault Weapon it can be kept if registered.But once it has been registered ownership can not be transfered,not even to a family member.It must be turned into law envorcement when you die or they will come and get it.If you purchased ammo from mail order that will end on April 15th,you must show up in person to have check done to purchase ammo.If you order ammo out of state in large quanities delivered via trucking,must be shipped to FFL where you show in person for check.Ranges must be certified to sell ammo to be shot at the range.Uncertified ranges you can only have 7 rounds in your magazine.Persons in transit flying in from other states and countries can no longer carry unregistered Assault weapons or ammo through airports in route to states or other countries.

This bill just about ties you up and takes your firearms away!

Capt Larry

[ Post made via Android ]

Larry, thanks, you confirmed most of our fears.

[Sk8man]

Interesting situation - I overheard a guy today who has a 9 mm Sig 228 discussing the new law and his pistol came with (2) 13 round magazines. He said that when he tried to order new 10 round magazines over the Internet that they won't ship them to New York State. The 10 round magazine is the smallest that is made for the gun and the gun s no longer manufactured as it was replaced by the P229 so basically his $800 plus gun is useless. Unreal!

[MikeyP]

This is basically what I said here 2 weeks ago. Cuomo and his cronies essentially banned 80-90 percent of handguns and most rifles under the guise of "assault weapons" and there are getting away with it. If you want to keep your guns or buy something worth having you will have to move out of New York state. I don't see us getting this ban repealed because those that voted for the ban come from anti gun districts downstate and don't have a chance of be defeated come election time.

[Legacy]

fqpzOSYqX3c

[mostlymuskies]

ROAD TRIP TO ALBANY FEBUARY 28th

DEPARTURE TIME: 4:30AM, 2/28/13, from NYS Thruway Exit 49 DEPEW – park & drive area.

Travel to: Empire State Plaza, Legislative Office Building (LOB); Route: New York State Thruway

(Interstate 90) to Exit 24 (Albany), proceed east on Interstate 90 to Interstate 787 South, along Hudson

River, take Empire Plaza Exit direct to LOB bus parking zone.

1 travel stop is planned along NYS Thruway inbound travel route.

Approximate ARRIVAL TIME at Empire Plaza: 10:00AM

Proceed to Legislative Office Building on foot, all must proceed through security checkpoint. Enter

Legislative Office Building and turn left, proceed to “The Wellâ€. Organized speaker activities are planned

to begin at 10:30AM with speakers through 12:30PM.

There are approximately 2 hours of open air plaza activities after that.

DEPARTURE TIME: 3:00PM, 2/28/13, from bus parking zone at LOB for Return Trip to Exit 49 DEPEW –

park & drive area.

1 travel stop is planned along NYS Thruway outbound travel route.

Approximate ARRIVAL TIME: 8:30PM, 2/28/13, at Exit 49 DEPEW – park and drive area

To make reservations as a passenger, please contact Rich at 716-510-

7952 or email: [email protected]

A $25 per passenger donation is recommended to help defer costs. Cash or check made payable to the

Erie County Federation of Sportsmen

[Sk8man]

http://www.nyfirearms.com/forums/firear ... -undo.html

[FX]

This is a lengthy, but great read! One I have forwarded to everyone I know. I'm also send this to my representatives as I do NOT believe they are well informed.

"29 Jan 2013

Protecting the Second Amendment – Why all Americans Should Be Concerned

We are current or former Army Reserve, National Guard, and active duty US Army Special Forces soldiers (Green Berets). We have all taken an oath to “…support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same.…†The Constitution of the United States is without a doubt the single greatest document in the history of mankind, codifying the fundamental principle of governmental power and authority being derived from and granted through the consent of the governed. Our Constitution established a system of governance that preserves, protects, and holds sacrosanct the individual rights and primacy of the governed as well as providing for the explicit protection of the governed from governmental tyranny and/or oppression. We have witnessed the insidious and iniquitous effects of tyranny and oppression on people all over the world. We and our forebears have embodied and personified our organizational motto, De Oppresso Liber [To Free the Oppressed], for more than a half century as we have fought, shed blood, and died in the pursuit of freedom for the oppressed.

