Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NY State Supreme Court: Gov. Cuomo Must Prove New Gun Laws are Constitutional (VIDEO)
http://www.guns.com/2013/03/01/ny-state-supreme-court-gov-cuomo-must-prove-new-gun-laws-are-constitutional-video/ ^ | Mar. 1, 2013 | S.H. Blannelberry

Posted on 03/01/2013 11:38:53 AM PST by EXCH54FE

Do New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s new draconian gun laws pass constitutional muster?

This is a question to be debated in the state Supreme Court following a lawsuit that was filed by Buffalo-based attorney James Tresmond.

In the lawsuit, Tresmond challenges the constitutionality of the NY SAFE Act on the grounds that it violates not one’s Second Amendment rights, but one’s Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment protections against government seizure of private property without “due process and just compensation.”

In an interview with the Utica Observer-Dispatch, Tresmond explained how his two plaintiffs, both gun owners who possess ‘assault’ weapons and ‘high’-capacity magazines will be forced to forfeit their property when the new laws take effect.

The plaintiffs “have several firearms that fall under this category … and they have money invested in these firearms and they’re really upset about it,” Tresmond told the Utica OD.

“If you can take somebody’s $20,000 gun or firearm without any compensation whatsoever, that’s criminal,” Tresmond added, noting that the case may be on its way to becoming a class action lawsuit.

(Excerpt) Read more at guns.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: New York
KEYWORDS: banglist; guncontrol; secondamendment
I’m anxious to hear state Attorney General Schneiderman answer that question. Aren’t you?
1 posted on 03/01/2013 11:39:11 AM PST by EXCH54FE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

Just FYI, while this is good news, in NYS, “Supreme Court” is not the high court of the state. It is the level where things like civil suits, divorces and criminal trials are handled. The Court of Appeals is the high court and there are two levels between that court and Supreme Court.


2 posted on 03/01/2013 11:44:06 AM PST by Above My Pay Grade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

I’m actually afraid for the results of this. Eminent domain has been upheld in recent legal jurisprudence, and I’m concerned that they’ll contort it to mean that since those weapons are considered illegal under the law, they can be confiscated not as personal property but as contraband. They did it in New Orleans.


3 posted on 03/01/2013 11:44:14 AM PST by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Above My Pay Grade

Good information, thanks

Hope this type of law/action does not come to TN

MOLON LABE


4 posted on 03/01/2013 11:49:47 AM PST by EXCH54FE (Hurricane 416 "It’s one thing to make a law, It’s another to enforce it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

The Governor actually doesn’t have to “prove” that the law is constitutional; the burden of proof is on the challengers. The term “order to show cause” is just a procedural mechanism under New York law to bring a case on for a speedy hearing, shortening the usual deadlines.


5 posted on 03/01/2013 12:02:46 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

While the law is reprehensible it does not call for confiscation of semi auto rifles and high capacity mags. It calls for registration of these weapons and mags. I don’t see how this translates into confiscation. The law should be challenged on the basis of “not be infringed” not some non existent confiscation meme.


6 posted on 03/01/2013 12:03:59 PM PST by xkaydet65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rarestia

“they can be confiscated not as personal property but as contraband”

Not if the courts find that the NY law is unconstitutional!


7 posted on 03/01/2013 12:24:06 PM PST by vette6387
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: xkaydet65

“While the law is reprehensible it does not call for confiscation of semi auto rifles and high capacity mags. It calls for registration of these weapons and mags.”

It bans the magazines that were previously legal to own. They must be removed from the state or permanently altered or you are felon.


8 posted on 03/01/2013 12:29:03 PM PST by Brooklyn Attitude (Obama being re-elected is the political equivalent of OJ being found not guilty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: xkaydet65

” It calls for registration of these weapons and mags”

Nope. No registration for Mags.

If they are in your possession you are a felon. And according to NY State law a worse felon than a kiddie diddler.

This law must be dumped. It won’t be unless a court says so.

The best we can do for now is simply refuse to comply - en mass.


9 posted on 03/01/2013 12:37:25 PM PST by Nik Naym (It's not my fault... I have compulsive smartass disorder.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: xkaydet65

” It calls for registration of these weapons and mags”

Nope. No registration for Mags.

If they are in your possession you are a felon. And according to NY State law a worse felon than a kiddie diddler.

This law must be dumped. It won’t be unless a court says so.