Like you, we are also loving and caring fathers and grandfathers. Like you, we have been stunned, horrified, and angered by the tragedies of Columbine, Virginia Tech, Aurora, Fort Hood, and Sandy Hook; and like you, we are searching for solutions to the problem of gun-related crimes in our society. Many of us are educators in our second careers and have a special interest to find a solution to this problem. However, unlike much of the current vox populi reactions to this tragedy, we offer a different perspective.

First, we need to set the record straight on a few things. The current debate is over so-called “assault weapons†and high capacity magazines. The terms “assault weapon†and “assault rifle†are often confused. According to Bruce H. Kobayashi and Joseph E. Olson, writing in the Stanford Law and Policy Review, “Prior to 1989, the term ‘assault weapon’ did not exist in the lexicon of firearms. It is a political term [underline added for emphasis], developed by anti-gun publicists to expand the category of assault rifles.â€

The M4A1 carbine is a U.S. military service rifle – it is an assault rifle. The AR-15 is not an assault rifle. The “AR†in its name does not stand for “Assault Rifle†– it is the designation from the first two letters of the manufacturer’s name – ArmaLite Corporation. The AR-15 is designed so that it cosmetically looks like the M4A1 carbine assault rifle, but it is impossible to configure the AR-15 to be a fully automatic assault rifle. It is a single shot semi-automatic rifle that can fire between 45 and 60 rounds per minute depending on the skill of the operator. The M4A1 can fire up to 950 rounds per minute. In 1986, the federal government banned the import or manufacture of new fully automatic firearms for sale to civilians. Therefore, the sale of assault rifles are already banned or heavily restricted!

The second part of the current debate is over “high capacity magazines†capable of holding more than 10 rounds in the magazine. As experts in military weapons of all types, it is our considered opinion that reducing magazine capacity from 30 rounds to 10 rounds will only require an additional 6 -8 seconds to change two empty 10 round magazines with full magazines. Would an increase of 6 –8 seconds make any real difference to the outcome in a mass shooting incident? In our opinion it would not. Outlawing such “high capacity magazines†would, however, outlaw a class of firearms that are “in common useâ€. As such this would be in contravention to the opinion expressed by the U.S. Supreme Court recent decisions.

Moreover, when the Federal Assault Weapons Ban became law in 1994, manufacturers began retooling to produce firearms and magazines that were compliant. One of those ban-compliant firearms was the Hi-Point 995, which was sold with ten-round magazines. In 1999, five years into the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, the Columbine High School massacre occurred. One of the perpetrators, Eric Harris, was armed with a Hi-Point 995. Undeterred by the ten-round capacity of his magazines, Harris simply brought more of them: thirteen magazines would be found in the massacre’s aftermath. Harris fired 96 rounds before killing himself.

Now that we have those facts straight, in our opinion, it is too easy to conclude that the problem is guns and that the solution to the problem is more and stricter gun control laws. For politicians, it is politically expedient to take that position and pass more gun control laws and then claim to constituents that they have done the right thing in the interest of protecting our children. Who can argue with that? Of course we all want to find a solution. But, is the problem really guns? Would increasing gun regulation solve the problem? Did we outlaw cars to combat drunk driving?

What can we learn from experiences with this issue elsewhere? We cite the experience in Great Britain. Despite the absence of a “gun cultureâ€, Great Britain, with one-fifth the population of the U.S., has experienced mass shootings that are eerily similar to those we have experienced in recent years. In 1987 a lone gunman killed 18 people in Hungerford. What followed was the Firearms Act of 1988 making registration mandatory and banning semi-automatic guns and pump-action shotguns. Despite this ban, on March 13, 1996 a disturbed 43-year old former scout leader, Thomas Hamilton, murdered 16 school children aged five and six and a teacher at a primary school in Dunblane, Scotland. Within a year and a half the Firearms Act was amended to ban all private ownership of hand guns. After both shootings there were amnesty periods resulting in the surrender of thousands of firearms and ammunition. Despite having the toughest gun control laws in the world, gun related crimes increased in 2003 by 35% over the previous year with firearms used in 9,974 recorded crimes in the preceding 12 months. Gun related homicides were up 32% over the same period. Overall, gun related crime had increased 65% since the Dunblane massacre and implementation of the toughest gun control laws in the developed world. In contrast, in 2009 (5 years after the Federal Assault Weapons Ban expired) total firearm related homicides in the U.S. declined by 9% from the 2005 high (Source: “FBI Uniform Crime Reporting Master File, Table 310, Murder Victims – Circumstances and Weapons Used or Cause of Death: 2000-2009â€).

Are there unintended consequences to stricter gun control laws and the politically expedient path that we have started down?

In a recent op-ed piece in the San Francisco Chronicle, Brett Joshpe stated that “Gun advocates will be hard-pressed to explain why the average American citizen needs an assault weapon with a high-capacity magazine other than for recreational purposes.†We agree with Kevin D. Williamson (National Review Online, December 28, 2012): “The problem with this argument is that there is no legitimate exception to the Second Amendment right that excludes military-style weapons, because military-style weapons are precisely what the Second Amendment guarantees our right to keep and bear.â€

“The purpose of the Second Amendment is to secure our ability to oppose enemies foreign and domestic, a guarantee against disorder and tyranny. Consider the words of Supreme Court Justice Joseph Storyâ€: ‘The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defense of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.’

The Second Amendment has been ruled to specifically extend to firearms “in common use†by the military by the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in U.S. v Miller (1939). In Printz v U.S. (1997) Justice Thomas wrote: “In Miller we determined that the Second Amendment did not guarantee a citizen’s right to possess a sawed-off shot gun because that weapon had not been shown to be “ordinary military equipment†that could “could contribute to the common defenseâ€.

A citizen’s right to keep and bear arms for personal defense unconnected with service in a militia has been reaffirmed in the U.S. Supreme Court decision (District of Columbia, et al. v Heller, 2008). The Court Justice Scalia wrote in the majority opinion: “The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.“. Justice Scalia went on to define a militia as “… comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense ….â€

“The Anti-Federalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved.†he explained.

On September 13, 1994, the Federal Assault Weapons Ban went into effect. A Washington Post editorial published two days later was candid about the ban’s real purpose:“[N]o one should have any illusions about what was accomplished [by the ban]. Assault weapons play a part in only a small percentage of crime. The provision is mainly symbolic; its virtue will be if it turns out to be, as hoped, a stepping stone to broader gun control.â€

In a challenge to the authority of the Federal government to require State and Local Law Enforcement to enforce Federal Law (Printz v United States) the U.S. Supreme Court rendered a decision in 1997. For the majority opinion Justice Scalia wrote: “…. this Court never has sanctioned explicitly a federal command to the States to promulgate and enforce laws and regulations When we were at last confronted squarely with a federal statute that unambiguously required the States to enact or administer a federal regulatory program, our decision should have come as no surprise….. It is an essential attribute of the States’ retained sovereignty that they remain independent and autonomous within their proper sphere of authority.â€

So why should non-gun owners, a majority of Americans, care about maintaining the 2nd Amendment right for citizens to bear arms of any kind?

The answer is “The Battle of Athens, TNâ€. The Cantrell family had controlled the economy and politics of McMinn County, Tennessee since the 1930s. Paul Cantrell had been Sheriff from 1936 -1940 and in 1942 was elected to the State Senate. His chief deputy, Paul Mansfield, was subsequently elected to two terms as Sheriff. In 1946 returning WWII veterans put up a popular candidate for Sheriff. On August 1 Sheriff Mansfield and 200 “deputies†stormed the post office polling place to take control of the ballot boxes wounding an objecting observer in the process. The veterans bearing military style weapons, laid siege to the Sheriff’s office demanding return of the ballot boxes for public counting of the votes as prescribed in Tennessee law. After exchange of gun fire and blowing open the locked doors, the veterans secured the ballot boxes thereby protecting the integrity of the election. And this is precisely why all Americans should be concerned about protecting all of our right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment!

Throughout history, disarming the populace has always preceded tyrants’ accession of power. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao all disarmed their citizens prior to installing their murderous regimes. At the beginning of our own nation’s revolution, one of the first moves made by the British government was an attempt to disarm our citizens. When our Founding Fathers ensured that the 2nd Amendment was made a part of our Constitution, they were not just wasting ink. They were acting to ensure our present security was never forcibly endangered by tyrants, foreign or domestic.

If there is a staggering legal precedent to protect our 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms and if stricter gun control laws are not likely to reduce gun related crime, why are we having this debate? Other than making us and our elected representatives feel better because we think that we are doing something to protect our children, these actions will have no effect and will only provide us with a false sense of security.

So, what do we believe will be effective? First, it is important that we recognize that this is not a gun control problem; it is a complex sociological problem. No single course of action will solve the problem. Therefore, it is our recommendation that a series of diverse steps be undertaken, the implementation of which will require patience and diligence to realize an effect. These are as follows:

1.

First and foremost we support our Second Amendment right in that “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 infringedâ€.

2.

We support State and Local School Boards in their efforts to establish security protocols in whatever manner and form that they deem necessary and adequate. One of the great strengths of our Republic is that State and Local governments can be creative in solving problems. Things that work can be shared. Our point is that no one knows what will work and there is no one single solution, so let’s allow the State and Local governments with the input of the citizens to make the decisions. Most recently the Cleburne Independent School District will become the first district in North Texas to consider allowing some teachers to carry concealed guns. We do not opine as to the appropriateness of this decision, but we do support their right to make this decision for themselves.

3.

We recommend that Assisted Outpatient Treatment (AOT) laws be passed in every State. AOT is formerly known as Involuntary Outpatient Commitment (IOC) and allows the courts to order certain individuals with mental disorders to comply with treatment while living in the community. In each of the mass shooting incidents the perpetrator was mentally unstable. We also believe that people who have been adjudicated as incompetent should be simultaneously examined to determine whether they should be allowed the right to retain/purchase firearms.

4.

We support the return of firearm safety programs to schools along the lines of the successful “Eddie the Eagle†program, which can be taught in schools by Peace Officers or other trained professionals.

5.

Recent social psychology research clearly indicates that there is a direct relationship between gratuitously violent movies/video games and desensitization to real violence and increased aggressive behavior particularly in children and young adults (See Nicholas L. Carnagey, et al. 2007. “The effect of video game violence on physiological desensitization to real-life violence†and the references therein. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 43:489-496). Therefore, we strongly recommend that gratuitous violence in movies and video games be discouraged. War and war-like behavior should not be glorified. Hollywood and video game producers are exploiting something they know nothing about. General Sherman famously said “War is Hell!†Leave war to the Professionals. War is not a game and should not be “sold†as entertainment to our children.

6.

We support repeal of the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990. This may sound counter-intuitive, but it obviously isn’t working. It is our opinion that “Gun-Free Zones†anywhere are too tempting of an environment for the mentally disturbed individual to inflict their brand of horror with little fear of interference. While governmental and non-governmental organizations, businesses, and individuals should be free to implement a Gun-Free Zone if they so choose, they should also assume Tort liability for that decision.

7.

We believe that border states should take responsibility for implementation of border control laws to prevent illegal shipments of firearms and drugs. Drugs have been illegal in this country for a long, long time yet the Federal Government manages to seize only an estimated 10% of this contraband at our borders. Given this dismal performance record that is misguided and inept (“Fast and Furiousâ€), we believe that border States will be far more competent at this mission.

8.

This is our country, these are our rights. We believe that it is time that we take personal responsibility for our choices and actions rather than abdicate that responsibility to someone else under the illusion that we have done something that will make us all safer. We have a responsibility to stand by our principles and act in accordance with them. Our children are watching and they will follow the example we set."

The undersigned Quiet Professionals hereby humbly stand ever present, ever ready, and ever vigilant.

---END---

1100 Green Berets Signed the above Letter

Shawn

[Tall Tails]

I wont attend these meetings and I certainly wont look at the website big brother is watching for sure!!

[ Post made via Android ]

[skipper19]

It's intresting Shawn in the excerpt of the letter from the Green Beret, the mention of the Sheriff Cantrel story in Tennessee. Apparently this is where they feel confident in their own state constitution and civil bill of rights! Here is a bill offered by senate assembly members of the State of Tennessee in response to federal rule on firearms. IMHO, I wish NY had a provision in its constitution, but it is only in the bill of rights, which is more STRONGLY worded as "cannot" infringe as opposed to "shall not" infringe. There is a bill.. http://open.nysenate.gov/legislation/bill/s1427-2011.. to make the amendment to the NY constitution and it has passed judicial vote and presented to committee of rules on June 21st 2012, but that is where it has sat without further considerations. An apparent stonewall of the democratic process to make a full and real law when possible. In their back door deal at the midnight hour they pass law on all of us without proper hearings and rest before senate and judicial review. Anybody can guess why without much thought. However, please read on to see how a state should protect It's self from a bent takeover of civil rights.

In the state of Tennessee:

“The general assembly declares that any federal action prohibited by this chapter relating to firearms, firearms accessories or ammunition, whether made in Tennessee or not, is not authorized by the United States constitution and violates the restrictions contained therein and is hereby declared to be invalid in this state; that said federal action shall not be recognized by this state; and that said federal action is rejected by this state and shall be null and void and of no effect in this state.â€

Today, Rep. Joe Carr unveiled his legislation to protect Tennesseans against a potential gun ban or registration scheme out of Washington, DC. Sen. Joey Hensley has agreed to carry the bill in the Senate. The new Tennessee bill is a verbatim copy of an earlier version of the Wyoming bill currently pending before their state legislature.

Tennessee’s HB 0042 provides for misdemeanor penalties like the earlier version of the Wyoming bill. Because Rep. Carr specifically told the Tennessee Tenth Amendment Center that he feels it is important that the states pass exactly the same bill with exactly the same verbiage, he is looking at filing an amendment to match to the latest version of the Wyoming legislation.

The bill, which is fully endorsed by the Tennessee Firearms Association, was specifically written to cover all of the points in the model legislation released by the Tennessee Tenth Amendment Center and more. It will block all of the following federal attempts at firearms regulation with Class B felony criminal penalties:

(1) Infringe on, ban, regulate, or restrict state government, local government or civilian ownership, transfer, possession or manufacture of a firearm, a firearm accessory or ammunition in this state;

(2) Require any state government, local government or civilian owned firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition in this state to be registered or tracked in any manner; or

(3) Impose federal taxes, fees or any other charges on any state government, local government or civilian owned firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition that are payable to any government entity.

Should any Tennesseans be prosecuted by the federal government for alleged firearms-related crimes, SB 0250/HB 0248 provides for this scenario as well. The attorney general is authorized to provide defense for the accused and work to invalidate or nullify such federal actions.

[ Post made via Android ]

[MikeyP]

It's intresting Shawn in the excerpt of the letter from the Green Beret, the mention of the Sheriff Cantrel story in Tennessee. Apparently this is where they feel confident in their own state constitution and civil bill of rights! Here is a bill offered by senate assembly members of the State of Tennessee in response to federal rule on firearms. IMHO, I wish NY had a provision in its constitution, but it is only in the bill of rights, which is more STRONGLY worded as "cannot" infringe as opposed to "shall not" infringe. There is a bill.. http://open.nysenate.gov/legislation/bill/s1427-2011.. to make the amendment to the NY constitution and it has passed judicial vote and presented to committee of rules on June 21st 2012, but that is where it has sat without further considerations. An apparent stonewall of the democratic process to make a full and real law when possible. In their back door deal at the midnight hour they pass law on all of us without proper hearings and rest before senate and judicial review. Anybody can guess why without much thought. However, please read on to see how a state should protect It's self from a bent takeover of civil rights.

In the state of Tennessee:

“The general assembly declares that any federal action prohibited by this chapter relating to firearms, firearms accessories or ammunition, whether made in Tennessee or not, is not authorized by the United States constitution and violates the restrictions contained therein and is hereby declared to be invalid in this state; that said federal action shall not be recognized by this state; and that said federal action is rejected by this state and shall be null and void and of no effect in this state.â€

Today, Rep. Joe Carr unveiled his legislation to protect Tennesseans against a potential gun ban or registration scheme out of Washington, DC. Sen. Joey Hensley has agreed to carry the bill in the Senate. The new Tennessee bill is a verbatim copy of an earlier version of the Wyoming bill currently pending before their state legislature.

Tennessee’s HB 0042 provides for misdemeanor penalties like the earlier version of the Wyoming bill. Because Rep. Carr specifically told the Tennessee Tenth Amendment Center that he feels it is important that the states pass exactly the same bill with exactly the same verbiage, he is looking at filing an amendment to match to the latest version of the Wyoming legislation.

The bill, which is fully endorsed by the Tennessee Firearms Association, was specifically written to cover all of the points in the model legislation released by the Tennessee Tenth Amendment Center and more. It will block all of the following federal attempts at firearms regulation with Class B felony criminal penalties:

(1) Infringe on, ban, regulate, or restrict state government, local government or civilian ownership, transfer, possession or manufacture of a firearm, a firearm accessory or ammunition in this state;

(2) Require any state government, local government or civilian owned firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition in this state to be registered or tracked in any manner; or

(3) Impose federal taxes, fees or any other charges on any state government, local government or civilian owned firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition that are payable to any government entity.

Should any Tennesseans be prosecuted by the federal government for alleged firearms-related crimes, SB 0250/HB 0248 provides for this scenario as well. The attorney general is authorized to provide defense for the accused and work to invalidate or nullify such federal actions.

[ Post made via Android ]

All well and good for Tennesee. That's just not going to happen in NY. Signing petitions from our legislatures is just symbolic. Nothing will get repealed or changed. Only chance is to sue to overturn this law and hope it goes our way. Other than that we're screwed! I'm going to para quote something I read today in the paper from Dean Skelos...our so called republican majority leader in the senate...."The gun law is passed it's over so we better just move on" I wonder what that SOB got in return from Cuomo? This is the worst legislature in the country!

[skipper19]

Can't give up Mikey! There is plenty to negotiate with in this law and of course it will be sued against at this point, it is the process that was suppose to be in place in judicial review that was circumvented and now must go to review in a class action suit. At least here if at state level it is ruled still law then it can go higher, and yes a petition carried by your representing officials is symbolic. They couldn't go to your defense with nobody in agreement that the law needs refinement. We don't expect to win everything, but there are considerations the courts will take in lieu of some parts of the law and give some repeal. If not, then you can admit defeat and in that case defeat is at the shores of the United States. This is not just a battle in NY, running to another state is eventually going to be futile, just look in your neighboring states of Connecticut, and New Jersey for the latest gun legislation. Don't believe for a moment that the libs aren't chomping the bit to use NY as a model. Don't forget who's in Washington in control waiting to see us citizens fail to stand for our rights, the ones who fought for those rights, lost arms and legs, so that we shouldn't give anyone ours for our liberties.

[ Post made via Android ]

[Shorthanded]

Petitions symbolic, probably, but they all send a message to Obama and friends that we will not stand for this happening at a Federal level.

[FX]

It's intresting Shawn in the excerpt of the letter from the Green Beret, the mention of the Sheriff Cantrel story in Tennessee. Apparently this is where they feel confident in their own state constitution and civil bill of rights! Here is a bill offered by senate assembly members of the State of Tennessee in response to federal rule on firearms. IMHO, I wish NY had a provision in its constitution, but it is only in the bill of rights, which is more STRONGLY worded as "cannot" infringe as opposed to "shall not" infringe. There is a bill.. http://open.nysenate.gov/legislation/bill/s1427-2011.. to make the amendment to the NY constitution and it has passed judicial vote and presented to committee of rules on June 21st 2012, but that is where it has sat without further considerations. An apparent stonewall of the democratic process to make a full and real law when possible. In their back door deal at the midnight hour they pass law on all of us without proper hearings and rest before senate and judicial review. Anybody can guess why without much thought. However, please read on to see how a state should protect It's self from a bent takeover of civil rights.

In the state of Tennessee:

“The general assembly declares that any federal action prohibited by this chapter relating to firearms, firearms accessories or ammunition, whether made in Tennessee or not, is not authorized by the United States constitution and violates the restrictions contained therein and is hereby declared to be invalid in this state; that said federal action shall not be recognized by this state; and that said federal action is rejected by this state and shall be null and void and of no effect in this state.â€

Today, Rep. Joe Carr unveiled his legislation to protect Tennesseans against a potential gun ban or registration scheme out of Washington, DC. Sen. Joey Hensley has agreed to carry the bill in the Senate. The new Tennessee bill is a verbatim copy of an earlier version of the Wyoming bill currently pending before their state legislature.

Tennessee’s HB 0042 provides for misdemeanor penalties like the earlier version of the Wyoming bill. Because Rep. Carr specifically told the Tennessee Tenth Amendment Center that he feels it is important that the states pass exactly the same bill with exactly the same verbiage, he is looking at filing an amendment to match to the latest version of the Wyoming legislation.

The bill, which is fully endorsed by the Tennessee Firearms Association, was specifically written to cover all of the points in the model legislation released by the Tennessee Tenth Amendment Center and more. It will block all of the following federal attempts at firearms regulation with Class B felony criminal penalties:

(1) Infringe on, ban, regulate, or restrict state government, local government or civilian ownership, transfer, possession or manufacture of a firearm, a firearm accessory or ammunition in this state;

(2) Require any state government, local government or civilian owned firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition in this state to be registered or tracked in any manner; or

(3) Impose federal taxes, fees or any other charges on any state government, local government or civilian owned firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition that are payable to any government entity.

Should any Tennesseans be prosecuted by the federal government for alleged firearms-related crimes, SB 0250/HB 0248 provides for this scenario as well. The attorney general is authorized to provide defense for the accused and work to invalidate or nullify such federal actions.

[ Post made via Android ]

All well and good for Tennesee. That's just not going to happen in NY. Signing petitions from our legislatures is just symbolic. Nothing will get repealed or changed. Only chance is to sue to overturn this law and hope it goes our way. Other than that we're screwed! I'm going to para quote something I read today in the paper from Dean Skelos...our so called republican majority leader in the senate...."The gun law is passed it's over so we better just move on" I wonder what that SOB got in return from Cuomo? This is the worst legislature in the country!

The sure fire way to guarantee what you're saying MikeyP is to do nothing.

For those who can't make it to Albany, 13wham.com is going to Live Stream Guns In America Town Hall From Albany

http://www.13wham.com/news/local/story/ ... x?rss=1485

Shawn

[skipper19]

Thanks Shawn, I like the illustration, I just wish one of those rifles illustrated a broader spectrum of sporting arms was an old remington 742, 7400, 750 along with the MSR. They are the same functioning rifles we all should know that have evolved astheticly like a model t to a Mustang Cobra GT.

[ Post made via Android ]

[Sk8man]

When I went in the military at age 18 back in 1963 I was proud to be a "New Yorker" and even more proud to be an American. I know my dad who flew in B-24's in WW-II felt the same way and I'm sure my buddies who lost their lives in Viet Nam felt the same way. I now feel disgusted when I see our country peddling so-called "democracy" to other countries as though we are some kind of "standard barer". The socialist regime that parades itself as "progressive" now running the country is destroying every vestige of respect other countries as well as our own concerned citizens have for America. The fact that our own President doesn't follow the U.S. Constitution or believe it is a valid document governing today's situations in favor of a more "global" view is an insult to our forefathers as well as all Americans. We are in a fight for our very lives in terms of the Constitutional issues currently being assailed by our own government both here in New York and the U.S. in general. The gun control issue is quite "secondary" in this sense and is merely a vehicle to push their agenda and even the "anti-gun nuts" should be very disturbed by the current tactics being used by our out of control government. Unfortunately the mass media, the "out of contact with reality" citizens and the self-serving re-election obsessed politicians at the state and federal levels are currently in absolute control of the "machinery" of change. This situation is really about Obama and his cronies view of the need for a new "world order" which doesn't include us. What he really is referring to when he repeatedly says We the people" is "We the government" it has absolutely nothing to do with the citizenry. I apologize for the rant but it is probably necessary in the way of ulcer prevention as I've never been so upset in my life.

[Tank]

http://www.dailyfreeman.com/articles/20 ... =fullstory

Let's hope he is right!

[Shorthanded]

Taken from another website....looks like we need to target Mr. Schumer for ouster from his Senate post with the same zeal as he is targeting our guns..just a thought

RE: "The government is never going to try and take all of our guns, only the ones unneccesary for the paranoid, nutjob general public to own." Aren't these quotes from "the government"?...

" Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe."

~ Diane Feinstein, gun owner with concealed carry permit

" I don't care about crime, I just want to get the guns."

~ Howard Metzenbaum

" I do not believe in people owning guns. Guns should be owned only by the police and military.

I am going to do everything I can to disarm this state."

~ Michael Dukakis

" If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking

up every one of them... 'Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in,' I would have done

it."

~ Diane Feinstein, gun owner with concealed carry permit, 60 Minutes episode

" If I had my way, sporting guns would be strictly regulated, the rest would be confiscated."

~ Nancy Pelosi

" We're here to tell the NRA their nightmare is true..."

~ Charles Schumer (has sworn an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution)

quoted on NBC, November 30, 1993

" Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step.

The prohibition of private firearms is the goal."

~Janet Reno

" We're bending the law as far as we can to ban an entirely new class of guns."

~ Rahm Emmanuel

" We're going to hammer guns on the anvil of relentless legislative strategy!

We're going to beat guns into submission!"

~ Charles Schumer (has sworn an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution)

quoted on NBC, December 8, 1993

[Sk8man]

Lest we forget how the vote went:

SENATE:

Ayes (43): Adams, Addabbo, Avella, Boyle, Breslin, Carlucci, Diaz, Dilan, Espaillat, Felder, Flanagan, Fuschillo, Gianaris, Gipson, Golden, Grisanti, Hannon, Hassell-Thomps, Hoylman, Kennedy, Klein, Krueger, Lanza, Latimer, LaValle, Marcellino, Martins, Montgomery, O'Brien, Parker, Peralta, Perkins, Rivera, Sampson, Sanders, Savino, Serrano, Skelos, Smith, Squadron, Stavisky, Stewart-Cousin, Valesky

Nays (18): Ball, Bonacic, DeFrancisco, Farley, Gallivan, Griffo, Larkin, Libous, Little, Marchione, Maziarz, Nozzolio, O'Mara, Ranzenhofer, Ritchie, Robach, Seward, Young

Excused (1): Zeldin

ASSEMBLY:

S02230 Votes:

BILL:S02230 DATE:01/15/2013MOTION: YEA/NAY:104/43Abbate Y Clark Y Gantt Y Kavanag Y McKevit Y Raia NO Solages Y

Abinant Y Colton Y Garbari NO Kearns NO McLaugh NO Ramos Y Stec NO

Arroyo Y Cook Y Gibson Y Kellner Y Miller Y Reilich NO Steck Y

Aubry Y Corwin NO Giglio NO Kim Y Millman Y Rivera ER Stevens Y

Barclay NO Crespo ER Gjonaj Y Kolb NO Montesa NO Roberts Y Stirpe Y

Barrett Y Crouch NO Glick Y Lalor NO Morelle Y Robinso Y Sweeney Y

Barron Y Curran Y Goldfed Y Lavine Y Mosley Y Rodrigu Y Tedisco NO

Benedet Y Cusick Y Goodell NO Lentol Y Moya Y Rosa Y Tenney NO

Blanken NO Cymbrow Y Gottfri Y Lifton Y Nojay NO Rosenth Y Thiele Y

Borelli NO DenDekk Y Graf NO Lope PD NO Nolan Y Rozic Y Titone Y

Boyland Y Dinowit Y Gunther NO Lope VJ Y Oaks NO Russell Y Titus Y

Braunst Y DiPietr NO Hawley NO Losquad Y O'Donne Y Ryan Y Walter NO

Brennan Y Duprey NO Heastie Y Lupardo NO Ortiz Y Saladin NO Weinste Y

Brindis NO Englebr Y Henness Y Lupinac Y Otis Y Santaba Y Weisenb Y

Bronson Y Espinal Y Hevesi Y Magee NO Palmesa NO Scarbor Y Weprin Y

Brook K Y Fahy Y Hikind Y Magnare Y Paulin Y Schimel Y Wright Y

Buchwal Y Farrell Y Hooper Y Maisel Y Peoples Y Schimmi NO Zebrows Y

Butler NO Finch NO Jacobs Y Malliot Y Perry Y Sepulve Y Mr Spkr Y

Cahill Y Fitzpat ER Jaffee Y Markey Y Pretlow Y Simanow Y

Camara Y Friend NO Johns NO Mayer Y Quart Y Simotas Y

Castro Y Gabrysz NO Jordan NO McDonal Y Ra Y Skartad Y

Ceretto NO Galef Y Katz NO McDonou Y Rabbitt NO Skoufis NO