The best we can do for now is simply refuse to comply - en mass.


10 posted on 03/01/2013 12:37:46 PM PST by Nik Naym (It's not my fault... I have compulsive smartass disorder.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

The obvious answer is “of course he’ll say it is.”
Long answer will be written in obtuse legalese that means “If it wasn’t constitutional we couldn’t have passed it.”
But the law itself reads that possessing a firearm is illegal.
Sooooo, this will be an interesting exercise in recto cranial contorionism the likes of which has not been seen outside a circus tent.


11 posted on 03/01/2013 12:50:56 PM PST by Darksheare (Try my coffee, first one's free.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

If you watch the video the pics of the gun rally/protest is the one we put together in Buffalo Jan 19th. Over 3200 people came out on a cold winters day.

The anchorman is Scott Levin a friend of mine.
One of the judges Debra Chimes is a friend too.
Right now we have 33 counties on board passing a bill for Albany to repeal the Bill with 17 more in the works.

I will post the image in a minute.


12 posted on 03/01/2013 12:58:02 PM PST by The Mayor ("If you can't make them see the light, let them feel the heat" — Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

13 posted on 03/01/2013 1:00:15 PM PST by The Mayor ("If you can't make them see the light, let them feel the heat" — Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

Rotsa Ruck, Cuomo, you fascist t*rd.

Your “regulations” are history.


14 posted on 03/01/2013 1:02:21 PM PST by Jack Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE
If for no other reason SUPPORT THE NRA because this is the kind of crap laws the NRA has challenged by citing our constitution.
15 posted on 03/01/2013 1:03:08 PM PST by drypowder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Mayor

Your map shows again that people crowded into big cities ,or those who choose to live in big cities, tend to become insane and vote for fantasy over reality.


16 posted on 03/01/2013 2:01:47 PM PST by hoosierham (Freedom isn't free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: hoosierham

We got it to pass in Erie County by 2 dem votes when Cuomo and Schumer were in town. So it proved things can be done. Cuomo is pissed that it happened but oh well, he’s a punk and we slapped him while he was here.

The 2nd Amendment seems to have woken people up here and it’s about time. It crosses party lines and what is happening is proving that democrats are against the 2nd unless we force them to vote.

Yesterday there was 12,000 plus in Albany protesting. Cuomo high tailed it out of town and hid out in NY City so he could be close to his own kind.


17 posted on 03/01/2013 2:25:05 PM PST by The Mayor ("If you can't make them see the light, let them feel the heat" — Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

Second amendment says keep.

KEEP!!!!

NO SURRENDER!!!


18 posted on 03/01/2013 2:31:26 PM PST by djf (I don't want to be safe. I want to be FREE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rarestia

“...those weapons are considered illegal under the law...”

Wouldn’t that then be an ex post facto law? That’s also not constitutional.


19 posted on 03/01/2013 2:47:07 PM PST by beelzepug (Telling other people they need to die is a good way to get your own lamp blown out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: beelzepug
Wouldn’t that then be an ex post facto law? That’s also not constitutional.

No, an ex post facto law would be one that said that if you possessed it before the law passed,you are guilty of a crime.

20 posted on 03/02/2013 4:43:28 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

“NY State Supreme Court: Gov. Cuomo Must Prove New Gun Laws are Constitutional”

Yeh, right. Let’s see the neo-Nazi pig Cuomo declare that it’s constitutional to send armed government goons to your house and kill you if you don’t surrender your constitutional right to bear arms.

The time of law has passed.


21 posted on 03/02/2013 5:19:10 PM PST by sergeantdave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

If you purchased it when it was legal you committed no crime but the new law would automatically make you a criminal. An ex post facto law is one that takes effect before it is passed, a retroactive law. What if the change wasn’t made public, as is often done in third world countries? You could “disappear” in the night and never be seen again. It happens.

Eminent domain is the taking of private property for public use (screw what SCOTUS did in Connecticut) and you must be fairly compensated. But even if ‘for the public good’ qualified, you still are not a criminal and must be compensated, else the government is the criminal, guilty of theft.

Why do we put up with this? We number over three hundred million and yet we allow a handful of legislators and congressmen to bring us to our knees. It has to stop and I, for one, am ready to fight.


22 posted on 03/03/2013 10:45:27 AM PST by beelzepug (Telling other people they need to die is a good way to get your own lamp blown out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson